| Literature DB >> 35267665 |
Davide Brocco1, Pasquale Simeone2,3, Davide Buca2,3, Pietro Di Marino4, Michele De Tursi5, Antonino Grassadonia5, Laura De Lellis1, Maria Teresa Martino4, Serena Veschi1, Manuela Iezzi3,6, Simone De Fabritiis2,3, Marco Marchisio2,3, Sebastiano Miscia2,3, Alessandro Cama1, Paola Lanuti2,3, Nicola Tinari7.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most incident and lethal malignancies worldwide. Recent treatment advances prolonged survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, there are still few biomarkers to guide clinical management and treatment selection in mCRC. In this study, we applied an optimized flow cytometry protocol for EV identification, enumeration, and subtyping in blood samples of 54 patients with mCRC and 48 age and sex-matched healthy controls (HCs). The overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR) were evaluated in mCRC patients enrolled and treated with a first line fluoropyrimidine-based regimen. Our findings show that patients with mCRC presented considerably higher blood concentrations of total EVs, as well as CD133+ and EPCAM+ EVs compared to HCs. Overall survival analysis revealed that increased blood concentrations of total EVs and CD133+ EVs before treatment were significantly associated with shorter OS in mCRC patients (p = 0.001; and p = 0.0001, respectively). In addition, we observed a correlation between high blood levels of CD133+ EVs at baseline and reduced ORR to first-line systemic therapy (p = 0.045). These findings may open exciting perspectives into the application of novel blood-based EV biomarkers for improved risk stratification and optimized treatment strategies in mCRC.Entities:
Keywords: circulating biomarkers; colorectal cancer; extracellular vesicles
Year: 2022 PMID: 35267665 PMCID: PMC8909146 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14051357
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1(A) Gating strategy for the identification and subtyping of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in peripheral blood samples. All events were represented on a forward scatter-H/side scatter-H dot-plot and a “platelet-free area” (Morph) region was defined by using platelets as a reference population: (a) the “platelet-free area”(Morph) was shown on a phalloidin-H/lipophilic cationic dye (LCD)-H dot-plot and total EVs were identified as LCD-positive/phalloidin negative events. (b) Total EVs were analyzed on a CD133-H/CD45-H dot-plot and CD45− and CD45+ events were gated (c). The CD45− population was plotted on a CD133-H/EPCAM-H dot-plot and CD133+ EVs (CD45−/CD133+ events) (d) and EPCAM+ EVs (CD45−/EPCAM+ events) (e) were identified. (B) Box plots showing differences in total EV (a), CD133+ EV (b) and EPCAM+ EV (c) concentration between patients with mCRC (n = 54) and healthy controls (n = 48). **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001. Extreme values were not shown.
Comparison of total and subtype EV concentrations between mCRC patients (n = 54) and healthy controls (HCs) (n = 48).
| mCRC | HCs | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (%) | |||
| ≥65 | 35 (61.4) | 22 (38.6) | 0.07 |
| <65 | 19 (42.2) | 26 (57.8) | |
| Sex (%) | |||
| Male | 39 (54.9) | 16 (51.6) | 0.66 |
| Female | 12 (20.3) | 15 (48.4) | |
| Median Total EVs/µL (95% CI) | 5264.0 (4123.0–6314.0) | 2548.0 (2100.7–3051.4) | 0.000003 |
| Median CD133+ EVs/µL (95% CI) | 52.6 (32.4–96.1) | 18.4 (11.6–32.2) | 0.0002 |
| Median EPCAM+ EVs/µL (95% CI) | 50.9 (38.6–67.2) | 27.0 (19.3–42.0) | 0.007 |
Univariate Cox proportional hazards model predicting OS in the treatment-naive cohort (n = 33).
| Variable | Univariate Analysis | Bootstrap Results (1000 Replicas) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) |
| Bias | SE | 95% CI |
| |
| Total EVs a | 1.77 (1.24–2.54) | 0.002 | 0.15 | 0.58 | 0.30 to 1.78 | 0.001 b |
| EPCAM EVs a | 1.31 (0.94–1.84) | 0.11 | 0.33 | 0.64 | −0.03 to 2.02 | 0.32 |
| CD133+ EVs a | 1.72 (1.24–2.39) | 0.001 | 0.12 | 0.30 | 0.38 to 1.42 | 0.001 c |
| ECOG PS | ||||||
| 1 | 1 [reference] | |||||
| 0 | 0.15 (0.03–0.72) | 0.02 | −0.46 | 1.98 | −8.37 to −0.08 | 0.003 |
| Age (years) | ||||||
| ≥65 | 1 [reference] | |||||
| <65 | 0.48 (0.12–1.94) | 0.30 | −0.21 | 1.04 | −4.02 to 0.68 | 0.13 |
| No. of metastatic sites | ||||||
| >1 | 1 [reference] | |||||
| 1 | 0.95 (0.25–3.57) | 0.94 | −0.05 | 0.87 | −1.73 to 1.41 | 0.93 |
| Grading | ||||||
| 1–2 | 1 [reference] | |||||
| 3 | 3.47 (0.37–32.4) | 0.27 | −0.18 | 3.91 | −3.22 to 13.5 | 0.10 b |
| Primary site | ||||||
| Left-sided | 1 [reference] | |||||
| Right-sided colon | 2.75 (0.675-11.57) | 0.17 | 0.01 | 1.81 | −3.21 to 3.09 | 0.10 c |
a continuous variable (log-transformed); b based on 927 samples; c based on 998 samples; abbreviations—HR: hazard ratio; SE: standard error; CI: confidence interval.
Multivariate Cox proportional hazards model predicting OS in the treatment-naive cohort (n = 33).
| Variable | Multivariate Analysis | Bootstrap Results (1000 Replicas) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) |
| Bias | SE | 95% CI |
| |
| Total EVs | 1.80 (1.06–3.09) | 0.03 | 1.14 | 3.37 | −0.10 to 11.30 | 0.01 b |
| CD133+ EVs | 1.67 (1.02–2.74) | 0.04 | 0.73 | 3.21 | −0.07 to 7.43 | 0.006 b |
| ECOG PS | ||||||
| 1 | 1 [reference] | |||||
| 0 | 0.06 (0.01–0.55) | 0.01 | −4.17 | 16.55 | −36.16 to 1.65 | 0.02 a |
a continuous variable (log-transformed); b based on 998 samples; abbreviations—HR: hazard ratio; SE: standard error; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier (KM) curves showing the relationship between overall survival and blood concentration of total EVs and CD133+ EVs are illustrated, respectively, in panel (A(a)) and (B(a)). ROC curves for identification of optimal cut-off points are shown in panel (A(b)) and panel (B(b)).
Figure 3Relationship between treatment response and blood circulating CD133+ EV concentration at baseline. (A) Box plot diagram showing difference in blood concentration of CD133+ EVs between responders and non-responders are represented. (B) Histograms illustrate overall response rate in patients with high and low CD133+ EVs; *, p < 0.05. (C) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showing the effect of CD133+ EVs in predicting treatment response are shown. (D) Kaplan–Meier curves comparing PFS between two groups of patients with different blood concentration of CD133+ EVs are represented.