4.7 Article

Molecular study of malignant gliomas treated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors: Tissue analysis from North American Brain Tumor Consortium Trials 01-03 and 00-01

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 11, 期 21, 页码 7841-7850

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0421

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [U01CA62407, U01 CA894314-1, T32 CA009512, R21 CA104504, 5-U01CA62399-09, CA62412, R01 CA100688, R01 CA099489, CA62426, CA62422] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We investigated the molecular effect of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors erlotinib and gefitinib in vivo on all available tumors from patients treated on North American Brain Tumor Consortium trials 01-03 and 00-01 for recurrent or progressive malignant glioma. Experimental Design: EGFR expression and signaling during treatment with erlotinib or gefitinib were analyzed by Western blot and compared with pre-erlotinib/gefitinib-exposed tissue or unexposed controls. Tumors were also analyzed for EGFR mutations and for other genomic abnormalities by array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Clinical data were used to associate molecular features with tumor sensitivity to erlotinib or gefitinib. Results: Erlotinib and gefitinib did not markedly affect EGFR activity in vivo. No lung signature mutations of EGFR exons 18 to 21 were observed. There was no clear association between erlotinib/gefitinib sensitivity and deletion or amplification events on array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis, although novel genomic changes were identified. Conclusions: As erlotinib and gefitinib were generally ineffective at markedly inhibiting EGFR phosphorylation in these tumors, other assays may be needed to detect molecular effects. Additionally, the mechanism of erlotinib/gefitinib sensitivity likely differs between brain and lung tumors. Finally, novel genomic changes, including deletions of chromosomes 6, 21, and 22, represent new targets for further research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据