Eduardas Aleknavičius

BACKGROUND: The α/β ratio for prostate cancer is postulated being in the range of 0.8 to 2.2 Gy, giving rise to the hypothesis that there may be a therapeutic advantage to hypofractionation. To do so, we carried out a randomized trial comparing hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated image-guided intensity modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) in high-risk prostate cancer. Here, we report on acute toxicity and quality of life (QOL) for the first 124 randomized patients. METHODS: The trial compares 76 Gy in 38 fractions (5 fractions/week) (Arm 1) to 63 Gy in 20 fractions (4 fractions/week) (Arm 2) (IG-IMRT). Prophylactic pelvic lymph node irradiation with 46 Gy in 23 fractions sequentially (Arm 1) and 44 Gy in 20 fractions simultaneously (Arm 2) was applied. All patients had long term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) started before RT. Both physician-rated acute toxicity and patient-reported QOL using EPIC questionnaire are described. RESULTS: There were no differences in overall maximum acute gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity. Compared to conventional fractionation (Arm 1), GI and GU toxicity both developed significantly earlier but also disappeared earlier in the Arm 2, reaching significant differences from Arm 1 at week 8 and 9. In multivariate analyses, only parameter shown to be related to increased acute Grade ≥1 GU toxicity was the study Arm 2 (p = 0.049). There were no statistically significant differences of mean EPIC scores in any domain and sub-scales. The clinically relevant decrease (CRD) in EPIC urinary domain was significantly higher in Arm 2 at month 1 with a faster recovery at month 3 as compared to Arm 1. CONCLUSIONS: Hypofractionation at 3.15 Gy per fraction to 63 Gy within 5 weeks was well tolerated. The GI and GU physician-rated acute toxicity both developed earlier but recovered faster using hypofractionation. There was a correlation between acute toxicity and bowel and urinary QOL outcomes. Longer follow-up is needed to determine the significance of these associations with late toxicity.

BACKGROUND: MiRNAs are often deregulated in colorectal cancer and might function as tumor suppressors or as oncogenes. They participate in controlling key signaling pathways involved in proliferation, invasion and apoptosis and may serve as prognostic and predictive markers. In this study we aimed to evaluate the role of miRNA-148a and miRNA-625-3p in metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Fifty-four patients with a first-time diagnosed CRC receiving FOLFOX ± Bevacizumab were involved in the study. Tumor samples underwent routine pathology examination including evaluation for tumor budding and KRAS. MiRNA-148a and miRNA-625-3p expression analysis was done by RT-PCR. Associations between expression of both miRNAs and clinico-pathological factors, treatment outcomes and survival were analyzed. RESULTS: Both miRNA-148a and miRNA-625-3p were down-regulated in the tumors compared to normal colonic mucosa. Significantly lower expression of both miRNAs was noticed in tumors with budding phenomenon compared to tumors without it (median values of miRNA-148a were 0.314 and 0.753 respectively, p = 0.011, and 0.404 and 0.620 respectively for miRNA-625-3p, p = 0.036). Significantly lower expression of miRNA-625-3p was detected in rectal tumors, compared to tumors in the colon (median 0.390 and 0.665 respectively, p = 0.037). Progression free survival was significantly lower in patients with high miRNA-148a expression (6 and 9 months respectively, p = 0.033), but there were no significant differences in PFS for miRNA-625-3p and in overall survival for both miRNAs. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant relationship between low miRNA-148a and miRNA-625-3p expression and tumor budding, which is thought to represent epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Both studied miRNAs may be associated with a more aggressive phenotype and could be the potential prognostic and predictive biomarkers in CRC. Further investigation is needed to confirm miRNAs involvement in EMT, and their prognostic and predictive value.