Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common brain tumor with an overall survival (OS) of less than 30% at two years. Valproic acid (VPA) demonstrated survival benefits documented in retrospective and prospective trials, when used in combination with chemo-radiotherapy (CRT). The primary goal of this study was to examine if the differential alteration in proteomic expression pre vs. post-completion of concurrent chemoirradiation (CRT) is present with the addition of VPA as compared to standard-of-care CRT. The second goal was to explore the associations between the proteomic alterations in response to VPA/RT/TMZ correlated to patient outcomes. The third goal was to use the proteomic profile to determine the mechanism of action of VPA in this setting. Serum obtained pre- and post-CRT was analyzed using an aptamer-based SOMAScan® proteomic assay. Twenty-nine patients received CRT plus VPA, and 53 patients received CRT alone. Clinical data were obtained via a database and chart review. Tests for differences in protein expression changes between radiation therapy (RT) with or without VPA were conducted for individual proteins using two-sided t-tests, considering p-values of <0.05 as significant. Adjustment for age, sex, and other clinical covariates and hierarchical clustering of significant differentially expressed proteins was carried out, and Gene Set Enrichment analyses were performed using the Hallmark gene sets. Univariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to test the individual protein expression changes for an association with survival. The lasso Cox regression method and 10-fold cross-validation were employed to test the combinations of expression changes of proteins that could predict survival. Predictiveness curves were plotted for significant proteins for VPA response (p-value < 0.005) to show the survival probability vs. the protein expression percentiles. A total of 124 proteins were identified pre- vs. post-CRT that were differentially expressed between the cohorts who received CRT plus VPA and those who received CRT alone. Clinical factors did not confound the results, and distinct proteomic clustering in the VPA-treated population was identified. Time-dependent ROC curves for OS and PFS for landmark times of 20 months and 6 months, respectively, revealed AUC of 0.531, 0.756, 0.774 for OS and 0.535, 0.723, 0.806 for PFS for protein expression, clinical factors, and the combination of protein expression and clinical factors, respectively, indicating that the proteome can provide additional survival risk discrimination to that already provided by the standard clinical factors with a greater impact on PFS. Several proteins of interest were identified. Alterations in GALNT14 (increased) and CCL17 (decreased) (p = 0.003 and 0.003, respectively, FDR 0.198 for both) were associated with an improvement in both OS and PFS. The pre-CRT protein expression revealed 480 proteins predictive for OS and 212 for PFS (p < 0.05), of which 112 overlapped between OS and PFS. However, FDR-adjusted p values were high, with OS (the smallest p value of 0.586) and PFS (the smallest p value of 0.998). The protein PLCD3 had the lowest p-value (p = 0.002 and 0.0004 for OS and PFS, respectively), and its elevation prior to CRT predicted superior OS and PFS with VPA administration. Cancer hallmark genesets associated with proteomic alteration observed with the administration of VPA aligned with known signal transduction pathways of this agent in malignancy and non-malignancy settings, and GBM signaling, and included epithelial-mesenchymal transition, hedgehog signaling, Il6/JAK/STAT3, coagulation, NOTCH, apical junction, xenobiotic metabolism, and complement signaling. Differential alteration in proteomic expression pre- vs. post-completion of concurrent chemoirradiation (CRT) is present with the addition of VPA. Using pre- vs. post-data, prognostic proteins emerged in the analysis. Using pre-CRT data, potentially predictive proteins were identified. The protein signals and hallmark gene sets associated with the alteration in the proteome identified between patients who received VPA and those who did not, align with known biological mechanisms of action of VPA and may allow for the identification of novel biomarkers associated with outcomes that can help advance the study of VPA in future prospective trials.
Read full abstract