Introduction: Epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) is considered an essential process in the metastatic cascade. EMT is characterised by upregulation of vimentin, Twist, Snail, Slug and Sip1 among others. Metastasis is also associated with the presence of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) and disseminated tumour cells in the blood and bone marrow, respectively, of breast cancer patients, but the expression of EMT markers in these cells has not been reported so far. Methods: The expression of Twist and vimentin in CTCs of 25 metastatic and 25 early breast cancer patients was investigated by using double-immunofluorescence experiments in isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cell cytospins using anti-cytokeratin (anti-CK) anti-mouse (A45-B/B3) and anti-Twist or anti-vimentin anti-rabbit antibodies. Results: Among early breast cancer patients, vimentin-and Twist-expressing CK⁺ CTCs were identified in 77% and 73% of the patients, respectively, and in 100% of the patients with metastatic breast cancer for both markers (P = 0.004 and P = 0.037, respectively). Among patients with early disease, 56% and 53% of the CK⁺ CTCs were double-stained with vimentin and Twist, and the corresponding values for metastatic patients were 74% and 97%, respectively (P = 0.005 and P = 0.0001, respectively). The median expression of CK⁺vimentin⁺ and CK⁺Twist⁺ cells per patient in metastatic patients was 98% and 100%, and in an adjuvant chemotherapy setting the corresponding numbers were 56% and 40.6%, respectively. Triple-staining experiments revealed that all CK⁺Twist⁺ or CK⁺vimentin⁺ cells were also CD45^-, confirming their epithelial origin. Immunomagnetic separation of CTCs and triple-immunofluorescence with anti-CK/anti-Twist/anti-vimentin antibodies demonstrated that both mesenchymal markers could be coexpressed in the same CK⁺ cell, since 64% of the total identified CTCs were triple-stained. There was a significant correlation (P = 0.005) between the number of CTCs expressing Twist and vimentin within the same setting. Conclusions: CTCs expressing Twist and vimentin, suggestive of EMT, are identified in patients with breast cancer. The high incidence of these cells in patients with metastatic disease compared to early stage breast cancer strongly supports the notion that EMT is involved in the metastatic potential of CTCs.

Targeted cancer therapies are used to inhibit the growth, progression, and metastasis of the tumor by interfering with specific molecular targets and are currently the focus of anticancer drug development. Protein kinase B, also known as Akt, plays a central role in many types of cancer and has been validated as a therapeutic target nearly two decades ago. This review summarizes the intracellular functions of Akt as a pivotal point of converging signaling pathways involved in cell growth, proliferation, apoptotis and neo‑angiogenesis, and focuses on the drug design strategies to develop potent anticancer agents targeting Akt. The discovery process of Akt inhibitors has evolved from adenosine triphosphate (ATP)‑competitive agents to alternative approaches employing allosteric sites in order to overcome the high degree of structural similarity between Akt isoforms in the catalytic domain, and considerable structural analogy to the AGC kinase family. This process has led to the discovery of inhibitors with greater specificity, reduced side-effects and lower toxicity. A second generation of Akt has inhibitors emerged by incorporating a chemically reactive Michael acceptor template to target the nucleophile cysteines in the catalytic activation loop. The review outlines the development of several promising drug candidates emphasizing the importance of each chemical scaffold. We explore the pipeline of Akt inhibitors and their preclinical and clinical examination status, presenting the potential clinical application of these agents as a monotherapy or in combination with ionizing radiation, other targeted therapies, or chemotherapy.

To compare the efficacy and toxicity of oxaliplatin (L-OHP) in combination with irinotecan (CPT-11), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) (FOLFOXIRI) vs irinotecan and 5-FU/LV (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC). A total of 283 chemotherapy-naïve patients with MCC were enrolled (FOLFIRI arm: n=146; FOLFOXIRI arm: n=137). In the FOLFOXIRI arm, CPT-11 (150 mg m⁻²) was given on d₁, L-OHP (65 mg m⁻²) on d₂, LV (200 mg m⁻²) on days 2 and 3 and 5-FU (400 mg m⁻² as i.v. bolus and 600 mg m⁻² as 22 h i.v. continuous infusion) on days 2 and 3. In the FOLFIRI arm, CPT-11 (180 mg m⁻²) was given on d₁ whereas LV and 5-FU were administered in the same way as in the FOLFOXIRI regimen. Both regimens were administered every 2 weeks. There was no difference in terms of overall survival (median OS: 19.5 and 21.5 months, for FOLFIRI and FOLFOXIRI, respectively; P=0.337), median time to disease progression (FOLFIRI: 6.9 and FOLFOXIRI: 8.4 months; P=0.17), response rates (33.6 and 43% for FOLFIRI and FOLFOXIRI, respectively; P=0.168). Patients treated with FOLFOXIRI had a significantly higher incidence of alopecia (P=0.0001), diarrhoea (P=0.0001) and neurosensory toxicity (P=0.001) compared with patients treated with FOLFIRI. The present study failed to demonstrate any superiority of the FOLFOXIRI combination compared with the FOLFIRI regimen, although the observed median OS is one of the best ever reported in the literature.

Background: We address the prognostic and predictive value of KRAS, PIK3CA and BRAF mutations for clinical outcomes in response to active agents in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: We determined KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations in tumours from 168 patients treated for mCRC at two institutions. All patients received 5-FU-based first-line chemotherapy and treatment outcome was analysed retrospectively. Results: KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations were present in 62 (37%), 13 (8%) and 26 (15%) cases, respectively. Multivariate analysis uncovered BRAF mutation as an independent prognostic factor for decreased survival (hazard ratio (HR) 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1–7.6). In addition, patients with BRAF-mutant tumours had significantly lower progression-free survival (PFS: HR 4.0, 95% CI 2.2–7.4) than those whose tumors that carried wild-type BRAF. Among 92 patients treated using chemotherapy and cetuximab as salvage therapy, KRAS mutation was associated with lack of response (P=0.002) and shorter PFS (P=0.09). BRAF (P=0.0005) and PIK3CA (P=0.01) mutations also predicted reduced PFS in response to cetuximab salvage therapy. Conclusions: These results underscore the potential of mutational profiling to identify CRCs with different natural histories or treatment responses. The adverse significance of BRAF mutation should inform patient selection and stratification in clinical trials.