32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Molecular and clinical significance of fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2 /bFGF) in malignancies of solid and hematological cancers for personalized therapies

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling is essential for normal and cancer biology. Mammalian FGF family members participate in multiple signaling pathways by binding to heparan sulfate and FGF receptors (FGFR) with varying affinities. FGF2 is the prototype member of the FGF family and interacts with its receptor to mediate receptor dimerization, phosphorylation, and activation of signaling pathways, such as Ras-MAPK and PI3K pathways. Excessive mitogenic signaling through the FGF/FGFR axis may induce carcinogenic effects by promoting cancer progression and increasing the angiogenic potential, which can lead to metastatic tumor phenotypes. Dysregulated FGF/FGFR signaling is associated with aggressive cancer phenotypes, enhanced chemotherapy resistance and poor clinical outcomes. In vitro experimental settings have indicated that extracellular FGF2 affects proliferation, drug sensitivity, and apoptosis of cancer cells. Therapeutically targeting FGF2 and FGFR has been extensively assessed in multiple preclinical studies and numerous drugs and treatment options have been tested in clinical trials. Diagnostic assays are used to quantify FGF2, FGFRs, and downstream signaling molecules to better select a target patient population for higher efficacy of cancer therapies. This review focuses on the prognostic significance of FGF2 in cancer with emphasis on therapeutic intervention strategies for solid and hematological malignancies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references207

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Docetaxel plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 1): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

          The phase 3 LUME-Lung 1 study assessed the efficacy and safety of docetaxel plus nintedanib as second-line therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients from 211 centres in 27 countries with stage IIIB/IV recurrent NSCLC progressing after first-line chemotherapy, stratified by ECOG performance status, previous bevacizumab treatment, histology, and presence of brain metastases, were allocated (by computer-generated sequence through an interactive third-party system, in 1:1 ratio), to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion on day 1 plus either nintedanib 200 mg orally twice daily or matching placebo on days 2-21, every 3 weeks until unacceptable adverse events or disease progression. Investigators and patients were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review, analysed by intention to treat after 714 events in all patients. The key secondary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat after 1121 events had occurred, in a prespecified stepwise order: first in patients with adenocarcinoma who progressed within 9 months after start of first-line therapy, then in all patients with adenocarcinoma, then in all patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00805194. Between Dec 23, 2008, and Feb 9, 2011, 655 patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel plus nintedanib and 659 to receive docetaxel plus placebo. The primary analysis was done after a median follow-up of 7·1 months (IQR 3·8-11·0). PFS was significantly improved in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group compared with the docetaxel plus placebo group (median 3·4 months [95% CI 2·9-3·9] vs 2·7 months [2·6-2·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·79 [95% CI 0·68-0·92], p=0·0019). After a median follow-up of 31·7 months (IQR 27·8-36·1), overall survival was significantly improved for patients with adenocarcinoma histology who progressed within 9 months after start of first-line treatment in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group (206 patients) compared with those in the docetaxel plus placebo group (199 patients; median 10·9 months [95% CI 8·5-12·6] vs 7·9 months [6·7-9·1]; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60-0·92], p=0·0073). Similar results were noted for all patients with adenocarcinoma histology (322 patients in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group and 336 in the docetaxel plus placebo group; median overall survival 12·6 months [95% CI 10·6-15·1] vs 10·3 months [95% CI 8·6-12·2]; HR 0·83 [95% CI 0·70-0·99], p=0·0359), but not in the total study population (median 10·1 months [95% CI 8·8-11·2] vs 9·1 months [8·4-10·4]; HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·83-1·05, p=0·2720). Grade 3 or worse adverse events that were more common in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group than in the docetaxel plus placebo group were diarrhoea (43 [6·6%] of 652 vs 17 [2·6%] of 655), reversible increases in alanine aminotransferase (51 [7·8%] vs six [0·9%]), and reversible increases in aspartate aminotransferase (22 [3·4%] vs three [0·5%]). 35 patients in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group and 25 in the docetaxel plus placebo group died of adverse events possibly unrelated to disease progression; the most common of these events were sepsis (five with docetaxel plus nintedanib vs one with docetaxel plus placebo), pneumonia (two vs seven), respiratory failure (four vs none), and pulmonary embolism (none vs three). Nintedanib in combination with docetaxel is an effective second-line option for patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with one line of platinum-based therapy, especially for patients with adenocarcinoma. Boehringer Ingelheim. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            AP24534, a pan-BCR-ABL inhibitor for chronic myeloid leukemia, potently inhibits the T315I mutant and overcomes mutation-based resistance.

            Inhibition of BCR-ABL by imatinib induces durable responses in many patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), but resistance attributable to kinase domain mutations can lead to relapse and a switch to second-line therapy with nilotinib or dasatinib. Despite three approved therapeutic options, the cross-resistant BCR-ABL(T315I) mutation and compound mutants selected on sequential inhibitor therapy remain major clinical challenges. We report design and preclinical evaluation of AP24534, a potent, orally available multitargeted kinase inhibitor active against T315I and other BCR-ABL mutants. AP24534 inhibited all tested BCR-ABL mutants in cellular and biochemical assays, suppressed BCR-ABL(T315I)-driven tumor growth in mice, and completely abrogated resistance in cell-based mutagenesis screens. Our work supports clinical evaluation of AP24534 as a pan-BCR-ABL inhibitor for treatment of CML.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Receptor specificity of the fibroblast growth factor family. The complete mammalian FGF family.

              In mammals, fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) are encoded by 22 genes. FGFs bind and activate alternatively spliced forms of four tyrosine kinase FGF receptors (FGFRs 1-4). The spatial and temporal expression patterns of FGFs and FGFRs and the ability of specific ligand-receptor pairs to actively signal are important factors regulating FGF activity in a variety of biological processes. FGF signaling activity is regulated by the binding specificity of ligands and receptors and is modulated by extrinsic cofactors such as heparan sulfate proteoglycans. In previous studies, we have engineered BaF3 cell lines to express the seven principal FGFRs and used these cell lines to determine the receptor binding specificity of FGFs 1-9 by using relative mitogenic activity as the readout. Here we have extended these semiquantitative studies to assess the receptor binding specificity of the remaining FGFs 10-23. This study completes the mitogenesis-based comparison of receptor specificity of the entire FGF family under standard conditions and should help in interpreting and predicting in vivo biological activity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Oncotarget
                Oncotarget
                Oncotarget
                ImpactJ
                Oncotarget
                Impact Journals LLC
                1949-2553
                12 July 2016
                19 March 2016
                : 7
                : 28
                : 44735-44762
                Affiliations
                1 Genomics and Biomarkers Program, The John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA
                2 Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
                3 Lymphoma Division, The John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: K. Stephen Suh, ksuh@ 123456HackensackUMC.org
                Article
                8203
                10.18632/oncotarget.8203
                5190132
                27007053
                5f8a3e2c-b079-42b5-814a-fa229e2b52fe
                Copyright: © 2016 Akl et al.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 20 October 2015
                : 10 March 2016
                Categories
                Review

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                bfgf,fgf2,diagnosis,prognosis,malignancy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                bfgf, fgf2, diagnosis, prognosis, malignancy

                Comments

                Comment on this article