Genetic Analysis May Help Physicians Individualize Treatment Of Patients With Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
Main Category: GastroIntestinal / GastroenterologyAlso Included In: Cancer / Oncology; Genetics
Article Date: 14 Oct 2009 - 1:00 PDT
Analysis of a small number of marker genes may determine in a matter of hours if a patient with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) would respond to a targeted molecular drug regimen. This analysis could allow clinicians to determine if they have chosen the best course of action or need to consider another alternative. Preliminary data from a genetic analysis of GIST cell lines showed that four marker genes reflected the effectiveness of treatment with sunitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is used as second-line targeted therapy to stop the growth of GIST tumors after imatinib therapy has failed in patients with locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease. The data were presented at the 2009 Clinical Congress of the American College of Surgeons.
In a previous study by Andrey Frolov, PhD, and Andrew Godwin, PhD, at Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia, PA, the same four genes were associated with the effectiveness of treatment of GIST with imatinib, which is given as front-line drug therapy for patients who are diagnosed with metastasis or who have GIST tumors that cannot be removed surgically. "We noticed four genes were similar in action when exposed to sunitinib as well as imatinib," said Derron Allen, MD, a research fellow in the department of surgery at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB).
The UAB researchers are in the final stages of preparing for a clinical trial that will determine whether the genes can predict the outcome of patients who receive sunitinib for GIST. Details of the clinical trial, which should begin within the next 12 months, could not be disclosed at this time. However, the overall aim is to obtain FNA (fine needle aspiration) biopsies of live cells from GIST patients during an operation or a diagnostic procedure, culture them outside of the body, treat them with targeted molecular therapy, screen the cells for the expression of the four marker genes, and evaluate whether analysis of the genes can be used to make treatment choices. "This approach may help determine what would be the best treatment for a particular patient and to individualize drug therapy," said Dr. Andrey Frolov, an instructor in the department of surgery and associate scientist at UAB Comprehensive Cancer Center.
GISTs are the most common mesenchymal cancers in the gastrointestinal tract. Approx- imately 4,500 to 6,000 patients are newly diagnosed with GIST each year in the United States. Surgical removal of GIST is the primary form of therapy for localized primary tumors. However, more than half of GIST patients are diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease.
GIST patients respond well to treatment with either imatinib or sunitinib at least at first. "The drugs we use for these tumors are probably one of the pharmaceutical miracles of the last century," Dr. Frolov said. These forms of targeted therapy have been able to reduce the size of GIST by 50 percent or more or stabilize disease in most patients and they have increased survival by as much as four times when compared to the survival of patients who did not receive them.
However, imatinib and sunitinib do not directly kill cancer cells like nonspecific cytotoxic agents do; these drugs stop the growth of tumors. Moreover, the researchers note that this statement is specific to imatinib and sunitinib and cannot be generalized for all targeted therapies. Therefore, patients must receive treatment for prolonged periods, and over time, they often develop secondary resistance. "With these two drugs--imatinib and sunitinib--GIST patients are living much longer, but nevertheless, they may succumb to treatment resistance or disease recurrence," Dr. Frolov said.
Genetic analysis of marker genes has the potential to dynamically track treatment progress with imatinib or sunitinib. "The initial response [to treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors] is usually quite good. But then the tumor stops responding or another site develops or something else happens. A test, like the analysis of the marker genes, is needed to help physicians decide what to do when the drug they are using isn't a silver bullet anymore," he explained.
Genetic testing promises to be a less expensive alternative to positron-emission tomography (PET) scanning, which is one of the most common ways of assessing whether drug treatment is affecting GIST tumors. PET is an expensive examination, and it is not available in many parts of the country. "PET also is not a direct measure of treatment effectiveness. PET measures the metabolic activity of the tumor and whether a drug has shut down that metabolic activity or not," said Dr. Frolov. Therefore, PET scanning must be done after a course of treat-ment has been completed and the tumors have had time to react, which may take more than four weeks. "The analysis of the marker genes is a straightforward real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction [the standard method of amplifying mRNA so it can be readily examined in a laboratory] that can be performed in any molecular function laboratory which has the necessary equipment. The cost would be similar to the cost of any pathology test," Dr. Frolov said.
Genetic analysis also has the potential to provide a specific molecular assessment of the effectiveness of targeted therapy almost immediately after it begins. "At the time the patient undergoes fine needle aspiration of a biopsy sample and cells are obtained, we might be able to check for the marker genes and compare them to baseline levels to see whether the tumor is responding or not in six to 12 hours," Dr. Frolov said.
Also participating in the study were Martin J. Heslin, MD, FACS; Takahiro Taguchi, PhD; and Juan P. Arnoletti, MD, FACS.
Source: American College of Surgeons (ACS)
Visit our gastrointestinal / gastroenterology section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
13 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/167243.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/167243.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (1)
Why Isn't There Any Progress In Drug Selection Through The Use Of Molecular Profiling?
posted by Gregory D. Pawelski on 19 Oct 2009 at 7:30 pmMolecular profiling is far too limited in scope to encompass the vagaries and complexities of human cancer biology when it comes to drug selection. Efforts to administer targeted therapies in randomly selected patients often result in low response rates at significant toxicity and cost.
The endpoints of molecular profiling are gene expression. The endpoints of tumor cell functional profiling are expression of cell death (both tumor cell death and tumor associated endothelial [capillary] cell death).
In chemotherapy selection, molecular profiling examines a single process within the cell or a relatively small number of processes. The aim is to tell if there is a theoretical predisposition to drug response.
Functional profiling examines not only for the presence of the molecular profile but also for their functionality, for their interaction with other genes, proteins, and processes occurring within the cell, and for their response to anti-cancer drugs.
The goal of molecular testing is to look for patterns of normal and abnormal gene expression which could suggest that certain proteins might or might not be produced within a cell. However, just because a gene is present, it does not mean that an associated protein has been produced.
Protein testing goes one step further by testing to see if the relevant protein actually has been produced. However, even Protein testing cannot tell us if a protein is functional or how it will interact with other proteins in the presence of anti-cancer drugs.
Gene and protein testing involve the use of dead, formaldehyde preserved cells that are never exposed to chemotherapy drugs. Gene and protein tests cannot tells us anything about uptake of a certain drug into the cell or if the drug will be excluded before it can act or what changes will take place within the cell if the drug successfully enters the cell.
Gene and protein tests cannot discriminate among the activities of different drugs within the same class. Instead, gene and protein tests assume that all drugs within a class will produce precisely the same effect, even though from clinical experience, this is not the case. Nor can gene and protein tests tell us anything about drug combinations.
Functional tumor cell profiling tests living cancer cells. It assesses the net result of all cellular processes, including interactions, occurring in real time when cancer cells actually are exposed to specific anti-cancer drugs. It can discriminate differing anti-tumor effects of different drugs within the same class. It can also identify synergies in drug combinations.
Gene and protein tests are better suited for ruling out "inactive" drugs than for identifying "active" drugs. When considering a cancer drug which is believed to act only upon cancer cells that have a specific genetic defect, it is useful to know if a patient's cancer cells do or do not have precisely that defect.
Although presence of a targeted defect does not necessarily mean that a drug will be effective, absence of the targeted defect may rule out use of the drug. Of course, this assumes that the mechanism of drug activity is known beyond any doubt, which is not always the case.
Although gene and protein testing currently are limited in their reliability as clinical tools, the tests can be important in research settings such as in helping to identify rational targets for development of new anti-cancer drugs.
Many of these drugs cry out for validated clinical biomarkers to help set dosage and select people likely to respond. And optimal and reproducible gene expression testing continues to evade the diagnositcs of the disease. Numerous other genes, tumor, and patient factors contribute to the risk of the cancer coming back and the effectiveness of chemotherapy for solid tumors.
It could be vastly more beneficial to measure the net effect of all processes (systems) instead of just individual molecular targets. The cell is a system, an integrated, interacting network of genes, proteins, and other cellular constituents that produce functions. One needs to analyze the systems' response to drug treatments, not just one or a few targets (pathways/mechanisms).
There are many pathways/mechanisms to the altered cellular (forest) function, hence all the different "trees" which correlate in different situations. Improvement can be made by measuring what happens at the end (the effects on the forest), rather than the status of the indivudal trees.
As you can see, just selecting the right test to perform in the right situation is a very important step on the road to personalizing cancer therapy.
Literature Citation:
Functional profiling with cell culture-based assays for kinase and anti-angiogenic agents Eur J Clin Invest 37 (suppl. 1):60, 2007
Functional Profiling of Human Tumors in Primary Culture: A Platform for Drug Discovery and Therapy Selection (AACR: Apr 2008-AB-1546)
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.





