| Literature DB >> 23242249 |
Jens Sperling1, Thilo Schäfer, Anna Benz-Weißer, Christian Ziemann, Claudia Scheuer, Otto Kollmar, Martin K Schilling, Michael D Menger.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Systemic chemotherapy still represents the gold standard in the treatment of irresectable colorectal liver metastases. Modern anticancer agents like the monoclonal antibody cetuximab have improved the outcome of patients in clinical studies. As hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) is capable to potentially increase the anticancer effect of cytostatics, we herein studied whether HAI of cetuximab (CE) as a single agent or in combination with oxaliplatin (OX) exerts increased anticancer effects compared to the systemic application (SYS) of the drugs.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23242249 PMCID: PMC3639362 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-012-1617-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis ISSN: 0179-1958 Impact factor: 2.571
Fig. 1Immunocytochemical fluorescence microscopy of CC531 cells in vitro. a The staining of the nuclei of the cells (cells are stained blue). b The binding of cetuximab (stained red) on the CC531 cells; c the merge of a and b. d The negative control
Body weight change (in percent) from days 0 to 13
| Group | HAI | SYS |
|---|---|---|
| Sham | −2.1 ± 0.4 | +7.3 ± 2.2 |
| CE | +1.2 ± 1.3 | −0.4 ± 1.0* |
| CE + OX | −2.0 ± 1.3 | −4.5 ± 1.2* |
| OX | −6.9 ± 1.9* | −4.3 ± 1.6* |
Weight change from days 0 to 13 in percent of the body weight at day 0. Animals were treated either with hepatic arterial infusion or systemic application of saline (Sham), cetuximab, the combination of cetuximab and oxaliplatin, or oxaliplatin alone. There were no statistically significant differences comparing HAI to SYS. Mean ± SEM
HAI hepatic arterial infusion, SYS systemic application, CE cetuximab, CE + OX combination of cetuximab and oxaliplatin, OX oxaliplatin
*p < 0.05 vs Sham of the corresponding group
Fig. 2a, b The tumor volume at day 13 in percent of the volume measured at day 10 after HAI (a) and SYS (b) of cetuximab (CE), oxaliplatin (OX), or the combination of both (CE + OX). Animals undergoing HAI or SYS with saline served as controls (Sham). Data are given as mean ± SEM; *p < 0.05 vs Sham; # p < 0.05 vs corresponding SYS
Fig. 3a, b The data of the immunohistochemical analysis of proliferating nuclear cell antigen (score 0 = <1 %, 1 = 1–10 %, 2 = 10–30 %, 3 = 30–50 %, and 4 ≥ 50 % of PCNA-positive cells) of liver and tumor tissue of animals undergoing HAI (a) or SYS (b) with cetuximab (CE), oxaliplatin (OX), or the combination of both (CE + OX). Animals undergoing HAI or SYS with saline served as controls (Sham). Data are given as mean ± SEM; # p < 0.05 vs corresponding SYS
Fig. 4a, b The quantitative analysis of cleaved caspase-3-positive cells of liver and tumor tissue (given as number per HPF) of animals undergoing HAI (a) or SYS (b) with cetuximab (CE), oxaliplatin (OX), or the combination of both (CE + OX). Animals undergoing HAI or SYS with saline served as controls (Sham). Data are given as mean ± SEM; *p < 0.05 vs Sham; # p < 0.05 vs corresponding SYS
Fig. 5a, b The number of PECAM-1-positive blood vessels per HPF in tumors of animals undergoing HAI (a) or SYS (b) with cetuximab (CE), oxaliplatin (OX), or the combination of both (CE + OX). Animals undergoing HAI or SYS with saline served as controls (Sham). Data are given as mean ± SEM; *p < 0.05 vs Sham; # p < 0.05 vs corresponding SYS
Liver enzyme GLDH (in units per liter) at days 10 and 13
| Group | Day 10 | Day 13 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HAI | SYS | HAI | SYS | |
| Sham | 22.3 ± 7.1 | 34.3 ± 10.3 | 35.0 ± 5.8 | 22.3 ± 6.5 |
| CE | 49.9 ± 9.7 | 23.2 ± 6.6 | 44.6 ± 8.4 | 22.9 ± 9.8 |
| CE + OX | 24.7 ± 6.4 | 38.6 ± 14.2 | 72.2 ± 5.1 | 20.8 ± 6.9* |
| OX | 30.5 ± 6.2 | 35.2 ± 5.9 | 59.8 ± 34.8 | 15.1 ± 2.9 |
Animals were treated either with hepatic arterial infusion or systemic application of saline (Sham), cetuximab, or oxaliplatin alone or the combination of cetuximab and oxaliplatin. HAI of cetuximab and oxaliplatin led to a significant increase of GLDH from days 10 to 13 compared to the systemic administration form (SYS CE + OX). Mean ± SEM
HAI hepatic arterial infusion, SYS systemic application, CE cetuximab, OX oxaliplatin, CE + OX combination of cetuximab and oxaliplatin, HAI CE + OX HAI of cetuximab and oxaliplatin
*p < 0.05 vs HAI