MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930155869

Antitumor effects and normal tissue toxicity of 111In-labeled epidermal growth factor administered to athymic mice bearing epidermal growth factor receptor-positive human breast cancer xenografts.

2003· article· en· W1930155869 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Chen, Ross Cameron, Judy Wang, Katherine A. Vallis, Raymond M. Reilly

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidermal growth factorEpidermal growth factor receptorToxicityBreast cancerCancerMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyCancer researchPathologyReceptor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is an attractive target for the design of radiotherapeutic agents for breast cancer because it is present on almost all estrogen receptor-negative, hormone-resistant tumors with a poor prognosis. In this study, we describe the antitumor effects and normal tissue toxicity of the novel Auger electron-emitting radiopharmaceutical (111)In-labeled diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-human epidermal growth factor ((111)In-DTPA-hEGF) administered to athymic mice bearing EGFR-positive human breast cancer xenografts. METHODS: Mice bearing subcutaneous MDA-MB-468 or MCF-7 human breast cancer xenografts were treated with 5 weekly doses of (111)In-DTPA-hEGF (total, 27.7-92.5 MBq or 5-17 micro g). Treatment was commenced 6 wk after tumor cell implantation (established tumors) or 1 wk after implantation (nonestablished tumors). Antitumor effects were assessed by use of the slope of the tumor growth curve. Normal tissue toxicity was assessed by use of plasma alanine transaminase and creatinine levels, hematologic indices (leukocytes, platelets, erythrocytes, and hemoglobin), histopathologic examination of the liver and kidneys, and changes in body weight. The uptake of (111)In-DTPA-hEGF in tumors of different sizes (<5-200 mm(3)) was investigated, and microdosimetry estimates were calculated. RESULTS: (111)In-DTPA-hEGF exhibited strong antitumor effects against established MDA-MB-468 xenografts, decreasing their growth rate 3-fold compared with that in normal saline-treated mice (slopes, 0.0225 and 0.0737 d(-1), respectively; P = 0.002). The antitumor effects of (111)In-DTPA-hEGF were much more profound in mice with small, nonestablished MDA-MB-468 tumors, which regressed, than in saline-treated mice (slopes, -0.009 and 0.0297 d(-1), respectively; P < 0.001). The growth of MCF-7 xenografts, with a 100-fold-lower level of EGFR expression, was modestly inhibited by (111)In-DTPA-hEGF compared with that in saline-treated mice (slopes, 0.0250 and 0.0488 d(-1), respectively; P = 0.051). There was a 1.4- to 2-fold decrease in leukocyte and platelet counts with (111)In-DTPA-hEGF treatment, but these counts remained in the normal ranges. There was no change in other biochemical or hematologic parameters or body weight. There was no evidence of morphologic damage to the liver or kidneys. A strong inverse relationship was observed between radiopharmaceutical uptake and tumor size, with small tumors (<5 mm(3)) accumulating >30% of the injected dose (%ID) per gram, compared with 5 %ID/g for tumors measuring 6-30 mm(3). Exceptionally high uptake (>80 %ID/g) was achieved in tumors measuring 1-2 mm(3). Microdosimetry estimates indicated that the nucleus of an MDA-MB-468 cell would receive 90-1,400 cGy, depending on the level of radiopharmaceutical uptake. CONCLUSION: (111)In-DTPA-hEGF exhibited strong antitumor effects against MDA-MB-468 breast cancer xenografts overexpressing EGFR. The highest tumor localization, radiation-absorbed doses, and growth inhibition were achieved for small, nonestablished tumors, suggesting that the radiopharmaceutical may be most valuable for the treatment of small-volume metastatic breast cancer or occult micrometastases in an adjuvant setting.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207