Franziska Lange1, Daniel Kaemmerer2, Julianne Behnke-Mursch3, Wolfgang Brück4, Stefan Schulz1, Amelie Lupp5. 1. Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Drackendorfer Str. 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. 2. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Zentralklinik Bad Berka, Bad Berka, Germany. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Zentralklinik Bad Berka, Bad Berka, Germany. 4. Institute of Pathology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. 5. Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Drackendorfer Str. 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. Amelie.Lupp@med.uni-jena.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Glioblastomas represent the most common primary malignant tumor of the nervous system and the most frequent type of astrocytic tumors. Despite improved therapeutic options, prognosis has remained exceptionally poor over the last two decades. Therefore, new treatment approaches are urgently needed. An overexpression of somatostatin (SST) as well as chemokine CXCR4 and endothelin A (ETA) receptors has been shown for many types of cancer. Respective expression data for astrocytic brain tumors, however, are scarce and contradictory. METHODS: SST subtype, CXCR4 and ETA expression was comparatively evaluated in a total of 57 grade I-IV astrocytic tumor samples by immunohistochemistry using well-characterized monoclonal antibodies. RESULTS: Overall, receptor expression on the tumor cells was only very low. SST5 was the most prominently expressed receptor, followed by SST3, ETA, SST2 and CXCR4. In contrast, tumor capillaries displayed strong SST2, SST3, SST5, CXCR4 and ETA expression. Presence of SST5, CXCR4 and ETA on tumor cells and of SST3, CXCR4 and ETA on microvessels gradually increased from grade II to grade IV tumors. Ki-67 values correlated significantly with CXCR4 expression on tumor cells and with vascular SST3, CXCR4 or ETA positivity. SST5 or CXCR4 positivity of tumor cells and vascular SST3 or CXCR4 expression negatively correlated with patient outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Though having some prognostic value, SST, CXCR4 or ETA expression on astrocytic tumor cells is clearly of no therapeutic relevance. Indirect targeting of these highly vascularized tumors via SST3, SST5, CXCR4 or ETA on the microvessels, in contrast, may represent a promising additional therapeutic strategy.
PURPOSE:Glioblastomas represent the most common primary malignant tumor of the nervous system and the most frequent type of astrocytic tumors. Despite improved therapeutic options, prognosis has remained exceptionally poor over the last two decades. Therefore, new treatment approaches are urgently needed. An overexpression of somatostatin (SST) as well as chemokine CXCR4 and endothelin A (ETA) receptors has been shown for many types of cancer. Respective expression data for astrocytic brain tumors, however, are scarce and contradictory. METHODS: SST subtype, CXCR4 and ETA expression was comparatively evaluated in a total of 57 grade I-IV astrocytic tumor samples by immunohistochemistry using well-characterized monoclonal antibodies. RESULTS: Overall, receptor expression on the tumor cells was only very low. SST5 was the most prominently expressed receptor, followed by SST3, ETA, SST2 and CXCR4. In contrast, tumor capillaries displayed strong SST2, SST3, SST5, CXCR4 and ETA expression. Presence of SST5, CXCR4 and ETA on tumor cells and of SST3, CXCR4 and ETA on microvessels gradually increased from grade II to grade IV tumors. Ki-67 values correlated significantly with CXCR4 expression on tumor cells and with vascular SST3, CXCR4 or ETA positivity. SST5 or CXCR4 positivity of tumor cells and vascular SST3 or CXCR4 expression negatively correlated with patient outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Though having some prognostic value, SST, CXCR4 or ETA expression on astrocytic tumor cells is clearly of no therapeutic relevance. Indirect targeting of these highly vascularized tumors via SST3, SST5, CXCR4 or ETA on the microvessels, in contrast, may represent a promising additional therapeutic strategy.
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: P Cervera; C Videau; C Viollet; C Petrucci; J Lacombe; R Winsky-Sommerer; Z Csaba; L Helboe; C Daumas-Duport; J C Reubi; J Epelbaum Journal: J Neuroendocrinol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 3.627
Authors: Martyn E Caplin; Marianne Pavel; Jarosław B Ćwikła; Alexandria T Phan; Markus Raderer; Eva Sedláčková; Guillaume Cadiot; Edward M Wolin; Jaume Capdevila; Lucy Wall; Guido Rindi; Alison Langley; Séverine Martinez; Joëlle Blumberg; Philippe Ruszniewski Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-07-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Chiara Lambertini; Patrizia Barzaghi-Rinaudo; Lisa D'Amato; Stefan Schulz; Paolo Nuciforo; Herbert A Schmid Journal: Regul Pept Date: 2013-11-01
Authors: Max Czajkowski; Daniel Kaemmerer; Jörg Sänger; Guido Sauter; Ralph M Wirtz; Stefan Schulz; Amelie Lupp Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Rosalba Mansi; Guillaume Pierre Nicolas; Luigi Del Pozzo; Karim Alexandre Abid; Eric Grouzmann; Melpomeni Fani Journal: Molecules Date: 2020-09-11 Impact factor: 4.411
Authors: Sarah M Jacobs; Pieter Wesseling; Bart de Keizer; Nelleke Tolboom; F F Tessa Ververs; Gerard C Krijger; Bart A Westerman; Tom J Snijders; Pierre A Robe; Anja G van der Kolk Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-02-07 Impact factor: 9.236