Identification of a Novel Deactivating Small-Molecule Compound for Fibrogenic Hepatic Stellate Cells

Background: Liver fibrosis progresses to decompensated liver cirrhosis, for which medical needs remain unmet. We recently developed IC-2, a small-molecule compound that suppresses Wnt/β-catenin signaling, and found that IC-2 also suppresses liver fibrosis. In this study, we performed three-step screening of newly synthesized IC-2 derivatives to identify other small-molecule compounds that suppress liver fibrosis. Methods: The screening system consisted of three steps: a cell viability assay, a transcription factor 4 (TCF4) reporter assay, and induction of α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) and collagen 1α1 (Col1A1) expression in response to each compound. Screening using human LX-2 hepatic stellate cells (HSCs) was performed to target HSCs, which are the driver cells of liver fibrosis. Results: In the first step, since 9b and 9b-CONH2 at 100 μM did not have any effects on cell viability, they were omitted in the next screening. Additionally, the conditions that led to > 40% inhibition of the controls were also excluded in subsequent screening. The second step was performed under 31 conditions for 19 small-molecule compounds. Sixteen small-molecule compounds caused significant reduction of TCF4 activity relative to that of 0.1% DMSO. Of the 16 compounds, the 10 showing the greatest suppression of TCF4 activity were selected for the third step. Expressions of mRNA for α-SMA and Col1A1 were significantly reduced by seven and three small-molecule compounds, respectively. The greatest reductions in the α-SMA and Col1A1 mRNA expressions were observed in the cells treated with IC-2-F. Protein expressions of α-SMA and Col1A1 caused by IC-2-F were also comparable to those caused by IC-2. Conclusion: IC-2-F was identified as a novel deactivating small-molecule compound for HSCs in vitro. These data suggest that IC-2-F is a promising medicine for liver fibrosis.journal articl

Wnt/Beta-Catenin Signal Inhibitor HC-1 Sensitizes Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cells to 5-Fluorouracil through Reduction of CD44-Positive Population

journal articl

Table_1_The Predictive Value of PD-L1 Expression Level in Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Atezolizumab/Pembrolizumab.docx

ObjectiveRecently, the significant improvement of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab over chemotherapy for treatment-naïve stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been demonstrated, but the cost-effectiveness of these regimens remains unknown.MethodsA Markov model was adapted from the US healthcare perspective to assess the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, and chemotherapy in treatment-naïve NSCLC. Pseudo-individual patient data were generated from digitized Kaplan–Meier curves. Direct medical costs and utility values were sourced from the database and literature. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed. Sensitivity analyses and budgetary impact analyses were calculated.ResultsIn any and high programmed cell death 1-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression populations, with chemotherapy, atezolizumab provided ICERs of $234,990 and$130,804 per QALY, while pembrolizumab yielded ICERs of $424,797 and$140,873 per QALY. The ICER of atezolizumab vs. pembrolizumab was $56,635 and$115,511.82 in any and high PD-L1 expression population, respectively. The critical drivers of ICERs included the cost of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab. The accumulated incremental budgetary impact of atezolizumab vs. chemotherapy increased to approximately $39.1 million in high PD-L1 expression patients over 5 years.ConclusionsIn the high PD-L1 expression population, both atezolizumab and pembrolizumab were cost-effective for stage IV NSCLC compared to chemotherapy, which is contrary to that in any PD-L1 expression population. Atezolizumab shows a higher acceptability in both populations. Treating with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has a substantial budgetary impact on the medical burden. The PD-L1 expression level has the potential to be a predictor for the economics of ICIs.</p

Image_1_The Predictive Value of PD-L1 Expression Level in Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Atezolizumab/Pembrolizumab.pdf

ObjectiveRecently, the significant improvement of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab over chemotherapy for treatment-naïve stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been demonstrated, but the cost-effectiveness of these regimens remains unknown.MethodsA Markov model was adapted from the US healthcare perspective to assess the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, and chemotherapy in treatment-naïve NSCLC. Pseudo-individual patient data were generated from digitized Kaplan–Meier curves. Direct medical costs and utility values were sourced from the database and literature. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed. Sensitivity analyses and budgetary impact analyses were calculated.ResultsIn any and high programmed cell death 1-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression populations, with chemotherapy, atezolizumab provided ICERs of $234,990 and$130,804 per QALY, while pembrolizumab yielded ICERs of $424,797 and$140,873 per QALY. The ICER of atezolizumab vs. pembrolizumab was $56,635 and$115,511.82 in any and high PD-L1 expression population, respectively. The critical drivers of ICERs included the cost of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab. The accumulated incremental budgetary impact of atezolizumab vs. chemotherapy increased to approximately $39.1 million in high PD-L1 expression patients over 5 years.ConclusionsIn the high PD-L1 expression population, both atezolizumab and pembrolizumab were cost-effective for stage IV NSCLC compared to chemotherapy, which is contrary to that in any PD-L1 expression population. Atezolizumab shows a higher acceptability in both populations. Treating with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has a substantial budgetary impact on the medical burden. The PD-L1 expression level has the potential to be a predictor for the economics of ICIs.</p

DataSheet1_The correlation between the costs and clinical benefits of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in malignant tumors: An evaluation based on ASCO and ESMO frameworks.docx

Background: Life expectancy for patients with malignant tumors has been significantly improved since the presence of the programmed cell death protein-1/programmed cell death protein ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors in 2014, but they impose heavy financial burdens for patients, the healthcare system and the nations. The objective of this study was to determine the survival benefits, toxicities, and monetary of programmed cell death protein-1/programmed cell death protein ligand-1 inhibitors and quantify their values.Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for malignant tumors were identified and clinical benefits were quantified by American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework (ASCO-VF) and European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The drug price in Micromedex REDBOOK was used to estimate monthly incremental drug costs (IDCs) and the correlation between clinical benefits and incremental drug costs of experimental and control groups in each randomized controlled trial, and the agreement between two frameworks were calculated.Results: Up to December 2022, 52 randomized controlled trials were included in the quantitative synthesis. All the randomized controlled trials were evaluated by American society of clinical oncology value framework, and 26 (50%) met the American society of clinical oncology value framework “clinical meaningful value.” 49 of 52 randomized controlled trials were graded by European society for medical oncology magnitude of clinical benefit scale, and 30 (61.2%) randomized controlled trials achieved European Society for Medical Oncology criteria of meaningful value. p-values of Spearman correlation analyses between monthly incremental drug costs and American society of clinical oncology value framework/European society for medical oncology magnitude of clinical benefit scale scores were 0.9695 and 0.3013, respectively. In addition, agreement between two framework thresholds was fair (κ = 0.417, p = 0.00354).Conclusion: This study suggests that there might be no correlation between the cost and clinical benefit of programmed cell death protein-1/programmed cell death protein ligand-1 inhibitors in malignancy, and the same results were observed in subgroups stratified by drug or indication. The results should be a wake-up call for oncologists, pharmaceutical enterprises and policymakers, and meanwhile advocate the refining of American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology frameworks.</p