Beyond VEGF: Targeting Tumor Growth and Angiogenesis via Alternative Mechanisms

  • James Christensen
  • Kenna Anderes
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 610)

Cancer is a multiplicity of diseases characterized by a range of molecular defects leading to unregulated, aberrant cell growth. Recent improvements in understanding the molecular basis of cancer progression, improved diagnostics, and the emergence of new classes of therapeutics have offered promise to better manage the disease. Chemotherapeutic agents that induce cytotoxicity by damaging DNA have been the mainstay of cancer treatment for many decades. Despite their effectiveness, there are a number of limitations, most notably a narrow therapeutic window due to lack of selectivity toward cancer cells. A new generation of chemotherapeutic agents commonly referred to as “targeted therapies” is emerging and aims to impart selectivity to cancer cells by exploiting molecular differences between normal and cancer cells. The best known examples of these new drugs are imatinib and erlotinib, both acting through inhibition of the tyrosine kinases (TKs) BCR-ABL and EGFR, respectively. Lessons learned from imatinib and erlotinib include the necessity for careful patient selection, (i.e., identification of the underlying molecular anomalies) to optimize the potential efficacy of targeted therapies. In this chapter, we describe two novel kinase targeted therapies with distinct mechanisms of action: checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) and c-Met kinase inhibitors. Inhibition of Chk1 represents a molecularly targeted approach to selectively enhance the cytotoxicity of DNA-damaging agents in tumor cells with intrinsic checkpoint defects (mutated p53) while minimizing toxicity in normal cells that have a checkpoint competent molecular phenotype (wild-type p53). In contrast, an extensive body of literature indicates that c-Met is one of the most frequently genetically altered or otherwise dysregulated RTKs in advanced cancers implicating it as a key target for therapeutic intervention.


Hepatocyte Growth Factor Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma Antitumor Efficacy Antiangiogenic Activity Human Umbilical Vascular Endothelial Cell 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Hartwell, L. H. and Weinert, T. A. Checkpoints: controls that ensure the order of cell cycle events. Science 1989; 246:629–634.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hartwell, L H. and Kastan, M. B. Cell cycle control and cancer. Science 1994; 266:1821–1828.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Connor, P. M. Mammalian G1 and G2 phase checkpoints. Cancer Surveys, 1997; 29:151–182.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sanchez, Y.; Wong, C.; Thoma, R. S.; Richman, R.; Wu, Z; Piwnica-Worms, H.; Elledge, S. J. Conservation of the Chk1 checkpoint pathway in mammals: linkage of DNA damage to Cdk regulation through Cdc25. Science 1997; 277:1497–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhou, B. B. and Elledge, S. The DNA damage response: putting checkpoints in perspective. Nature 2000; 408:433–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, Q.; Guntuku, S.; Cui, X. S.; Matsuoka, S.; Cortez, D.; Tamai, K.; Luo, G.; Carattini-Rivera, S.; DeMayo, F.; Bradley, A.; Donehower, L. A.; Elledge, S. J. Chk1 is an essential kinase that is regulated by Atr and required for the G(2)/M DNA damage checkpoint. Genes Dev 2000; 14:1448–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Royds, A. and Iacopetta, B. p53 and disease: when the guardian angel fails. Cell Death and Differentiation 2006; 13:1017–1026.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, Z.; Xiao, Z.; Chen, J.; Ng, S. C.; Sowin, T. J.; Sham, H.; Rosenberg, S.; Fesik, S.; Zhang, H. Human Chk1 expression is dispensable for somatic cell death and critical for sustaining G2 DNA damage checkpoint. Mol Cancer Ther 2003; 2:543–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zachos, G.; Rainey, M. D.; Gillespie, D. A. Chk1-deficient tumor cells are viable but exhibit multiple checkpoint and survival defects. EMBO J 2003; 22:713–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhi-Fu, T. and Nan-Horng, L. Chk1 inhibitors for novel cancer treatment. Anticancer Agents in Medicinal Chemistry, 2006; 6:377–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Braakhuis, B. J.; Ruiz van Harperen, V. W.; Boven, E., et al. Schedule-dependent antitumor effect of gemcitabine in in vivo model systems. Semin Oncol 1995; 22 (Suppl 11):42–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Houghton, P.; Stewart, C.; Zamboni, W., et al. Schedule dependent efficacy of camptothecins in models of human cancer. Ann NY Acad Sci 1996; 803:188–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Birchmeier, C.; Birchmeier, W.; Gherardi, E. and Vande Woude, G. F. Met, metastasis, motility and more. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2003; 4:915–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Comoglio, P. M. and Trusolino, L. Invasive growth: from development to metastasis. J Clin Invest 2002; 109:857–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Di Renzo, M. F.; Olivero, M.; Martone, T., et al. Somatic mutations of the MET oncogene are selected during metastatic spread of human HNSC carcinomas. Oncogene 2000; 19:1547–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ma, P. C.; Jagdeesh, S.; Jagadeeswaran, R., et al. c-MET expression/activation, functions, and mutations in non-small cell lung cancer. Proc Amer Assn Cancer Res 2004; 44:1875.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ma, P. C.; Kijima, T.; Maulik, G., et al. c-MET mutational analysis in small cell lung cancer: novel juxtamembrane domain mutations regulating cytoskeletal functions. Cancer Res 2003; 63:6272–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schmidt, L.; Duh, F. M.; Chen, F., et al. Germline and somatic mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain of the MET proto-oncogene in papillary renal carcinomas. Nature Genet 1997; 16:68–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Di Renzo, M. F.; Olivero, M.; Giacomini, A., et al. Overexpression and amplification of the met/HGF receptor gene during the progression of colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 1995; 1:147–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kuniyasu, H.; Yasui, W.; Kitadai, Y., et al. Frequent amplification of the c-Met gene in scirrhous type stomach cancer. Biochem Biophys Res Comm 1992; 189:227–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bellusci, S.; Moens, G.; Gaudino, G., et al. Creation of an hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor autocrine loop in carcinoma cells induces invasive properties associated with increased tumorigenicity. Oncogene 1994; 9:1091–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jeffers, M.; Rong, S.; Anver, M., and Vande Woude, G. F. Autocrine hepatocyte growth factor/ scatter factor-Met signaling induces transformation and the invasive/metastastic phenotype in C127 cells. Oncogene 1996; 13:853–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jeffers, M.; Schmidt, L.; Nakaigawa, N., et al. Activating mutations for the met tyrosine kinase receptor in human cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1997; 94:11445–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rong, S. Bodescot, M.; Blair, D., et al. Tumorigenicity of the met proto-oncogene and the gene for hepatocyte growth factor. Mol Cell Biol 1992; 12:5152–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rong, S.; Segal, S.; Anver, M.; Resau, J. H., and Vande Woude, G. F. Invasiveness and metastasis of NIH 3T3 cells induced by Met-hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor autocrine stimulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994; 91:4731–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosen, E. M. and Goldberg, I. D. Regulation of angiogenesis by scatter factor. Exs 1997; 79:193–208.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rosen, E. M.; Grant, D. S.; Kleinman, H. K., et al. Scatter factor (hepatocyte growth factor) is a potent angiogenesis factor in vivo. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology 1993; 47:227–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhang, Y. W.; Su, Y.; Volpert, O. V., and Vande Woude, G. F. Hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor mediates angiogenesis through positive VEGF and negative thrombospondin 1 regulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100:12718–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gille, J., Khalik, M., Konig, V., and Kaufmann, R. Hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor (HGF/SF) induces vascular permeability factor (VPF/VEGF) expression by cultured keratinocytes. J Invest Dermatol 1998; 111:1160–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Christensen, J.; Burrows, J., and Salgia, R. c-Met as a target for human cancer and characterization of inhibitors for therapeutic intervention. Cancer Letters 2005; 225:1–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Manning, G.; Whyte, D. B.; Martinez, R.; Hunter, T., and Sudarsanam, S. The protein kinase complement of the human genome. Science 2002; 298:1912–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Drexler, H. G.; Gignac, S. M.; von Wasielewski, R.; Werner, M., and Dirks, W. G. Pathobiology of NPM-ALK and variant fusion genes in anaplastic large cell lymphoma and other lymphomas. Leukemia 2000; 14:1533–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Christensen
    • 1
  • Kenna Anderes
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cancer Biology, Pfizer Global Research and DevelopmentLa Jolla LaboratoriesLa Jolla

Personalised recommendations