4.5 Review

Investigational EGFR-targeted therapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON INVESTIGATIONAL DRUGS
Volume 19, Issue 6, Pages 709-722

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1517/13543781003769844

Keywords

antisense oligonucleotides; EGFR; monoclonal antibodies; TKI

Funding

  1. NIH [T32000066, P50CA097190]
  2. American Cancer Society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Importance of the field: EGFR is an established therapeutic target in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). The EGFR-targeting monoclonal antibody cetuximab (Erbitux (TM), Imclone Systems, Inc., Branchburg, USA) was FDA-approved for use in HNSCC in 2006. The molecular basis for the efficacy of an antibody approach compared with inhibition of EGFR tyrosine kinase function using small-molecule inhibitors, or downregulation of protein expression via antisense strategies, remains incompletely understood. Areas covered in this review: A literature search was performed to identify studies elucidating mechanisms of action of several approaches to targeting EGFR in HNSCC (monoclonal antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, antisense approaches, and ligand-toxin conjugates). What the reader will gain: Monoclonal antibodies decrease tumor growth via receptor endocytosis and recruitment of host immune defenses. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors bind to the ATP binding pocket of the tyrosine kinase domain, inhibiting signaling. Antisense approaches decrease EGFR expression with high specificity, though drug delivery remains problematic. Ligand-toxin conjugates facilitate the entry of toxin and the ADP-ribosylation of the ribosome, thereby inhibiting translation. Take home message: Elucidation mechanisms by which these different strategies inhibit EGFR function may enhance the development of more effective treatments for HNSCC and enable prospective identification of individuals who will benefit from EGFR inhibition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available