Recombinant human endostatin (Wuzhong Pharmaceutical)

Recombinant proteins are gaining increasing popularity for treating human diseases. The clinical effectiveness of recombinant proteins is directly related to their biological activity, which is an important indicator in drug development and quality control. However, certain recombinant proteins have unclear or complex signal pathways, making detecting their activity in vitro difficult. For instance, recombinant human endostatin (endostatin), a new antitumor drug developed in China, lacks a sensitive and stable assay for its biological activity since being market approval. To address this issue, we performed a genome‐wide screening of immortalized human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) using a CRISPR/Cas9 knockout library containing 20,000 targeted genes. We identified two potential endostatin‐resistant genes, NEPSPP and UTS2, and successfully constructed a highly sensitive cell line, HUVEC‐UTS2‐3#, by knocking down the UTS2 gene. Based on the optimized parameters of HUVEC‐UTS2‐3# cells, we established a new method for detecting the biological activity of endostatin. The method was validated, and it produced results consistent with primary HUVEC cells but with higher sensitivity and more stable data. The use of gene‐editing technology provides a novel solution for detecting the biological activity of recombinant proteins that other methods cannot detect.

This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of Endostar in the management of locally advanced cervical cancer.

This retrospective, 2-center study enrolled 41 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer between June 2017 and December 2020. The patients were subjected to a combination of Endostar and chemoradiotherapy until they experienced disease progression or an unacceptable level of toxicity. The patients in the Endostar combined chemoradiotherapy (E + CRT) and CRT groups were matched 1:1 based on clinical features, including age, disease stage, and pathological type. The therapeutic efficacy and safety outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.

Early treatment response: the CR rates in E + CRT and CRT groups were 48.8% and 26.8%, respectively ( χ2 = 4.20, P < .05). The ORR and DCR were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Long-term efficacy: there was no significant difference in the 1-year and 2-year PFS rates and OS rates between 2 groups. However, in patients with stage IIB, subgroup analyses revealed a significant difference in PFS between the 2 groups ( P < .05). Prognostic factors: stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score, and tumor size were independent predictive factors for PFS, while ECOG score and tumor size were those of OS in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Safety: The incidence of grade III-IV myelosuppression was significantly lower in E + CRT group than in CRT group ( P < .05).

The combination of Endostar and concurrent CRT exhibited greater efficacy in treating locally advanced cervical cancer with no severe adverse reactions, when compared to simple CRT. It is expected that this approach will evolve into a new treatment alternative for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.