Bispecific Targeting of EGFR and UPAR in a Mouse Model of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Overview

Journal Oral Oncol

Publisher Elsevier

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2012 Jul 24

PMID 22818892

Citations 15

Authors

Nate N Waldron

Seunguk Oh

Daniel A Vallera

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the efficacy of the bispecific targeted toxin, dEGFATFKDEL, on head and neck carcinoma cell lines in vitro and in vivo.

Materials And Methods: A deimmunized bispecific anti-cancer agent was constructed to simultaneously target both the overexpressed EGF receptor on carcinomas and the urokinase receptor (uPAR), that is found on the endothelial cells of the neovasculature within tumors. Flow cytometry assays were performed to determine the level of EGFR expressed on a variety of carcinoma lines. These lines were then tested in tritiated leucine incorporation assays to determine the efficacy of dEGFATFKDEL. Human vein endothelial primary cells were also tested to determine the effectiveness of the ATF portion of the molecule that binds uPAR. Furthermore, mouse studies were performed to determine whether dEGFATFKDEL was effective at inhibiting tumor growth in vivo.

Results: UMSCC-11B and NA, two head and neck squamous cell carcinomas, highly expressed EGFR. Both the carcinoma lines and the human vein endothelial cells were inhibited at sub-nanomolar concentrations by dEGFATFKDEL. The tumor studies showed that the tumors treated with dEGFATFKDEL were significantly inhibited whereas the negative control and untreated tumors progressed. In a separate in vivo study involving another carcinoma line, MDA-MB-231, the effectiveness of dEGFATFKDEL was confirmed. No toxicity was seen at the doses used in either of these mouse studies.

Conclusions: This bispecific agent is effective in a mouse model of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Further study of this reagent for use in the treatment of carcinomas is warranted.

Citing Articles

Toxicity Profile of eBAT, a Bispecific Ligand-Targeted Toxin Directed to EGFR and uPAR, in Mice and a Clinical Dog Model.

Dicovitsky R, Schappa J, Schulte A, Lang H, Kuerbitz E, Roberts S Toxins (Basel). 2024; 16(9).

PMID: 39330834 PMC: 11436214. DOI: 10.3390/toxins16090376.

Urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) as a therapeutic target in cancer.

Zhai B, Tian H, Sun J, Zou J, Zhang X, Cheng J J Transl Med. 2022; 20(1):135.

PMID: 35303878 PMC: 8932206. DOI: 10.1186/s12967-022-03329-3.

Therapeutic Strategies Targeting Urokinase and Its Receptor in Cancer.

Masucci M, Minopoli M, Di Carluccio G, Motti M, Carriero M Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(3).

PMID: 35158766 PMC: 8833673. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14030498.

Immunotoxins: From Design to Clinical Application.

Kreitman R, Pastan I Biomolecules. 2021; 11(11).

PMID: 34827694 PMC: 8615697. DOI: 10.3390/biom11111696.

The Urokinase Receptor (uPAR) as a "Trojan Horse" in Targeted Cancer Therapy: Challenges and Opportunities.

Metrangolo V, Ploug M, Engelholm L Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(21).

PMID: 34771541 PMC: 8582577. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13215376.

References

Engebraaten O, Hjortland G, Juell S, Hirschberg H, Fodstad O . Intratumoral immunotoxin treatment of human malignant brain tumors in immunodeficient animals. Int J Cancer. 2002; 97(6):846-52. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.10137. View

Kerbel R . Reappraising antiangiogenic therapy for breast cancer. Breast. 2011; 20 Suppl 3:S56-60. PMC: 4540338. DOI: 10.1016/S0960-9776(11)70295-8. View

Stish B, Oh S, Chen H, Dudek A, Kratzke R, Vallera D . Design and modification of EGF4KDEL 7Mut, a novel bispecific ligand-directed toxin, with decreased immunogenicity and potent anti-mesothelioma activity. Br J Cancer. 2009; 101(7):1114-23. PMC: 2768099. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605297. View

Jacobsen B, Ploug M . The urokinase receptor and its structural homologue C4.4A in human cancer: expression, prognosis and pharmacological inhibition. Curr Med Chem. 2008; 15(25):2559-73. DOI: 10.2174/092986708785909012. View

Gonzalez-Angulo A, Morales-Vasquez F, Hortobagyi G . Overview of resistance to systemic therapy in patients with breast cancer. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2007; 608:1-22. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-74039-3_1. View

Del Campo J, Hitt R, Sebastian P, Carracedo C, Lokanatha D, Bourhis J . Effects of lapatinib monotherapy: results of a randomised phase II study in therapy-naive patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Br J Cancer. 2011; 105(5):618-27. PMC: 3188940. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.237. View

Rasmussen L, Arvin A . Chemotherapy-induced immunosuppression. Environ Health Perspect. 1982; 43:21-5. PMC: 1568884. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.824321. View

Fitzgerald D, Pastan I . Targeted toxin therapy for the treatment of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989; 81(19):1455-63. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/81.19.1455. View

Uribe P, Gonzalez S . Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin: molecular bases for EGFR-targeted therapy. Pathol Res Pract. 2011; 207(6):337-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2011.03.002. View

10.

Liu T, Tatter S, Willingham M, Yang M, Hu J, Frankel A . Growth factor receptor expression varies among high-grade gliomas and normal brain: epidermal growth factor receptor has excellent properties for interstitial fusion protein therapy. Mol Cancer Ther. 2003; 2(8):783-7. View

11.

Tsai A, Oh S, Chen H, Shu Y, Ohlfest J, Vallera D . A novel bispecific ligand-directed toxin designed to simultaneously target EGFR on human glioblastoma cells and uPAR on tumor neovasculature. J Neurooncol. 2010; 103(2):255-66. PMC: 3098297. DOI: 10.1007/s11060-010-0392-5. View

12.

Chen Z, Lin L, Huai Q, Huang M . Challenges for drug discovery - a case study of urokinase receptor inhibition. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen. 2009; 12(10):961-7. PMC: 2797710. DOI: 10.2174/138620709789824727. View

13.

Waldron N, Kaufman D, Oh S, Inde Z, Hexum M, Ohlfest J . Targeting tumor-initiating cancer cells with dCD133KDEL shows impressive tumor reductions in a xenotransplant model of human head and neck cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011; 10(10):1829-38. PMC: 3191276. DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-11-0206. View

14.

PEARSON J, Sivam G, Manger R, Wiltrout R, Morgan Jr A, Longo D . Enhanced therapeutic efficacy of an immunotoxin in combination with chemotherapy against an intraperitoneal human tumor xenograft in athymic mice. Cancer Res. 1989; 49(18):4990-5. View

15.

Bianchini C, Ciorba A, Pelucchi S, Piva R, Pastore A . Targeted therapy in head and neck cancer. Tumori. 2011; 97(2):137-41. DOI: 10.1177/030089161109700201. View

16.

Fan F, Schimming A, Jaeger D, Podar K . Targeting the tumor microenvironment: focus on angiogenesis. J Oncol. 2011; 2012:281261. PMC: 3163131. DOI: 10.1155/2012/281261. View

17.

Modjtahedi H, Essapen S . Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in cancer treatment: advances, challenges and opportunities. Anticancer Drugs. 2009; 20(10):851-5. DOI: 10.1097/CAD.0b013e3283330590. View

18.

Sun Q, Xu Q, Dong X, Cao L, Huang X, Hu Q . A hybrid protein comprising ATF domain of pro-UK and VAS, an angiogenesis inhibitor, is a potent candidate for targeted cancer therapy. Int J Cancer. 2008; 123(4):942-50. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.23537. View

19.

Reuning U, Sperl S, Kopitz C, Kessler H, Kruger A, Schmitt M . Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its receptor (uPAR): development of antagonists of uPA/uPAR interaction and their effects in vitro and in vivo. Curr Pharm Des. 2003; 9(19):1529-43. DOI: 10.2174/1381612033454612. View

20.

Yarden Y, Sliwkowski M . Untangling the ErbB signalling network. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2001; 2(2):127-37. DOI: 10.1038/35052073. View