Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Le point sur hENT1, autres biomarqueurs

Focus on hENT1 and other biomarkers

  • Mise au Point / Update
  • Published:
Oncologie

Résumé

La mise en évidence de biomarqueurs prédictifs et/ou pronostiques a permis des avancées majeures ces dernières années en oncologie, permettant de définir de nouvelles cibles thérapeutiques ou de mieux utiliser certains traitements existants. De nombreux travaux de recherche translationnelle sont actuellement menés dans l’adénocarcinome du pancréas (ACP) et pourraient permettre à terme de mieux définir les options thérapeutiques chez un patient donné. Des biomarqueurs prédictifs de l’efficacité de la gemcitabine, des fluoropyrimidines, des sels de platine et de l’erlotinib ont été proposés ces dernières années et sont discutés dans cette revue. L’expression d’hENT1 évaluée avec l’anticorps souris est le biomarqueur le mieux validé avec une forte valeur prédictive de l’efficacité de la gemcitabine en adjuvant, mais cet anticorps n’est actuellement pas disponible. L’anticorps lapin n’a lui pas de valeur prédictive. Les autres biomarqueurs prédictifs les plus prometteurs sont l’expression de la thymidylate synthase (TS) et/ou de la DPD pour l’efficacité des fluoropyrimidines et l’expression d’ERCC1 et les mutations affectant le système de réparation de l’ADN (BRAC1/2, ATM et PALB2) pour l’efficacité des sels de platine.

Abstract

The highlighting of predictive and/or prognostic biomarkers has enabled major advances in recent years in oncology, to define new therapeutic targets and better use of some existing treatments. Many translational researches are being conducted in pancreatic adenocarcinoma and could ultimately help to better define treatment options for a given patient. Predictive biomarkers of the efficacy of gemcitabine, fluoropyrimidines, platinum salts, and erlotinib have been proposed in recent years and are discussed in this review. hENT1 expression evaluated with the mouse antibody is now the best validated biomarker with a strong predictive value for the efficacy of adjuvant gemcitabine, but this antibody is currently unavailable. The rabbit antibody has no predictive value. The other most promising predictive biomarkers are the expression of TS and/or the DPD for fluoropyrimidines efficacy and the expression of ERCC1 and mutations affecting DNA repair system (BRAC1/2, ATM, and PALB2) for platinum salts efficacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Références

  1. Rahib L, Smith BD, Aizenberg R, et al. (2014) Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: the unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res 74: 2913–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wei CH, Gorgan TR, Elashoff DA, et al. (2013) A meta-analysis of gemcitabine biomarkers in patients with pancreaticobiliary cancers. Pancreas 42: 1303–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Farrell JJ, Elsaleh H, Garcia M, et al. (2009) Human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 levels predict response to gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic cancer. Gastroenterology 136: 187–95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Maréchal R, Bachet JB, Mackey JR, et al. (2012) Gemcitabine metabolizing proteins predict the benefit of chemotherapy after curative surgery in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology 143: 664–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Greenhalf W, Ghaneh P, Neoptolemos JP, et al. (2014) Pancreatic cancer hENT1 expression and survival from gemcitabine in patients from the ESPAC-3 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 106: djt347

  6. Poplin E, Wasan H, Rolfe L, et al. (2013) Randomized, multicenter, phase II study of CO-101 versus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: including a prospective evaluation of the role of hENT1 in Gemcitabine or CO-101 sensitivity. J Clin Oncol 31: 4453–61

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sinn M, Sinn BV, Stieler J, et al. (2014) hENT1 expression in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine after curative intended resection: results from the CONKO-001 trial. J Clin Oncol 32: 4124

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ormanns S, Heinemann V, Raponi M, et al. (2014) Human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 is not predictive for gemcitabine efficacy in advanced pancreatic cancer: translational results from the AIO-PK0104 phase III study with the clone SP120 rabbit antibiody. Eur J Cancer 50: 1891–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Svrcek M, Cros J, Maréchal R, et al. (2015) hENT1 testing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a comparison between the murine and the rabbit antibodies. Histopathology (sous presse)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mc Allister F, Pineda DM, Jimbo M, et al. (2014) dCK expression correlates with 5-fluorouracil efficacy and HuR cytoplasmic expression in pancreatic cancer: a dual-institutional follow-up with the RTOG 9704 trial. Cancer Biol Ther 15: 688–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Costantino CL, Witkiewicz AK, Kuwano Y, et al. (2009) The role of HuR in gemcitabine efficacy in pancreatic cancer: HuR Upregulates the expression of the gemcitabine metabolizing enzyme deoxycytidine kinase. Cancer Res 69: 4567–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Ciccolini J, Dahan L, André N, et al. (2010) Cytidine deaminase residual activity in serum is a predictive marker of early severe toxicities in adults after gemcitabine-based chemotherapies. J Clin Oncol 28: 160–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Serdjebi C, Seitz JF, Ciccolini J, et al. (2013) Rapid deaminator status is associated with poor clinical outcome in pancreatic cancer patients treated with a gemcitabine-based regimen. Pharmacogenomics 14: 1047–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Farrell JJ, Bae K, Wong J, et al. (2012) Cytidine deaminase single-nucleotide polymorphism is predictive of toxicity from gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic cancer: RTOG 9704. Pharmacogenomics J 12: 395–403

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Manuyakorn A, Paulus R, Farrell J, et al. (2010) Cellular histone modification patterns predict prognosis and treatment response in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: results from RTOG 9704. J Clin Oncol 28: 1358–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Watanabe T, Morinaga S, Akaike M, et al. (2012) The cellular level of histone H3 lysine 4 dimethylation correlates with response to adjuvant gemcitabine in Japanese pancreatic cancer patients treated with surgery. Eur Surg Oncol 38: 1051–7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Popat S, Matakidou A, Houlston RS (2004) Thymidylate synthase expression and prognosis in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 22: 529–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Boige V, Mendiboure J, Pignon JP, et al. (2010) Pharmacogenetic assessment of toxicity and outcome in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with LV5FU2, FOLFOX, and FOLFIRI: FFCD 2000-05. J Clin Oncol 28: 2556–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Weekes CD, Nallapareddy S, Rudek MA, et al. (2011) Thymidylate synthase (TYMS) enhancer region genotype-directed phase II trial of oral capecitabine for 2nd line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Invest New Drugs 29: 1057–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kurata N, Fujita H, Ohuchida K, et al. (2011) Predicting the chemosensitivity of pancreatic cancer cells by quantifying the expression levels of gene associated with the metabolism of gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil. Int J Oncol 39: 473–82

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kondo N, Murakami Y, Uemura K, et al. (2012) Combined analysis of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 expression predicts survival of pancreatic carcinoma patients treated with adjuvant gemcitabine plus S-1 chemotherapy after surgical resection. Ann Surg Oncol 19: S646–S55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Peters GJ, Avan A, Gallegos Ruiz M, et al. (2014) Predictive role of repair enzymes in the efficacy of cisplatin combinations in pancreatic and lung cancer. Anticancer Res 34: 435–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Wislez M, Barlesi F, Besse B, et al. (2014) Customized adjuvant phase II trial in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: IFCT-0801 TASTE. J Clin Oncol 32: 1256–61

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Golan T, Kanji ZS, Epelbaum R, et al. (2014) Overall survival and clinical characteristics of pancreatic cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. Br J Cancer 111: 1132–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Grant RC, Selander I, Connor AA, et al. (2015) Prevalence of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes in patients with pancreatic cancer. Gastroenterology 148: 556–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Waddell N, Pajic M, Patch AM, et al. (2015) Whole genomes redefine the mutational landscape of pancreatic cancer. Nature 518: 495–501

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, et al. (2007) Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 25: 1960–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. da Cunha Santos G, Dhani N, Tu D, et al. (2010) Molecular predictors of outcome in a phase 3 study of gemcitabine and erlotinib therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: national Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study PA.3. Cancer 15: 5599–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Boeck S, Jung A, Laubender RP, et al. (2013) KRAS mutation status is not predictive for response to anti-EGFR treatment with erlotinib in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol 48: 544–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Chantrill LA, Nagrial AM, Watson C, et al. (2015) Precision medicine for advanced pancreas cancer: the individualized molecular pancreatic cancer therapy (IMPaCT) trial. Clin Cancer Res 21:2029–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sorbonne Université, UPMC Université, Paris, France

    J.-B. Bachet

  2. Service d’hépatogastroentérologie, groupe hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, faculté de médecine Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, UFR Paris-VI, 47–83, boulevard de l’Hôpital, F-75651, Paris cedex 13, France

    J.-B. Bachet

  3. Inserm UMRS 775, université Paris-Descartes, 45, rue des Saints-Pères, F-75006, Paris, France

    J.-B. Bachet

Authors
  1. J.-B. Bachet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J.-B. Bachet.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bachet, JB. Le point sur hENT1, autres biomarqueurs. Oncologie 17, 528–534 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10269-015-2568-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10269-015-2568-2

Mots clés

Keywords

Search

Navigation