2020
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12103050
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cetuximab-Mediated Protection from Hypoxia- Induced Cell Death: Implications for Therapy Sequence in Colorectal Cancer

Abstract: Monoclonal antibodies like cetuximab, targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and bevacizumab, targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), are an integral part of treatment regimens for metastasized colorectal cancer. However, inhibition of the EGFR has been shown to protect human glioma cells from cell death under hypoxic conditions. In colon carcinoma cells, the consequences of EGFR blockade in hypoxia (e.g., induced by bevacizumab) have not been evaluated yet. LIM1215 and SW948 c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 53 publications
(73 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…PFS1 was comparable (10.0 vs 10.4 months; P =0.402), while PFS2 (4.6 vs 7.9 months; P =0.002), OS1 (26.8 vs 40.0 months; P =0.011), and OS2 (15.2 vs 22.3 months; P =0.006) were reduced in Group A compared with Group B. A recent in-vitro study ( 19 ) compared the sequential administration of either cetuximab followed by bevacizumab (CET-BEV) or bevacizumab followed by cetuximab (BEV-CET) in a LIM1215 (KRAS wild type) and SW948 (KRAS mutant) xenograft mouse model. These results suggest that bevacizumab may act through the modulation of the tumor microenvironment by inducing hypoxia and cetuximab administration prior to bevacizumzb could trigger protective effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…PFS1 was comparable (10.0 vs 10.4 months; P =0.402), while PFS2 (4.6 vs 7.9 months; P =0.002), OS1 (26.8 vs 40.0 months; P =0.011), and OS2 (15.2 vs 22.3 months; P =0.006) were reduced in Group A compared with Group B. A recent in-vitro study ( 19 ) compared the sequential administration of either cetuximab followed by bevacizumab (CET-BEV) or bevacizumab followed by cetuximab (BEV-CET) in a LIM1215 (KRAS wild type) and SW948 (KRAS mutant) xenograft mouse model. These results suggest that bevacizumab may act through the modulation of the tumor microenvironment by inducing hypoxia and cetuximab administration prior to bevacizumzb could trigger protective effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%