Predictive factors in patients with advanced and metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A study based on SWOG protocol S0420

Mehta,Smita; Moon,James; Hashmi,Mehmood; Leblanc,Michael; Huang,Chao  Hui; Rinehart,Elizabeth; Wolf,Gregory  T.; Urba,Susan  G.; Banerjee,Sushanta  K.; Williamson,Stephen

doi:10.3892/or.2013.2374

Predictive factors in patients with advanced and metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A study based on SWOG protocol S0420

Authors:
- Smita Mehta
- James Moon
- Mehmood Hashmi
- Michael Leblanc
- Chao Hui Huang
- Elizabeth Rinehart
- Gregory T. Wolf
- Susan G. Urba
- Sushanta K. Banerjee
- Stephen Williamson
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Hematology and Oncology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Westwood, KS 66205, USA, SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA 98109, USA, Medical Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA, Cancer Research Unit, Kansas City VA Medical Center, Kansas City, MO 64128, USA
Published online on: April 2, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2013.2374
Pages: 2095-2100
Copyright: © Mehta et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY_NC 3.0].

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

To evaluate the prognostic values of different protein expression in the progression of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) patients, we conducted immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis in tissue samples of different patients enrolled on SWOG protocol S0420. S0420 was a phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-agent sorafenib in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic or recurrent SCCHN. The primary end point was response probability, i.e., confirmed complete (CR) and partial response (PR). Sorafenib was administered orally at 400 mg twice daily on a continuous basis in 28-day cycles to eligible patients. Responses were evaluated according to RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria. IHC analysis was performed for various markers and data were analyzed statistically. IHC data were obtained from 19 patients enrolled on S0420. There was a high frequency of cases with expression of the angiogenesis markers SMA, HIF-1α, Raf-1, VEGF and VEGF-R. None of the markers were significantly associated with response. Negative HER-2 status was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS), P=0.04. Negative NRP-1 status was associated with longer overall survival (OS), P=0.04. There were no other significant associations. An almost universal overexpression of angiogenesis markers in the samples analyzed supports the evaluation of angiogenesis inhibition as a potential target for therapy. High levels of NRP-1 and HER-2 in SCCHN samples appear to be associated with decreased survival and earlier progression of disease, respectively, in SCCHN patients and may represent targets for therapy.

View Figures

View References

1	Forastiere AA, Leong T, Rowinsky E, et al: Phase III comparison of high-dose paclitaxel + cisplatin + granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus low-dose paclitaxel + cisplatin in advanced head and neck cancer: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E1393. J Clin Oncol. 19:1088–1095. 2001.
2	Samlowski WE, Gundacker H, Kuebler JP, et al: Evaluation of gemcitabine in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a Southwest Oncology Group phase II study. Invest New Drugs. 19:311–315. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar
3	Samlowski WE, Lew D, Kuebler PJ, et al: Evaluation of Tomudex in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a Southwest Oncology Group study. Invest New Drugs. 16:271–274. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar
4	Smith RE, Lew D, Rodriguez GI, Taylor SA, Schuller D and Ensley JF: Evaluation of topotecan in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. A phase II Southwest Oncology Group study. Invest New Drugs. 14:403–407. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Specenier PM and Vermorken JB: Current concepts for the management of head and neck cancer: chemotherapy. Oral Oncol. 45:409–415. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Vermorken JB, Mesia R, Rivera F, et al: Platinum-based chemotherapy plus cetuximab in head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med. 359:1116–1127. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Forastiere AA, Metch B, Schuller DE, et al: Randomized comparison of cisplatin plus fluorouracil and carboplatin plus fluorouracil versus methotrexate in advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 10:1245–1251. 1992.PubMed/NCBI
8	Gibson MK, Li Y, Murphy B, et al: Randomized phase III evaluation of cisplatin plus fluorouracil versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel in advanced head and neck cancer (E1395): an intergroup trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 23:3562–3567. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Kim S, Yazici YD, Calzada G, et al: Sorafenib inhibits the angiogenesis and growth of orthotopic anaplastic thyroid carcinoma xenografts in nude mice. Mol Cancer Ther. 6:1785–1792. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Elser C, Siu LL, Winquist E, et al: Phase II trial of sorafenib in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck or nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 25:3766–3773. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Williamson SK, Moon J, Huang CH, et al: Phase II evaluation of sorafenib in advanced and metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: Southwest Oncology Group Study S0420. J Clin Oncol. 28:3330–3335. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler WM, et al: Sorafenib for treatment of renal cell carcinoma: final efficacy and safety results of the phase III treatment approaches in renal cancer global evaluation trial. J Clin Oncol. 27:3312–3318. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Banerjee SK, Weston AP, Zoubine MN, Campbell DR and Cherian R: Expression of cdc2 and cyclin B1 in Helicobacter pylori-associated gastric MALT and MALT lymphoma: relationship to cell death, proliferation, and transformation. Am J Pathol. 156:217–225. 2000.PubMed/NCBI
14	Stephenson JM, Banerjee S, Saxena NK, Cherian R and Banerjee SK: Neuropilin-1 is differentially expressed in myoepithelial cells and vascular smooth muscle cells in preneoplastic and neoplastic human breast: a possible marker for the progression of breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 101:409–414. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar
15	Olsson AK, Dimberg A, Kreuger J and Claesson-Welsh L: VEGF receptor signalling - in control of vascular function. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 7:359–371. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Shibuya M and Claesson-Welsh L: Signal transduction by VEGF receptors in regulation of angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis. Exp Cell Res. 312:549–560. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Gold KA, Lee HY and Kim ES: Targeted therapies in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Cancer. 115:922–935. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Mac Gabhann F and Popel AS: Differential binding of VEGF isoforms to VEGF receptor 2 in the presence of neuropilin-1: a computational model. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 288:H2851–H2860. 2005.PubMed/NCBI
19	Soker S, Miao HQ, Nomi M, Takashima S and Klagsbrun M: VEGF165 mediates formation of complexes containing VEGFR-2 and neuropilin-1 that enhance VEGF165-receptor binding. J Cell Biochem. 85:357–368. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Folkman J: Antiangiogenesis in cancer therapy - endostatin and its mechanisms of action. Exp Cell Res. 312:594–607. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Rizzolio S and Tamagnone L: Multifaceted role of neuropilins in cancer. Curr Med Chem. 18:3563–3575. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Saharinen P, Eklund L, Pulkki K, Bono P and Alitalo K: VEGF and angiopoietin signaling in tumor angiogenesis and metastasis. Trends Mol Med. 17:347–362. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Ferrara N, Gerber HP and LeCouter J: The biology of VEGF and its receptors. Nat Med. 9:669–676. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Neuchrist C, Erovic BM, Handisurya A, et al: Vascular endothelial growth factor C and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 3 expression in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Head Neck. 25:464–474. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Scott PA, Smith K, Poulsom R, De Benedetti A, Bicknell R and Harris AL: Differential expression of vascular endothelial growth factor mRNA vs protein isoform expression in human breast cancer and relationship to eIF-4E. Br J Cancer. 77:2120–2128. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Usui T, Ishida S, Yamashiro K, et al: VEGF164(165) as the pathological isoform: differential leukocyte and endothelial responses through VEGFR1 and VEGFR2. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 45:368–374. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Karjalainen K, Jaalouk DE, Bueso-Ramos CE, et al: Targeting neuropilin-1 in human leukemia and lymphoma. Blood. 117:920–927. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Kreuter M, Woelke K, Bieker R, et al: Correlation of neuropilin-1 overexpression to survival in acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 20:1950–1954. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Lu L, Zhang L, Xiao ZJ, et al: Expression and effect of neuropilin-1 in acute myeloid leukemic cells. Zhongguo Shi Yan Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi. 15:1150–1155. 2007.(In Chinese).
30	Vanveldhuizen PJ, Zulfiqar M, Banerjee S, et al: Differential expression of neuropilin-1 in malignant and benign prostatic stromal tissue. Oncol Rep. 10:1067–1071. 2003.PubMed/NCBI
31	Hong TM, Chen YL, Wu YY, et al: Targeting neuropilin 1 as an antitumor strategy in lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 13:4759–4768. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32	Mac Gabhann F and Popel AS: Targeting neuropilin-1 to inhibit VEGF signaling in cancer: comparison of therapeutic approaches. PLoS Comput Biol. 2:e1802006.PubMed/NCBI
33	Mac Gabhann F and Popel AS: Interactions of VEGF isoforms with VEGFR-1, VEGFR-2, and neuropilin in vivo: a computational model of human skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 292:H459–H474. 2007.PubMed/NCBI
34	Zhang S and Kong W: Expression of neuropilin-1 in human laryngeal carcinoma and cell lines. Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi. 20:634–635. 2006.(In Chinese).
35	Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J, et al: Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med. 354:567–578. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J, et al: Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer: 5-year survival data from a phase 3 randomised trial, and relation between cetuximab-induced rash and survival. Lancet Oncol. 11:21–28. 2010.PubMed/NCBI
37	Frampton JE: Cetuximab: a review of its use in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Drugs. 70:1987–2010. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
38	Cavalot A, Martone T, Roggero N, Brondino G, Pagano M and Cortesina G: Prognostic impact of HER-2/neu expression on squamous head and neck carcinomas. Head Neck. 29:655–664. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
39	Shiga H, Rasmussen AA, Johnston PG, et al: Prognostic value of c-erbB2 and other markers in patients treated with chemotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer. Head Neck. 22:599–608. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	Xia W, Lau YK, Zhang HZ, et al: Combination of EGFR, HER-2/neu, and HER-3 is a stronger predictor for the outcome of oral squamous cell carcinoma than any individual family members. Clin Cancer Res. 5:4164–4174. 1999.PubMed/NCBI