MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recombinant Human Erythropoietin (rHuEPO) In Combination with Chemotherapy Increases Breast Cancer Metastasis In Pre-Clinical Mouse Models

2010· article· en· W2572605004 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anargyros Xenocostas, Benjamin D. Hedley, Jenny E. Chu, D. George Ormond, Michel S. Beausoleil, Alexandra Boasie, Alison L. Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErythropoietinMedicineBreast cancerCancerErythropoiesisMetastatic breast cancerMetastasisCancer researchInternal medicineErythropoietin receptorChemotherapyAnemiaImmunologyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3345 Background: Erythropoietin (EPO) is a key regulator of erythropoiesis, and has been shown to stimulate growth, maintain viability, and promote differentiation of red blood cell precursors. The EPO receptor (EPO-R) is expressed by erythroid cells and by several non-hematopoietic cell types including various neoplastic cells. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are used clinically for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia. The results of some recent randomized clinical trials have reported an increased incidence in adverse events and reduced survival in ESA-treated metastatic breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, potentially related to EPO-induced cancer progression. These results have raised concerns over ESA treatment in metastatic cancer patients. However, very little pre-clinical data is available regarding the impact of EPO on breast cancer metastasis. The goal of the current study was therefore to determine if EPO can influence the malignant behavior of breast cancer cells and/or influence the metastatic process. Methods: MDA-MB-468, MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-435, and 4T-1 breast cancer cell lines were treated with recombinant human EPO (rHuEPO; 10 U/ml) or control media and screened for EPO-R mRNA expression levels by RT-PCR, and for EPO-R protein expression by Western blot and flow cytometry. MDA-MB-231 (231) and MDA-MB-435 (435) cell lines were used for functional assays in vitro and in vivo. Untreated or rHuEPO treated cells were grown in 2D and 3D in vitro systems (standard tissue culture plates and 0.6% soft agar, respectively) to determine if rHuEPO influenced growth. In vitro cell survival was also assessed in response to treatment with rHuEPO in the presence or absence of paclitaxel chemotherapy (10mg/ml), radiation (10G), or hypoxic conditions (1% O2). Following mammary fat pad injection, in vivo effects of rHuEPO (300U/kg) alone or in combination with paclitaxel treatment (10mg/kg) were assessed in mouse models of tumorigenicity and spontaneous metastasis. Results: Expression analysis of EPO-R mRNA and protein revealed a large variation in levels across different cell lines. The majority of cell lines did not express cell surface EPO-R by flow cytometry, although two cell lines (231 and 435) did show weak expression of EPO-R mRNA, with only the 231 cell line showing EPO-R expression by Western blot. In vitro, a small protective effect from rHuEPO on radiation-treated 435 cells was seen (p<0.05); however, rHuEPO treatment alone or combined with chemotherapy or hypoxia did not cause a significant increase in cell survival relative to untreated controls cells. In contrast, in vivo studies demonstrated that rHuEPO increased the incidence and burden of lung metastases in immunocompromised mice injected with 231 or 435 cells and treated with paclitaxel relative to mice treated with paclitaxel alone (p<0.05). Conclusions: The lack of an in vitro effect of rHuEPO highlights the importance of in vivo studies to delineate the effects of EPO on the metastatic process. Our novel findings demonstrate that rHuEPO can reduce the efficacy of chemotherapy in the metastatic setting in vivo, and in some cases enhance the inherent metastatic growth potential of human breast cancer cells. This work was supported by funding from the London Regional Cancer Program and Janssen Ortho Canada Disclosures: Xenocostas: Janssen Ortho: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Allan:Janssen Ortho: Research Funding.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207