Targeted therapy in head and neck cancer

ENT Department, University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Tumori (Impact Factor: 1.27). 03/2011; 97(2):137-41. DOI: 10.1700/667.7773
Source: PubMed
This review focuses on recent advances in understanding the molecular mechanisms at the basis of cancer initiation and progression in the head and neck and also discusses the possible development of targeted cellular strategies. Intrinsic and acquired resistance of cancer cells to current conventional treatments, as well as recurrence, represent a major challenge in treating and curing the most aggressive and metastatic tumors also in the head and neck. Even though in some hematologic malignancies (i.e., non-Hodgkin's lymphomas) antibodies specifically designed to target tumor-specific cells have already been introduced, in solid tumors molecular targeted therapy is now entering clinical practice.
A PubMed database systematic review.
Molecular targeting could achieve specific damage to cancer cells, at the same time preserving functionally important tissues. This could offer new prospectives in primary and adjuvant treatment also of head and neck tumors.


Available from: Stefano Pelucchi
Key words: cancer stem cells, cancer
treatment, head and neck cancer, tar-
geting therapy.
Acknowledgments: The oncologic
project of the ENT Clinic and of the
Molecular Biology Section at the Uni-
versity of Ferrara is supported by a
grant for scientific research from the
University of Ferrara.
Correspondence to: Chiara Bianchini,
MD, ENT Department, University Hos-
pital of Ferrara, Giovecca 203,
44100 Ferrara, Italy.
Tel +39-0532-236383;
fax +39-0532-237615;
Received May 3, 2010;
accepted December 6, 2010.
Targeted therapy in head and neck cancer
Chiara Bianchini
, Andrea Ciorba
, Stefano Pelucchi
, Roberta Piva
and Antonio Pastore
ENT Department, University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara;
Molecular Biology Section, Department
of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
Aims and background. This review focuses on recent advances in understanding the
molecular mechanisms at the basis of cancer initiation and progression in the head
and neck and also discusses the possible development of targeted cellular strategies.
Intrinsic and acquired resistance of cancer cells to current conventional treatments,
as well as recurrence, represent a major challenge in treating and curing the most ag-
gressive and metastatic tumors also in the head and neck. Even though in some
hematologic malignancies (i.e., non-Hodgkins lymphomas) antibodies specifically
designed to target tumor-specific cells have already been introduced, in solid tumors
molecular targeted therapy is now entering clinical practice.
Methods. A PubMed database systematic review.
Results and conclusions. Molecular targeting could achieve specific damage to can-
cer cells, at the same time preserving functionally important tissues. This could offer
new prospectives in primary and adjuvant treatment also of head and neck tumors.
Head and neck cancer is still the sixth most common cancer type worldwide. Sur-
gery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, alone or in combination, are considered the
main therapeutic approaches. Disappointingly, despite significant advances in head
and neck treatments, survival rates and prognosis have only improved moderately
through the years
. Recently, studies have suggested that several factors may be in-
volved in the head and neck carcinogenetic process. The highly tumorigenic expres-
sion of some cancer types, cancer progression to locally invasive and metastatic
states, and recurrences are often associated with resistance to treatments. This could
be explained by accumulating genetic and/or epigenic alterations in cancer cells that
may contribute to their uncontrolled growth, survival and invasion, as well as to their
intrinsic or acquired resistance to clinical treatments
In particular, the concept of cancer stem cells or cancer-initiating cells has been
proposed to explain cancer initiation and progression to metastatic disease states
and resistance to conventional therapies
A major problem in the treatment of cancer is still the specific molecular targeting of
neoplastic cells. Ideally, future therapies should act over short distances to minimize dam-
age to healthy cells and target tumor compartments that have the highest sensitivity.
In the present review, the importance of considering these new concepts in the role
of cancer progenitor cells and cancer development in order to overcome resistance to
conventional cancer therapies is discussed.
Cancer stem cells in head and neck tumors
There already are several reports that focus on the possible role of stem cells in can-
cer occurrence and progression in head and neck tumors
. It is likely that carcino-
Tumori, 97: 137-141, 2011
Page 1
genesis should be considered as a multistep process, in
which an accumulation of genetic and epigenetic alter-
ations forms the basis for development from a normal
cell to a cancer cell
. Particularly, the alteration of two
key genes, p53 and p16, seems to be involved in this
Cancer stem cells could represent a minor population
of tumor cells that possess the stem cell property of self
renewal. De-regulation of stem cell self renewal is a like-
ly requirement for the development of cancer
. The
presence of these cancer progenitors may partially ex-
plain the rapid recurrence as well as the high metastat-
ic rate of the most aggressive tumors after current clini-
cal treatments.
Moreover, the reactivation of several developmental
signaling cascades [epidermal growth factor (EGF)/EGFR,
stem cell factor/KIT, platelet-derived growth factor
(PDGF)/PDGFR, sonic hedgehog (SHH/PTCH/GLI tran-
scription factor, and/or Wnt/catenin)] combined with al-
tered DNA repair and mechanisms of multi-drug resist-
ance in cancer progenitor cells may take part and may be
considered responsible, at least in part, for their resist-
ance to current clinical therapies
Possible specific targets in head and neck
Recent advances in basic research, particularly ge-
nomics and proteomics, have already improved but will
probably develop more in the near future our under-
standing of the molecular processes governing head
and neck cancer origin and progression.
It has been reported that the simultaneous blockade
of several oncogenic cascades activated in cancer pro-
genitor cells during cancer development has been
judged essential for improving the current clinical treat-
ments against high-risk metastatic solid tumors, includ-
ing head and neck cancers
. Particularly, the molec-
ular targeting of developmental cascades including
hedgehog, Wnt/catenin, Notch, EGFR, PDGFR and KIT
pathways and/or oncogenic signaling elements (telom-
erase, Src, ABL, PI3K/Akt, MYC, NF-KB and survivin),
which assume a critical function in regulating the self-
renewal, survival and invasion of cancer progenitor
cells as well as in drug resistance and disease relapse,
has been defined of therapeutic interest
(see also
Table 1).
So far, the two most promising and advanced strate-
gies are the blockage of growth factor-based cellular sig-
naling and interference with angiogenesis-related path-
ways. One of the most comprehensive investigated can-
didate is the EGFR family. EGFR is the most prominent
candidate for therapeutic targeting due to its more than
90% expression rate in head & neck squamous cell car-
cinoma and its influence on regulation of proliferation,
apoptosis, metastasis, angiogenesis and cell differentia-
. It has been reported that down-stream signaling
or inhibition of EGFR may result in arrest of the G1
phase of the cell cycle, due to induced upregulation/ac-
cumulation of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors
p27kip1 and/or p21cip1/waf1, and this may stop cancer
cell proliferation
. The extracellular part of the EGFR
can be inhibited by monoclonal antibodies and the in-
tracellular part by more or less specific tyrosine kinase
A clinically tested EGFR inhibitor is cetuximab, a
monoclonal antibody with a high affinity to EGFR, and
there are already several encouraging reports about the
use of the drug in treating head & neck squamous cell
Instead, there only are very few data available about
the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in head and neck
cancer treatment. In particular, it has been shown that
tyrosine kinase inhibitors block EGFR downstream sig-
nal transduction pathways, inducing an immediate cell
cycle arrest, and significantly inhibit angiogenesis by in-
ducing a decrease in angiogenic growth factors
Gefinitib and erlotinib are the two most advanced drugs
available, but their use is still experimental
Currently, EGFR inhibitors have been tested as a sin-
gle agent or in combination with other therapies. As a
single agent, there are several reports showing that
these molecules are moderately active in patients af-
fected by head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. In
some cases, they have provided disease control with a
reasonable therapeutic index in patients who are
chemotherapy refractory or are deemed unfit for cyto-
toxic therapy. However, the activity of single-agent anti-
EGFR therapy in the head and neck squamous cell car-
cinoma setting is largely based on uncontrolled, single-
arm, phase II trials (see also Table 2).
Few phase II and III trials have tested the addition of
cetumibax to cisplatin in patients who resulted refracto-
ry to platinum-based therapy. Nonetheless, so far the
combination appears to confer no further benefit over
anti-EGFR agents alone (see also Table 2)
able 1 - Possible sites of intervention for arresting head and
eck cancer cells progression
olecular targets/ Biological References
possible sites mechanism
f intervention
EGFR in head & neck Arrest G1 phase cell cycle, 3,11,38,39,40
quamous cell carcinoma stopping cellular
nsulin-like growth factor Inhibition of intracellular 41-44
1 receptor, telomerase, signaling
YC, Bcl-2
53 Inducing apoptosis in specific 45,46
eoplastic cells
ox2 Reduction of cellular 47
growth & angiogenesis
Page 2
It is known that angiogenesis plays a key role in the
pathogenesis of solid tumors, including those of the
head and neck. Experimentally, it has already been
shown in mice that inhibition of vascular endothelial
growth factors and their receptors decreases angiogen-
esis and tumor growth. Therefore, several strategies to
target vascular endothelial growth factors have been de-
veloped and are currently being explored. Clinical trials
on the use of these types of molecules alone or in com-
bination with conventional chemotherapies are already
The development of new biological agents should fo-
cus on inhibitors that are likely to hit multiple targets.
The complexity of aberrant signaling in head and neck
tumors explains why interfering with only single steps
in this pathway have not yet shown marked clinical re-
Probably, a combination of different agents that target
distinct specific pathways is likely to inhibit the escape
of tumor cells by alternate mechanisms leading to more
effective disease control. Furthermore, different etiolog-
ical factors and risk habits can result in distinct genetic
and epigenetic alterations, which may trigger different
signaling pathways, thus impacting differently the de-
velopment and progression of head and neck tumors.
To evaluate the efficacy of these biological agents, there
is urgent need to identify novel biomarkers that can be
used to accurately assess and individualize therapy
The concept of “field cancerization”
A genetic progression model of head and neck tumors
has to be associated also to the concept of field cancer-
ization of the aerodigestive tract. Slaughter et al.
the term field cancerization, firstly studying 783 pa-
tients with oral cancer
. After performing histological
examinations, they proposed the concept of field can-
cerization to describe a situation in which: 1) oral can-
cer develops in multifocal areas of precancerous
change; 2) histologically abnormal tissue surrounds the
tumor; 3) oral cancer often consists of multiple inde-
pendent lesions that sometimes coalesce; and 4) the
persistence of abnormal tissue after surgery may ex-
plain second primary tumors and local recurrences
At the time of the study
, there was no molecular basis
for these observations, and the term field canceriza-
tion has subsequently taken on a slightly different
meaning in the literature.
In fact, the concept has been re-proposed to explain
the development of locally recurrent cancer and/or sec-
ond primary tumors in head and neck cancer patients
by Leemans et al.
, who suggested that head and neck
carcinomas recur at the primary site in about 10-30% of
the cases with advanced tumors, even when a complete
resection of the primary carcinoma has been per-
Ha and Califano
considered the term of field cancer-
ization from a molecular” point of view. It could be
considered the result of either independent molecular
events affecting multiple cells separately, or as a molec-
ular event in a single clonal progenitor that gives rise to
the phenomenon. These two mechanisms may not be
mutually exclusive and may be simultaneous and/or
complementary events
Future perspectives
Further knowledge, and thus possibly further new
therapeutic targets, could arise from the comprehen-
sion of head and neck cancer stem cell biology, since
methods to isolate and characterize the ex vitro and in
vivo properties of cancer stem/progenitor cells have
been recently provided and improved. Therefore, a re-
analysis of the oncogenic gene products specifically ac-
tivated in cancer progenitor cells will be necessary. Par-
ticularly, further investigations by using cancer stem
cells isolated from primary cancer patients’ malignant
tissues at different stages during cancer progression and
metastatic disease should help to identify new biomark-
ers for the development of more effective diagnostic
and prognostic methods and targeted therapies against
aggressive and metastatic cancers.
able 2 - Clinical trials of molecular targeted therapies in recurrent and/or metastatic head & neck squamous cell carcinoma: an-
i-EGFR molecular-targeted therapies as single agent and in combination (modified from Le Tourneau and Siu
gent Phase Reference Treatment Overall survival (mo)
ingle agent
etuximab II 23 Cetuximab 400 mg/day 6
Gefitinib II 24 Gefitinib 500 mg/day 5
efinitib III 25 Gefitinib 250 mg/day 6
latinum + cetuximab II 26 Platinum + cetuximab 5
Platinum + cetuximab II 27 Platinum + cetuximab 6
latinum + cetuximab II 28 Platinum + cetuximab 4
Cisplatin + erlotinib II 29 Cisplatin + erlotinib 7
rlotinib & bevacizumab I, II 30 Erlotinib & bevacizumab 7
Page 3
However, evaluation of the functional and molecular
properties of these cells ex vivo must be considered with
caution, since multiple extrinsic factors may influence
the in vitro behavior of this subset of cells. More specif-
ically, experimental culture conditions do not necessar-
ily reflect the local tumor microenvironment and the in-
tercellular signaling environment. Further investiga-
tions of cancer progenitor cells in more vigorous exper-
imental conditions are required to help to elucidate the
molecular mechanisms that provide a critical role for
their uncontrolled self-renewal and/or aberrant differ-
entiation capacity. The specific biomarkers and func-
tional properties of cancer progenitor or stem cells
clearly should be explored in order to assess selected
possible targets. This particularly considering that can-
cer progenitor/stem cells may also exhibit a differential
genomic and proteomic pattern, compared to the bulk
mass of further cancer cells
. It is also necessary to
consider that these molecular markers might allow a
very sensitive detection of minimal residual cancer cells
or micrometastasis in the various body compartments
and/or in lymph nodes, thus facilitating the prognosis
The development of new effective and safe targeted
therapies by eradicating the total population of cancer
progenitor cells and their further differentiated proge-
nies at the primary and secondary neoplasms should al-
low us to improve current cancer treatments, prevent the
disease relapse, and thereby induce a complete cytoge-
netic remission and cure of cancer patients in the clinic.
The next few years will be exciting also in terms of sur-
gical technique progresses. A newer pathway of nan-
otechnology and molecular medicine will also lead to
technical advancements in areas such as free tissue
transfer, robotics, minimal-access surgery, as well as ap-
plication of new lasers and optical technologies. Ad-
vances in these fields could expand our capabilities to
repair, restore and preserve organ/tissue function, thus
personalizing and tailoring the treatment to the “indi-
vidual” patient.
A cancer targeted therapy” actually represents one of
the most promising resources in the development of
new strategies including in head and neck oncology. A
targeted therapy with biological markers in head and
neck cancer is a new and fast-growing field with inter-
esting aspects concerning decreasing early and late tox-
icity with better functional outcome and survival. Since
it is likely that carcinogenesis may be considered as a
process that arises from the malignant transformation
of embryonic or adult stem/progenitor cells into cancer
progenitor cells
, cancer progenitor cells can provide
critical functions in cancer initiation and progression
into metastatic and recurrent disease states. Based on
these observations, the molecular targeting of cancer
progenitor cells must be considered for improving the
efficacy of current cancer therapies.
Traditional diagnostic methods such as clinical as-
sessment, histopathological examination and imaging
techniques are not considered sufficient to provide all
the information related to prognosis and treatment of
choice in head and neck cancer
. Additional investi-
gations to identify the specific molecular biological
characteristics of head and neck tumors should be per-
formed. Only comprehension of the origin and molecu-
lar behavior of head and neck cancer will lead us to pro-
gram and perform a more specific, safe, effective, per-
sonalized and targeted therapeutic plan.
1. Forastiere A, Koch W, Trotti A, Sidransky D: Medical
progress-head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med, 345: 1890-
1900, 2001.
2. Mimeault M, Hauke R, Mehta PP, Batra SK: Recent ad-
vances in cancer stem/progenitor cell research: therapeu-
tic implications for overcoming resistance to the most ag-
gressive cancers. J Cell Mol Med, 11: 981-1011, 2007.
3. Bianchini C, Ciorba A, Pelucchi S, Piva R, Pastore A: Head
and neck cancer: the possible role of stem cells. Eur Arch
Otorhinolaryngol, 265: 17-20, 2008.
4. Graziano A, d’Aquino R, Tirino V, Desiderio V, Rossi A,
Pirozzi G: The stem cell hypothesis in head and neck can-
cer. J Cell Biochem, 103: 408-412, 2008.
5. Prince ME, Ailles LE: Cancer stem cells in head and neck
squamous cell cancer. J Clin Oncol, 26: 2871-2875, 2008.
6. Braakhuis BJ, Leemans CR, BrakenhoV RH: Expanding
fields of genetically altered cells in head and neck squa-
mous carcinogenesis. Semin Cancer Biol, 15: 113-120, 2005.
7. Hirata Y: Progression of cancer. Med Hypotheses, 52: 51-
113, 1999.
8. Gollin SM: Chromosomal alterations in squamous cell car-
cinomas of the head and neck: window to the biology of
disease. Head Neck, 23: 238-253, 2001.
9. Dietz A, Boehm A, Mozet C, Wichmann G, Giannis A: Cur-
rent aspects of targeted therapy in head and neck tumors.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 265 Suppl: S3-12, 2008.
10. Mimeault M, Batra SK: Recent advances on the signifi-
cance of stem cells in tissue regeneration and cancer ther-
apies. Stem Cells, 24: 2319-2345, 2006.
11. Mimeault M, Hauke R, Batra SK: Recent advances on the
molecular mechanisms involved in drug resistance of can-
cer cells and novel targeting therapies. Clin Pharmacol
Ther, 82: 252-264, 2007.
12. Dean M, Fojo T, Bates S: Tumour stem cells and drug re-
sistance. Nat Rev Cancer, 5: 275-284, 2005.
13. Barker N, Clevers H: Mining the Wnt pathway for cancer
therapeutics. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 5: 997-1014, 2006.
14. Rubin LL, de Sauvage FJ: Targeting the hedgehog pathway
in cancer. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 5: 1026-1033, 2006.
15. Roberg K, Jonsson AC, Grenman R, Norberg-Spaak L: Ra-
diotherapy response in oral squamous carcinoma cell
lines: evaluation of apoptotic proteins as prognostic fac-
tors. Head Neck, 29: 325-334, 2007.
16. Mimeault M, Batra S: Interplay of distinct growth factors
during epithelial-mesenchymal transition of cancer pro-
genitor cells and molecular targeting as novel cancer ther-
apies. Ann Oncol, 18: 1605-1619, 2007.
Page 4
17. Mimeault M, Batra SK: Functions of tumorigenic and mi-
grating cancer progenitor cells in cancer progression and
metastasis and their therapeutic implications. Cancer
Metastasis Rev, 26: 203-214, 2007.
18. Fodde R, Brabletz T: Wnt/beta-catenin signaling in cancer
temness and malignant behavior. Curr Opin Cell Biol, 19:
150-158, 2007.
19. Zhang Q, Chen G, Liu X, Qian Q: Monoclonal antibodies as
therapeutic agents in oncology and antibody gene therapy.
Cell Res, 17: 89-99, 2007.
20. Goerner M, Seiwert TY, Sudhoff H: Molecular targeted ther-
apies in head and neck cancer - An update of recent devel-
opements. Head Neck Oncol, 2: 8-10, 2010.
21. Razak AR, Siu LL, Le Tourneau C: Molecular targeted ther-
apies in all histologies of head and neck cancers: an up-
date. Curr Opin Oncol, 22: 212-220, 2010.
22. Le Tourneau C, Siu LL: Molecular-targeted therapies in the
treatment of squamous cell carcinomas of the head and
neck. Current Opinion in Oncology, 20: 256-263, 2008.
23. Vermorken JB, Trigo J, Hitt R, Koralewski P, Diaz-Rubio E,
Rolland F, Knecht R, Amellal N, Schueler A, Baselga J:
Open-label, uncontrolled, multicenter phase II study to
evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of cetuximab as a single
agent in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squa-
mous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who failed to re-
spond to platinum-based therapy. J Clin Oncol, 25: 2171-
2177, 2007.
24. Kirby AM, A’Hern RP, D’Ambrosio C, Tanay M, Syrigos KN,
Rogers SJ, Box C, Eccles SA, Nutting CM, Harrington KJ:
Gefitinib (ZD1839, Iressa) as palliative treatment in recur-
rent or metastatic head and neck cancer. Br J Cancer, 94:
631-636, 2006.
25. Stewart JSW, Cohen EEW, Licitra L: A phase III randomized
parallel group study of gefitinib (RESSA) versus methotrex-
ate (IMEX) in patients with recurrent squamous cell carci-
noma of the head and neck [abstract]. In: American Asso-
ciation for Cancer Research Annual Meeting: Proceedings;
14-18 Apr 2007; Los Angeles, Philadelphia: AACR; 2007, Ab-
stract 3522.
26. Baselga J, Trigo JM, Bourhis J, Tortochaux J, Cortés-Funes
H, Hitt R, Gascón P, Amellal N, Harstrick A, Eckardt A:
Phase II multicenter study of the antiepidermal growth
factor receptor monoclonal antibody cetuximab in combi-
nation with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients
with platinum-refractory metastatic and/or recurrent
squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. J Clin On-
col, 23: 5568-5577, 2005.
27. Herbst RS, Arquette M, Shin DM, Dicke K, Vokes EE, Azar-
nia N, Hong WK, Kies MS: Phase II multicenter study of the
epidermal growth factor receptor antibody cetuximab and
cisplatin for recurrent and refractory squamous cell carci-
noma of the head and neck. J Clin Oncol, 23: 5578-5587,
28. Burtness B, Goldwasser MA, Flood W, Mattar B, Forastiere
AA: Phase III randomized trial of cisplatin plus placebo
compared with cisplatin plus cetuximab in metastatic / re-
current head and neck cancer: an Eastern Cooperative On-
cology Group study. J Clin Oncol, 23: 8646-8654, 2005.
29. Siu LL, Soulieres D, Chen EX, Pond GR, Chin SF, Francis P,
Harvey L, Klein M, Zhang W, Dancey J, Eisenhauer EA, Win-
quist E: Phase I/II trial of erlotinib and cisplatin in patients
with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of
the head and neck: a Princess Margaret Hospital phase II
consortium and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clin-
ical Trials Group Study. J Clin Oncol, 25: 2178-2183, 2007.
30. Cohen EE, Davis DW, Karrison TG, Seiwert TY, Wong SJ,
Nattam S, Kozloff MF, Clark JI, Yan DH, Liu W, Pierce C,
Dancey JE, Stenson K, Blair E, Dekker A, Vokes EE: Erlotinib
and bevacizumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic
squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a phase
I/II study. Lancet Oncol, 10: 247-257, 2009.
31. Matta A, Ralhan R: Overview of current and future biologi-
cally based targeted therapies in head and neck squamous
ell carcinoma. Head Neck Oncol, 1: 6-10, 2009.
32. Slaughter DP, Southwick HW, Smejkal W: Field canceriza-
tion in oral stratified squamous epithelium. Cancer, 6:
963-968, 1953.
33. Leemans CR, Tiwari R, Nauta JJ, van der Waal I, Snow GB:
Recurrence at the primary site in head and neck cancer
and the significance of neck lymph node metastases as a
prognostic factor. Cancer, 73: 187-190, 1994.
34. Braakhuis BJ, Brakenhoff RH, Leemans CR: Gene expres-
sion profiling in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 18: 67-71, 2010.
35. Ha PK, Califano JA: The Molecular Biology of Mucosal Field
Cancerization of the Head and Neck. Critical Reviews in
Oral Biology & Medicine, 14: 363-369, 2003.
36. Mahfouz ME, Rodrigo JP, Takes RP, Elsheikh MN, Rinaldo A,
Brakenhoff RH, Ferlito A: Current potential and limitations
of molecular diagnostic methods in head and neck cancer.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 267: 851-860, 2010.
37. Langer CJ: Targeted therapy in head and neck cancer: state
of the art 2007 and review of clinical applications. Cancer,
112: 2635-2645, 2008.
38. Mimeault M, Batra SK: Recent insights into the molecular
mechanisms involved in aging and the malignant transfor-
mation of adult stem/progenitor cells and their therapeu-
tic implications. Ageing Res Rev, 8: 94-112, 2009.
39. Szakács G, Paterson JK, Ludwig JA, Booth-Genthe C,
Gottesman MM: Targeting multidrug resistance in cancer.
Nat Rev Drug Discov, 5: 219-234, 2006.
40. Kim S, Grandis JR, Rinaldo A, Takes RP, Ferlito A: Emerging
perspectives in epidermal growth factor receptor targeting
in head and neck cancer. Head Neck, 30: 667-674, 2008.
41. Barnes CJ, Ohshiro K, Rayala SK, El-Naggar AK, Kumar R:
Insulin-like growth factor receptor as a therapeutic target
in head and neck cancer. Clin Cancer Res, 13: 4291-4299,
42. Hong DY, Lee BJ, Lee JC, Choi JS, Wang SG, Ro JH: Expres-
sion of VEGF, HGF, IL-6, IL-8, MMP-9, telomerase in pe-
ripheral blood of patients with head and neck squamous
cell carcinoma. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol, 2: 186-192,
43. Wang X, Hao MW, Dong K, Lin F, Ren JH, Zhang HZ: Apop-
tosis induction effects of EGCG in laryngeal squamous cell
carcinoma cells through telomerase repression. Arch
Pharm Res, 32: 1263-1269, 2009.
44. Kurihara Y, Watanabe Y, Onimatsu H, Kojima T, Shirota T,
Hatori M, Liu D, Kyo S, Mizuguchi H, Urata Y, Shintani S,
Fujiwara T: Telomerase-specific virotheranostics for hu-
man head and neck cancer. Clin Cancer Res, 15: 2335-2343,
45. Rubin Grandis J, Melhem MF, Gooding WE, Day R, Holst
VA, Wagener MM, Drenning SD, Tweardy DJ: Levels of TGF
alpha and EGFR protein in head and neck squamous cell
carcinoma and patient survival. J Natl Cancer Inst, 90: 824-
832, 1998.
46. Grandis JR, Chakraborty A, Zeng Q, Melhem MF, Tweardy
DJ: Down modulation of TGF-alpha protein expression
with antisense oligonucleotides inhibits proliferation of
head and neck squamous carcinoma but not normal mu-
cosal epithelial cells. J Cell Biochem, 69: 55-62, 1998.
47. Lin DT, Subbaramaiah K, Shah JP, Dannenberg AJ, Boyle JO:
Cyclooxygenase-2: a novel molecular target for the preven-
tion, treatment of head, neck cancer. Head Neck, 24: 792-
799, 2002.
Page 5
  • Source
    • "Principle The concept of 'Field cancerization', coined by Slaughter in 1953, proposes that the normal tissue adjacent to the tumor harbor certain pre-neoplastic genetic finger prints which can eventually lead to development of local recurrence or second primary tumors. Slaughter and his group based this concept on the following observations: (i) tumor adjacent mucosa being molecularly 'abnormal' (ii) multifocal areas of precancerous changes develop due to a prolonged and widespread exposure to carcinogens (iii) oral cancer often consists of multiple independent lesions that sometimes coalesce and (iv) formation of second primary tumors and recurrences can be explained by the presence of residual abnormal tissue after surgery [15,16]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) has a high propensity for local failure, which is attributed to recurrence at the primary site or the development of second primary tumors (SPT). Field cancerization that refers to the existence of transformed cells in areas adjacent to the primary tumor, has been attributed to be one of the probable reasons underlying disease relapse. The carcinogenic process necessitates multiple molecular events for the transformation of a normal cell into a cancer cell. This implies that only the long-time residents of the epithelium, such as the stem cells, might be the candidates capable of accumulating these genetic hits. These transformed stem cells- the 'Cancer stem cells' (CSCs), are further known to be equipped with the properties of tumor initiation and migration, both of which are essential for orchestrating field cancerization. The concept that the CSCs might be responsible for field cancerization in OSCC has not been explored extensively. If the role of CSCs as the primary units of field cancerization process is established, their presence in the mucosa adjacent to the tumor may be an indicator for local recurrence and/or development of second primary tumors. In this review, we examine the available evidence in literature exploring the possibilities of CSCs driving the process of field cancerization and thereby being the underlying mechanism for disease recurrence and development of SPT. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2015
  • Source
    • "However, an important shortcoming of both radioo and chemotherapy is their relatively low specificity. In recent years, the development of chemotherapeutic drugs and antibodies more specific to certain types of cancer cells has become a topical issue456. An alternative research approach is focused on potential applications of oncolytic viruses. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Increasing information concerning molecular biology of viruses and virus-cell interactions makes possible to use viruses as a tool in effort to treat cancer diseases. As a rule, tumor cells are highly sensitive to viruses that may be used in cancer therapy. Therewith, applications of viral oncolysis in treatment of cancer diseases assume maximum possible safety of used viruses for patient and environment. Human enteroviruses are one of the convenient sources to generate oncolytic viruses. Many of enteroviruses are non-pathogenic for humans or cause mild disease. Progress in genetic engineering permits to develop attenuated enterovirus variants with high safety and selectivity. This review focuses on the main members of Enterovirus genus, such as Coxsackieviruses, and vaccine strains as promising source for development of oncolytic agents, applicable for cancer therapy. It reviews data concerning recently developed and tested oncolytic variants of enteroviruses and discusses perspectives of their application in cancer therapy and problems, concerning their improvement and practical use.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2012 · Molecular Biology
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Расширение знаний в области молекулярной биологии вирусов и их взаимодействия с клеткой позволяет использовать вирусы в качестве инструмента для борьбы с онкологическими заболеваниями, поскольку клетки злокачественных опухолей, как правило, приобретают повышенную чувствительность к вирусам. Вместе с тем, для применения вирусного онколиза в терапии злокачественных заболеваний необходимо обеспечить максимально возможную безопасность онколитических вирусов для больного и его окружения. Энтеровирусы человека рассматриваются в качестве одного из наиболее удобных исходных объектов для создания онколитических вирусов, так как многие представители энтеровирусов либо полностью непатогенны для человека, либо вызывают малоопасные заболевания. Развитие методов генетической инженерии позволяет создавать высокоаттенуированные энтеровирусы, обладающие повышенной безопасностью и селективностью. В данном обзоре основные представители рода энтеровирусов – вирусы ECHO, Коксаки и вакцинные штаммы полиовирусов – рассмотрены в качестве перспективных исходных объектов для создания эффективных онколитических вариантов. Описаны уже созданные и апробированные онколитические варианты энтеровирусов, рассмотрены перспективы их применения в онкотерапии и проблемы, связанные с совершенствованием и практическим использованием.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2012
Show more

Similar Publications