| Literature DB >> 29530037 |
Xóchitl Zambrano-Estrada1, Brianda Landaverde-Quiroz2, Andrés A Dueñas-Bocanegra2, Marco A De Paz-Campos2, Gerardo Hernández-Alberto2, Benjamín Solorio-Perusquia3, Manuel Trejo-Mandujano3, Laura Pérez-Guerrero3, Evangelina Delgado-González1, Brenda Anguiano1, Carmen Aceves4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mammary cancer has a high incidence in canines and is an excellent model of spontaneous carcinogenesis. Molecular iodine (I2) exerts antineoplastic effects on different cancer cells activating re-differentiation pathways. In co-administration with anthracyclines, I2 impairs chemoresistance installation and prevents the severity of side effects generated by these antineoplastic drugs. This study is a random and double-blind protocol that analyzes the impact of I2 (10 mg/day) in two administration schemes of Doxorubicin (DOX; 30 mg/m2) in 27 canine patients with cancer of the mammary gland. The standard scheme (sDOX) includes four cycles of DOX administered intravenously for 20 min every 21 days, while the modified scheme (mDOX) consists of more frequent chemotherapy (four cycles every 15 days) with slow infusion (60 min). In both schemes, I2 or placebo (colored water) was supplemented daily throughout the treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Animal welfare; Canine mammary cancer; Doxorubicin; Molecular iodine; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29530037 PMCID: PMC5848438 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-018-1411-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Oligonucleotides
| Gen | Reference | Forward primer | Reverse primer | pb |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| β-actin 1 | NM_001101 | acagagtacttgcgctcagga | ccatcatgaagtgtgacgttg | 175 |
| PGK12 | NM_053291.3 | tgactttggacaagctggacgtga | cagcagccttgatcctttggttgt | 110 |
| Bax3 | NM_001003011.1 | aagctgagcgagtgtctcaagcgc | tcccgccacaaagatggtcacg | 366 |
| Bcl24 | NM_000633.2 | gtggaggagctcttcaggga | aggcacccagggtgatgcaa | 304 |
| PPARγ5 | XM_005632014.1 | ttccattctcaagagcggaccc | tctccacagactcggcattcaa | 190 |
| Survivin6 | NM_001003348.1 | accgcgtctctacgttcaag | ccaagtctggctcgttctca | 114 |
| uPA7 | XM_005618862.1 | ttggggagatgaagtttgaggtgg | cagaacggatcttcagcaaggc | 105 |
| MDR18 | NM_001003215.1 | tatcagcagcccacgtcatc | cagccactgctacctacgag | 214 |
1, 3, 4 Human, 2 Rat, 5, 6, 7, 8 Canine
Patient characteristics
| Breed | Age (years) | Body weight (kg) | Clinical stage (TNM)ϕ | Number of tumors | Parturition | ERα |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard scheme (Dox) | ||||||
| Standard Poodle | 12 | 6 | III | 2 | 0 | Positive |
| Maltese bichon | 9 |
| III | 7 | 2 | Positive |
| Dachshund | 13 | 6.6 | III | 4 | 2 | Positive |
| Maltese bichon | 7 |
| III | 5 | 0 | Positive |
| Standard scheme (Dox + I2) | ||||||
| Rottweiler | 8 | 38 | III | 1 | 2 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 12 | 5.8 | II | 5 | 0 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 10 | 3.8 | III | 5 | 0 | Positive |
| Labrador Retriever | 10 | 30 | III | 7 | 0 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 12 | 6.4 | V | 8 | 1 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 9 | 7 | III | 9 | 1 | Positive |
| Modified scheme (Dox) | ||||||
| Cocker Spaniel | 9 | 10.3 | II | 8 | 0 | Positive |
| Mixed breed | 6 | 4.2 | II | 2 | 0 | Positive |
| Cocker Spaniel | 8 | 13 | I | 6 | 3 | Positive |
| Chihuahua | 5 | 2.2 | I | 3 | 0 | Positive |
| German Shepherd | 7 | 30.1 | III | 7 | 0 | Positive |
| Dalmatian | 6 | 23 | I | 1 | 0 | Positive |
| Modified scheme (Dox + I2) | ||||||
| Cocker Spaniel | 10 |
| III | 1 | 0 | Positive |
| Mixed breed | 8 |
| I | 5 | 0 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 11 | 4.2 | V | 7 | 0 | Positive |
| Cocker Spaniel | 13 | 9.8 | III | 7 | 0 | Positive |
| Fox terrier Toy | 7 | 2.4 | I | 5 | 0 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 10 | 4.5 | III | 3 | 0 | Positive |
| Cocker Spaniel | 13 |
| III | 7 | 3 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 10 | 6 | II | 8 | 0 | Positive |
| Standard Poodle | 9 | 4.7 | III | 6 | 4 | Positive |
| Chihuahua | 5 |
| III | 5 | 0 | Positive |
| Dachshund | 10 | 5.2 | III | 5 | 1 | Positive |
ϕ T – Primary tumor, N – Regional lymph nodes, M – Distant metastasis [28];
Bold numbers, overweight animals (10–30% of standard weight)
Fig. 1Functional value according to the VCOG-CTCAE scale. Each point represents the mean and SD for each clinical report during all treatments. Arrows represent the day of chemotherapy (DOX) application
Adverse events (VCOG-CTCAE)
| Grade | sDox | sDox + I2 | mDox | mDox + I2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vomiting | 1 | 1 (25%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 2 (18%) |
| 2 | 1 (25%) | 1(17%) | 1 (17%) | ||
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| Diarrhea | 1 | 1 (25%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 2 (18%) |
| 2 | 1 (25%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (9%) | |
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| Anorexia | 1 | 2 (50%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (9%) |
| 2 | 1 (25%) | 1 (17%) | |||
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| Lethargy | 1 | 1 (25%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (9%) |
| 2 | 1 (25%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (9%) | |
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| Anemiaa | 1 | 2 (50%) | 2 (33%) | 2 (33%) | 3 (27%) |
| 2 | |||||
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| Neutropenia | 1 | 1(25%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (9%) |
| 2 | |||||
| 3 | |||||
| 4 |
aAnemia includes: hematocrit, hemoglobin and erythrocyte values (mean globular volume and mean hemoglobin concentration)
Fig. 2Iodine ingestion, thyroid status and cardiac damage during treatments. Values were recorded on the day of the patient’s admission to the protocol (initial) and on the day of mastectomy (final). Total iodine was determined in urine. Triiodothyronine, thyrotropin and creatine kinase type MB (CK-MB) were quantified in serum. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, and the asterisk indicates a significant difference with respect to the initial condition (unpaired Student t test; P < 0.05)
Fig. 3Electrocardiogram profile. Values represent the day of the patient’s admission to the protocol (initial) and 1 week before mastectomy (final). One-way ANOVA was performed for each variable and no significant differences were observed
Fig. 4Residual tumor size (%), histopathological classification and grade of malignity were analyzed by RECIST scale. Each point represents an individual tumor. One-way ANOVA was performed, and no significant differences were observed
Fig. 5Epithelial and connective tissue proportion (%) in the final tumor mass. Micrograph staining with Masson’s trichrome method (red, epithelium; blue, connective tissue). Quantitative analysis was performed as the average of three random regions (40X) using the ImageJ 1.47 program. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, and the asterisk indicates a significant difference between groups. Student´s t-test (P < 0.05)
Fig. 6Effect of treatments on the expression of chemoresistant, invasive and differentiation markers. RT-qPCR amplification were performed in residual tumors. Bax/Bcl2 index as apoptotic induction. Multidrug resistance protein 1 (MDR1); urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA), Survivin protein (Surv). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors type gamma (PPARγ). Gene expression was calculated using the D cycle threshold method and normalized to β-actin content. Data are expressed as median and the asterisks indicate significant differences between DOX and DOX + I2 groups in each treatment (Mann-Whitney U; P < 0.05)
Fig. 7Effect of treatments on lymphocytic infiltration. Micrographs stained with H&E (20X). Quantitative analysis was performed as the average of three random regions using the ImageJ 1.47 program. Linear regression between residual tumor size (%) and lymphocyte number from DOX and DOX + I2 groups (* Pearson coefficient, p > 0.04)
Survival analysis
| Breed | Age (years) | Clinical stage (TNM) | Survival at ten months | Observations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard scheme (Dox) | ||||
| Standard Poodle | 12 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Maltese bichon | 9 | III | No | Death, surgical complications |
| Dachshund | 13 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Maltese bichon | 7 | III | No | Death, surgical complications |
| Standard scheme (Dox + I2) | ||||
| Rottweiler | 8 | III | Yes | Alive with relapse; no metastasis |
| Standard Poodle | 12 | II | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Standard Poodle | 10 | III | Yes | Alive with relapse; no metastasis |
| Labrador Retriever | 10 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Standard Poodle | 12 | V | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Standard Poodle | 9 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Modified scheme (Dox) | ||||
| Cocker Spaniel | 9 | II | No | Death, transitional cell cancer |
| Mixed breed | 6 | II | No | Euthanasia, suspected metastasis |
| Cocker Spaniel | 8 | I | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Chihuahua | 5 | I | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| German Shepherd | 7 | III | No | Death, anaplastic cancer |
| Dalmatian | 6 | I | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Modified scheme (Dox + I2) | ||||
| Cocker Spaniel | 10 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Mixed breed | 8 | I | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Standard Poodle | 11 | V | No | Death, extensive metastasis |
| Cocker Spaniel | 13 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Fox terrier Toy | 7 | I | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Standard Poodle | 10 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Cocker Spaniel | 13 | III | No | Death, pyometra |
| Standard Poodle | 10 | II | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Standard Poodle | 9 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Chihuahua | 5 | III | Yes | Alive without relapse |
| Dachshund | 10 | III | No | Death, surgical complications |