PURPOSE: Phage display technology can be used to identify peptide sequences that bind rapidly and specifically to tumors responding to sunitinib therapy. These peptides may help to address problems with current methods of assessing tumor response to therapy that can be slow and have limited usage. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The peptide of interest was isolated after four rounds of biopanning in MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 xenografted tumors. The binding location of the peptide was investigated with immunohistochemistry. Its in vivo ability to bind to breast tumors responding to therapy was determined by treating nude mice, xenografted with various tumor cell lines, with sunitinib and using near IR imaging to assess the ability of the peptide conjugated to Alexafluor-750 to bind tumors. RESULTS: EGEVGLG was the dominant sequence isolated from biopanning. This peptide showed increased binding relative to control groups in two cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-435 and MCF-7 human breast) responding to sunitinib treatment, whereas no elevated binding occurred in vitro when samples were incubated with tumor cells that are unresponsive to sunitinib treatment (B16 melanoma and BxPC3 pancreatic). Mice xenografted with tumors that are responsive to sunitinib therapy showed increased peptide binding when compared with untreated control. Mice bearing tumors unresponsive to sunitinib therapy showed no increased peptide binding between treated and untreated groups. CONCLUSION: The use of recombinant peptides to assess the pharmacodynamic response of cancer holds promise in minimizing the duration of ineffective treatment regimens in patients, potentially providing a more rapid and less invasive assessment of cancer response to systemic therapy.
PURPOSE: Phage display technology can be used to identify peptide sequences that bind rapidly and specifically to tumors responding to sunitinib therapy. These peptides may help to address problems with current methods of assessing tumor response to therapy that can be slow and have limited usage. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The peptide of interest was isolated after four rounds of biopanning in MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 xenografted tumors. The binding location of the peptide was investigated with immunohistochemistry. Its in vivo ability to bind to breast tumors responding to therapy was determined by treating nude mice, xenografted with various tumor cell lines, with sunitinib and using near IR imaging to assess the ability of the peptide conjugated to Alexafluor-750 to bind tumors. RESULTS: EGEVGLG was the dominant sequence isolated from biopanning. This peptide showed increased binding relative to control groups in two cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-435 and MCF-7human breast) responding to sunitinib treatment, whereas no elevated binding occurred in vitro when samples were incubated with tumor cells that are unresponsive to sunitinib treatment (B16 melanoma and BxPC3pancreatic). Mice xenografted with tumors that are responsive to sunitinib therapy showed increased peptide binding when compared with untreated control. Mice bearing tumors unresponsive to sunitinib therapy showed no increased peptide binding between treated and untreated groups. CONCLUSION: The use of recombinant peptides to assess the pharmacodynamic response of cancer holds promise in minimizing the duration of ineffective treatment regimens in patients, potentially providing a more rapid and less invasive assessment of cancer response to systemic therapy.
Authors: Li Sun; Chris Liang; Sheri Shirazian; Yong Zhou; Todd Miller; Jean Cui; Juri Y Fukuda; Ji-Yu Chu; Asaad Nematalla; Xueyan Wang; Hui Chen; Anand Sistla; Tony C Luu; Flora Tang; James Wei; Cho Tang Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2003-03-27 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Jürgen K Willmann; Nicholas van Bruggen; Ludger M Dinkelborg; Sanjiv S Gambhir Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Wadih Arap; Mikhail G Kolonin; Martin Trepel; Johanna Lahdenranta; Marina Cardó-Vila; Ricardo J Giordano; Paul J Mintz; Peter U Ardelt; Virginia J Yao; Claudia I Vidal; Limor Chen; Anne Flamm; Heli Valtanen; Lisa M Weavind; Marshall E Hicks; Raphael E Pollock; Gregory H Botz; Corazon D Bucana; Erkki Koivunen; Dolores Cahill; Patricia Troncoso; Keith A Baggerly; Rebecca D Pentz; Kim-Anh Do; Christopher J Logothetis; Renata Pasqualini Journal: Nat Med Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Dirk B Mendel; A Douglas Laird; Xiaohua Xin; Sharianne G Louie; James G Christensen; Guangmin Li; Randall E Schreck; Tinya J Abrams; Theresa J Ngai; Leslie B Lee; Lesley J Murray; Jeremy Carver; Emily Chan; Katherine G Moss; Joshua O Haznedar; Juthamas Sukbuntherng; Robert A Blake; Li Sun; Cho Tang; Todd Miller; Sheri Shirazian; Gerald McMahon; Julie M Cherrington Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ralph J Passarella; Daniel E Spratt; Alice E van der Ende; John G Phillips; Hongmei Wu; Vasanth Sathiyakumar; Li Zhou; Dennis E Hallahan; Eva Harth; Roberto Diaz Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2010-05-18 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Daniel J Ferraro; Sandeep R Bhave; Rama P Kotipatruni; Jeremy C Hunn; Scott A Wildman; Charles Hong; David Y A Dadey; Lincoln K Muhoro; Jerry J Jaboin; Dinesh Thotala; Dennis E Hallahan Journal: Integr Biol (Camb) Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Olusegun A Fagbohun; Deepa Bedi; Natalia I Grabchenko; Patricia A Deinnocentes; Richard C Bird; Valery A Petrenko Journal: Protein Eng Des Sel Date: 2012-04-06 Impact factor: 1.650