PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 2006Cancer Research162 citations

Targeted Anti–Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 Therapy Leads to Short-term and Long-term Impairment of Vascular Function and Increase in Tumor Hypoxia

View Full Paper
MFMarcela FrancoSMShan ManLCLimor Chen

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Because antiangiogenic therapies inhibit the growth of new tumor-associated blood vessels, as well as prune newly formed vasculature, they would be expected to reduce the supply of oxygen and thus increase tumor hypoxia. However, it is not clear if antiangiogenic treatments lead only to consistent and sustained increases in hypoxia, or transient decreases in tumor hypoxia along with periods of increased hypoxia. We undertook a detailed analysis of an orthotopically transplanted human breast carcinoma (MDA-MB-231) over a 3-week treatment period using DC101, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 antibody. We observed consistent reductions in microvascular density, blood flow (measured by high-frequency micro-ultrasound), and perfusion. These effects resulted in an increase in the hypoxic tumor fraction, measured with an exogenous marker, pimonidazole, concurrent with an elevation in hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha expression, an endogenous marker. The increase in tumor hypoxia was evident within 5 days and remained so throughout the entire course of treatment. Vascular perfusion and flow were impaired at days 2, 5, 7, 8, 14, and 21 after the first injection, but not at 4 hours. A modest increase in the vessel maturation index was detected after the 3-week treatment period, but this was not accompanied by an improvement in vascular function. These results suggest that sustained hypoxia and impairment of vascular function can be two consistent consequences of antiangiogenic drug treatment. The implications of the results are discussed, particularly with respect to how they relate to different theories for the counterintuitive chemosensitizing effects of antiangiogenic drugs, even when hypoxia is increased.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Franco et al. (2006) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a3f6c9a3b12f0bed1ccf98dhttps://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.can-05-3295
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Microregional Effects of Gemcitabine in HCT-116 Xenografts2004 · 78 citations
  2. 2Hypoxia Inducible Factor-1α-Independent Suppression of Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor-Regulated Genes by Nickel2003 · 29 citations
  3. 3Redefining the Target: Chemotherapeutics as Antiangiogenics2001 · 401 citations
  4. 4Kinetics of vascular normalization by VEGFR2 blockade governs brain tumor response to radiationRole of oxygenation, angiopoietin-1, and matrix metalloproteinases2004 · 679 citations
  5. 5Different signalling pathways regulate VEGF and IL-8 expression in breast cancer: implications for therapy2004 · 56 citations