Person:

Michor, Franziska

Background: The 5-year survival rate of cancer patients is the most commonly used statistic to reflect improvements in the war against cancer. This idea, however, was refuted based on an analysis showing that changes in 5-year survival over time bear no relationship with changes in cancer mortality. Methods: Here we show that progress in the fight against cancer can be evaluated by analyzing the association between 5-year survival rates and mortality rates normalized by the incidence (mortality over incidence, MOI). Changes in mortality rates are caused by improved clinical management as well as changing incidence rates, and since the latter can mask the effects of the former, it can also mask the correlation between survival and mortality rates. However, MOI is a more robust quantity and reflects improvements in cancer outcomes by overcoming the masking effect of changing incidence rates. Using population-based statistics for the US and the European Nordic countries, we determined the association of changes in 5-year survival rates and MOI. Results: We observed a strong correlation between changes in 5-year survival rates of cancer patients and changes in the MOI for all the countries tested. This finding demonstrates that there is no reason to assume that the improvements in 5-year survival rates are artificial. We obtained consistent results when examining the subset of cancer types whose incidence did not increase, suggesting that over-diagnosis does not obscure the results. Conclusions: We have demonstrated, via the negative correlation between changes in 5-year survival rates and changes in MOI, that increases in 5-year survival rates reflect real improvements over time made in the clinical management of cancer. Furthermore, we found that increases in 5-year survival rates are not predominantly artificial byproducts of lead-time bias, as implied in the literature. The survival measure alone can therefore be used for a rough approximation of the amount of progress in the clinical management of cancer, but should ideally be used with other measures.

The degree of histologic cellular differentiation of a cancer has been associated with prognosis but is subjectively assessed. We hypothesized that information about tumor differentiation of individual cancers could be derived objectively from cancer gene expression data, and would allow creation of a cancer phylogenetic framework that would correlate with clinical, histologic and molecular characteristics of the cancers, as well as predict prognosis. Here we utilized mRNA expression data from 4,413 patient samples with 7 diverse cancer histologies to explore the utility of ordering samples by their distance in gene expression from that of stem cells. A differentiation baseline was obtained by including expression data of human embryonic stem cells (hESC) and human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSC) for solid tumors, and of hESC and CD34+ cells for liquid tumors. We found that the correlation distance (the degree of similarity) between the gene expression profile of a tumor sample and that of stem cells orients cancers in a clinically coherent fashion. For all histologies analyzed (including carcinomas, sarcomas, and hematologic malignancies), patients with cancers with gene expression patterns most similar to that of stem cells had poorer overall survival. We also found that the genes in all undifferentiated cancers of diverse histologies that were most differentially expressed were associated with up-regulation of specific oncogenes and down-regulation of specific tumor suppressor genes. Thus, a stem cell-oriented phylogeny of cancers allows for the derivation of a novel cancer gene expression signature found in all undifferentiated forms of diverse cancer histologies, that is competitive in predicting overall survival in cancer patients compared to previously published prediction models, and is coherent in that gene expression was associated with up-regulation of specific oncogenes and down-regulation of specific tumor suppressor genes associated with regulation of the multicellular state.

Human primary glioblastomas (GBM) often harbor mutations within the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Treatment of EGFR-mutant GBM cell lines with the EGFR/HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib can effectively induce cell death in these models. However, EGFR inhibitors have shown little efficacy in the clinic, partly because of inappropriate dosing. Here, we developed a computational approach to model the in vitro cellular dynamics of the EGFR-mutant cell line SF268 in response to different lapatinib concentrations and dosing schedules. We then used this approach to identify an effective treatment strategy within the clinical toxicity limits of lapatinib, and developed a partial differential equation modeling approach to study the in vivo GBM treatment response by taking into account the heterogeneous and diffusive nature of the disease. Despite the inability of lapatinib to induce tumor regressions with a continuous daily schedule, our modeling approach consistently predicts that continuous dosing remains the best clinically feasible strategy for slowing down tumor growth and lowering overall tumor burden, compared to pulsatile schedules currently known to be tolerated, even when considering drug resistance, reduced lapatinib tumor concentrations due to the blood brain barrier, and the phenotypic switch from proliferative to migratory cell phenotypes that occurs in hypoxic microenvironments. Our mathematical modeling and statistical analysis platform provides a rational method for comparing treatment schedules in search for optimal dosing strategies for glioblastoma and other cancer types.

The dynamics of tumor burden, secreted proteins or other biomarkers over time, is often used to evaluate the effectiveness of therapy and to predict outcomes for patients. Many methods have been proposed to investigate longitudinal trends to better characterize patients and to understand disease progression. However, most approaches assume a homogeneous patient population and a uniform response trajectory over time and across patients. Here, we present a mixture piecewise linear Bayesian hierarchical model, which takes into account both population heterogeneity and nonlinear relationships between biomarkers and time. Simulation results show that our method was able to classify subjects according to their patterns of treatment response with greater than 80% accuracy in the three scenarios tested. We then applied our model to a large randomized controlled phase III clinical trial of multiple myeloma patients. Analysis results suggest that the longitudinal tumor burden trajectories in multiple myeloma patients are heterogeneous and nonlinear, even among patients assigned to the same treatment cohort. In addition, between cohorts, there are distinct differences in terms of the regression parameters and the distributions among categories in the mixture. Those results imply that longitudinal data from clinical trials may harbor unobserved subgroups and nonlinear relationships; accounting for both may be important for analyzing longitudinal data.