CXCR4 inhibitors could benefit to HER2 but not to triple-negative breast cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The CXCR4 receptor and its ligand CXCL12 (also named stromal cell-derived factor 1, SDF1) have a critical role in chemotaxis and homing, key steps in cancer metastasis. Although myofibroblasts expressing CXCL12 are associated with the presence of axillary metastases in HER2 breast cancers (BC), the therapeutic interest of targeting CXCR4/CXCL12 axis in the different BC subtypes remains unclear. Here, we investigate this question by testing antitumor activity of CXCR4 inhibitors in patient-derived xenografts (PDX), which faithfully reproduce human tumor properties. We observed that two CXCR4 inhibitors, AMD3100 and TN14003, efficiently impair tumor growth and metastasis dissemination in both Herceptin-sensitive and Herceptin-resistant HER2 BC. Conversely, blocking CXCR4/CXCL12 pathway in triple-negative (TN) BC does not reduce tumor growth, and can even increase metastatic spread. Moreover, although CXCR4 inhibitors significantly reduce myofibroblast content in all BC subtypes, they decrease angiogenesis only in HER2 BC. Thus, our findings suggest that targeting CXCR4 could provide some therapeutic interest for HER2 BC patients, whereas it has no impact or could even be detrimental for TN BC patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".