Institutes
Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (2)
Document Type
- Article (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- tyrosine kinase inhibitors (2) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors predominate as first-line therapy options for renal cell carcinoma. When first-line TKI therapy fails due to resistance development, an optimal second-line therapy has not yet been established. The present investigation is directed towards comparing the anti-angiogenic properties of the TKIs, sorafenib and axitinib on human endothelial cells (HUVECs) with acquired resistance towards the TKI sunitinib. HUVECs were driven to resistance by continuously exposing them to sunitinib for six weeks. They were then switched to a 24 h or further six weeks treatment with sorafenib or axitinib. HUVEC growth, as well as angiogenesis (tube formation and scratch wound assay), were evaluated. Cell cycle proteins of the CDK-cyclin axis (CDK1 and 2, total and phosphorylated, cyclin A and B) and the mTOR pathway (AKT, total and phosphorylated) were also assessed. Axitinib (but not sorafenib) significantly suppressed growth of sunitinib-resistant HUVECs when they were exposed for six weeks. This axinitib-associated growth reduction was accompanied by a cell cycle block at the G0/G1-phase. Both axitinib and sorafenib reduced HUVEC tube length and prevented wound closure (sorafenib > axitinib) when applied to sunitinib-resistant HUVECs for six weeks. Protein analysis revealed diminished phosphorylation of CDK1, CDK2 and pAKT, accompanied by a suppression of cyclin A and B. Both drugs modulated CDK-cyclin and AKT-dependent signaling, associated either with both HUVEC growth and angiogenesis (axitinib) or angiogenesis alone (sorafenib). Axitinib and sorafenib may be equally applicable as second line treatment options, following sunitinib resistance.
Objective. We investigated the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST). Methods: In the multicentre PROSa study, the HRQoL of adult GIST patients was assessed between 2017 and 2019 using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer HRQoL questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). We performed group comparisons and multivariate linear regressions. Results: Among 130 patients from 13 centres, the mean global HRQoL was 63.3 out of 100 points. Higher sores indicate better HRQoL. The highest restrictions were in emotional, social, role functioning, insomnia, fatigue, and pain. In multivariate linear regression, we found no significant differences between patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment and those without TKI treatment as well as between patients treated with curative or with palliative intent. Patients who received multiple lines of TKI treatment had the most restrictions, notably in physical (unstandardized regression coefficient [B] = −15.7), role (B = −25.7), social (B = −18.4), and cognitive functioning (B = −19.7); fatigue (B = 15.93); general health (B = −14.23); and EORTC-sum score (B = −13.82) compared to all other patients. Conclusion: The highest HRQoL restrictions were in GIST patients receiving multiple lines of TKI therapy. Underlying causes need further investigation.