Literature DB >> 1327501

Micropharmacology of monoclonal antibodies in solid tumors: direct experimental evidence for a binding site barrier.

M Juweid1, R Neumann, C Paik, M J Perez-Bacete, J Sato, W van Osdol, J N Weinstein.   

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) often distribute nonuniformly in tumors. In part, that observation reflects intrinsic heterogeneity within the tumor; in part, it reflects poor penetration through tumor substance. Several years ago, we proposed the "binding site barrier" hypothesis (J.N. Weinstein, R.R. Eger, D.G. Covell, C.D.V. Black, J. Mulshine, J.A. Carrasquillo, S.M. Larson, and A.M. Keenan, Ann. NY Acad. Sci., 507: 199-210, 1987; K. Fujimori, D.C. Covell, J.E. Fletcher, and J.N. Weinstein, Cancer Res., 49: 5656-5663, 1989), the idea that antibodies (and other ligands) could be prevented from penetrating tumors by the very fact of their successful binding to target antigen. Calculations suggested that this might be a significant factor in the therapy of even microscopic nodules. The higher the affinity and the higher the antigen density, the greater the barrier. Here, we provide direct experimental evidence of such a barrier to the percolation of D3 MAb through intradermally implanted line 10 carcinoma of guinea pigs. After affinity purification using glutaraldehyde-fixed line 10 cells, the D3 had an average immunoreactivity of 88%, a binding constant of 1.6 +/- 0.3 (SEM) x 10(10) M-1, and saturation binding of 355,000 +/- 15,000 molecules/cell. Using a combination of double-label autoradiography and double-chromagen immunohistochemistry, we determined simultaneously the distribution of (a) i.v. injected D3 MAb; (b) coinjected isotype-matched control IgG (BL3); (c) D3 antigen; (d) blood vessels. The previously developed mathematical models aided in the design of these experiments. Double immunochemical staining of the tumors showed antigen-rich patches 100-800 microns across, surrounded by blood vessels. At a low MAb dose (30 micrograms), binding to antigen severely hindered penetration into antigenic patches as small as 200 microns, even at 72 h. Explanation of this finding by a physical barrier was ruled out by the observation that BL3 distributed uniformly in the same patches. At a higher dose (1000 micrograms), the binding site barrier could be partially overcome. The same general principles of micropharmacology may apply to biological ligands other than antibodies, including those secreted by genetically modified cells.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1327501

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   12.701


  119 in total

Review 1.  Delivery of cancer therapeutics to extracellular and intracellular targets: Determinants, barriers, challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Jessie L-S Au; Bertrand Z Yeung; Michael G Wientjes; Ze Lu; M Guillaume Wientjes
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 15.470

2.  Synergistic antitumor activity of anti-CD25 recombinant immunotoxin LMB-2 with chemotherapy.

Authors:  Rajat Singh; Yujian Zhang; Ira Pastan; Robert J Kreitman
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 3.  Issues related to targeted delivery of proteins and peptides.

Authors:  Yingjuan Lu; Jun Yang; Emanuela Sega
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2006-07-21       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  The Binding Site Barrier Elicited by Tumor-Associated Fibroblasts Interferes Disposition of Nanoparticles in Stroma-Vessel Type Tumors.

Authors:  Lei Miao; Jay M Newby; C Michael Lin; Lu Zhang; Feifei Xu; William Y Kim; M Gregory Forest; Samuel K Lai; Matthew I Milowsky; Sara E Wobker; Leaf Huang
Journal:  ACS Nano       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 15.881

Review 5.  Silicon micro- and nanofabrication for medicine.

Authors:  Daniel Fine; Alessandro Grattoni; Randy Goodall; Shyam S Bansal; Ciro Chiappini; Sharath Hosali; Anne L van de Ven; Srimeenkashi Srinivasan; Xuewu Liu; Biana Godin; Louis Brousseau; Iman K Yazdi; Joseph Fernandez-Moure; Ennio Tasciotti; Hung-Jen Wu; Ye Hu; Steve Klemm; Mauro Ferrari
Journal:  Adv Healthc Mater       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 9.933

Review 6.  Imaging virus-associated cancer.

Authors:  De-Xue Fu; Catherine A Foss; Sridhar Nimmagadda; Richard F Ambinder; Martin G Pomper
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.116

7.  Target mediated disposition of T84.66, a monoclonal anti-CEA antibody: application in the detection of colorectal cancer xenografts.

Authors:  Shweta R Urva; Joseph P Balthasar
Journal:  MAbs       Date:  2010-01-26       Impact factor: 5.857

8.  Camouflaging Nanoparticles for Ratiometric Delivery of Therapeutic Combinations.

Authors:  Fanfei Meng; Jianping Wang; Qineng Ping; Yoon Yeo
Journal:  Nano Lett       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 11.189

9.  Semiquantitative assessment of the microdistribution of fluorescence-labeled monoclonal antibody in small peritoneal disseminations of ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Nobuyuki Kosaka; Mikako Ogawa; David S Paik; Chang H Paik; Peter L Choyke; Hisataka Kobayashi
Journal:  Cancer Sci       Date:  2009-10-31       Impact factor: 6.716

10.  Intracranial elimination of human glioblastoma brain tumors in nude rats using the bispecific ligand-directed toxin, DTEGF13 and convection enhanced delivery.

Authors:  Seunguk Oh; John R Ohlfest; Deborah A Todhunter; Vincent D Vallera; Walter A Hall; Hua Chen; Daniel A Vallera
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 4.130

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.