Despite being the hallmark of cancer that is responsible for the highest number of deaths, very little is known about the biology of metastasis. Metastatic disease typically manifests after a protracted period of undetectable disease following surgery or systemic therapy, owing to relapse or recurrence. In the case of breast cancer, metastatic relapse can occur months to decades after initial diagnosis and treatment. In this review, we provide an overview of the known key factors that influence metastatic recurrence, with the goal of highlighting the critical unanswered questions that still need to be addressed to make a difference in the mortality of breast cancer patients.

/pdf/the-lingering-mysteries-of-metastatic-recurrence-in-breast-5e2ewl93g8.pdf

The lingering mysteries of metastatic recurrence in breast cancer.

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is an important factor limiting the effectiveness of central nervous system (CNS) therapeutics. MR-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a noninvasive, spatially preci...

MR-guided focused ultrasound enhances delivery of trastuzumab to Her2-positive brain metastases

Epidemiology of bone metastases

Integrins mediate adhesive interactions between cells and their environment, including neighboring cells and extracellular matrix (ECM). These heterodimeric transmembrane receptors bind extracellular ligands with their globular head domains and connect to the cytoskeleton through multi-protein interactions at their cytoplasmic tails. Integrin containing cell–matrix adhesions are dynamic force-responsive protein complexes that allow bidirectional mechanical coupling of cells with their environment. This allows cells to sense and modulate tissue mechanics and regulates intracellular signaling impacting on cell faith, survival, proliferation, and differentiation programs. Dysregulation of these functions has been extensively reported in cancer and associated with tumor growth, invasion, angiogenesis, metastasis, and therapy resistance. This central role in multiple hallmarks of cancer and their localization on the cell surface makes integrins attractive targets for cancer therapy. However, despite a wealth of highly encouraging preclinical data, targeting integrin adhesion complexes in clinical trials has thus far failed to meet expectations. Contributing factors to therapeutic failure are 1) variable integrin expression, 2) redundancy in integrin function, 3) distinct roles of integrins at various disease stages, and 4) sequestering of therapeutics by integrin-containing tumor-derived extracellular vesicles. Despite disappointing clinical results, new promising approaches are being investigated that highlight the potential of integrins as targets or prognostic biomarkers. Improvement of therapeutic delivery at the tumor site via integrin binding ligands is emerging as another successful approach that may enhance both efficacy and safety of conventional therapeutics. In this review we provide an overview of recent encouraging preclinical findings, we discuss the apparent disagreement between preclinical and clinical results, and we consider new opportunities to exploit the potential of integrin adhesion complexes as targets for cancer therapy.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2022.863850/pdf

Targeting Integrins for Cancer Therapy - Disappointments and Opportunities

The features and survival of stage IV breast cancer patients with different metastatic sites are poorly understood. This study aims to examine the clinicopathological features and survival of stage IV breast cancer patients according to different metastatic sites. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, we restricted our study population to stage IV breast cancer patients diagnosed between 2010 to 2015. The clinicopathological features were examined by chi-square tests. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) were compared among patients with different metastatic sites by the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test. Univariable and multivariable analyses were also performed using the Cox proportional hazard model to identify statistically significant prognostic factors. A total of 18,322 patients were identified for survival analysis. Bone-only metastasis accounted for 39.80% of patients, followed by multiple metastasis (33.07%), lung metastasis (10.94%), liver metastasis (7.34%), other metastasis (7.34%), and brain metastasis (1.51%). The Kaplan-Meier plots showed that patients with bone metastasis had the best survival, while patients with brain metastasis had the worst survival in both BCSS and OS (p < 0.001, for both). Multivariable analyses showed that age, race, marital status, grade, tumor subtype, tumor size, surgery of primary cancer, and a history of radiotherapy or chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors. Stage IV breast cancer patients have different clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes according to different metastatic sites. Patients with bone metastasis have the best prognosis, and brain metastasis is the most aggressive subgroup.

/pdf/the-clinicopathological-features-and-survival-outcomes-of-24xctq0r7f.pdf

Xiaoxu Liu

Papers

The Clinicopathological features and survival outcomes of patients with different metastatic sites in stage IV breast cancer