No abstract

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that simultaneous, equipotent inhibition of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR; erbB1), erbB2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2), and erbB3 receptor signaling, using the novel small-molecule inhibitor AZD8931, will deliver broad antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo.Experimental Design: A range of assays was used to model erbB family receptor signaling in homodimers and heterodimers, including in vitro evaluation of erbB kinase activity, erbB receptor phosphorylation, proliferation in cells, and in vivo testing in a human tumor xenograft panel, with ex vivo evaluation of erbB phosphorylation and downstream biomarkers. Gefitinib and lapatinib were used to compare the pharmacological profile of AZD8931 with other erbB family inhibitors.Results: In vitro, AZD8931 showed equipotent, reversible inhibition of EGFR (IC 50 , 4 nmol/L), erbB2 (IC 50 , 3 nmol/L), and erbB3 (IC 50 , 4 nmol/L) phosphorylation in cells. In proliferation assays, AZD8931 was significantly more potent than gefitinib or lapatinib in specific squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck and non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines. In vivo, AZD8931 inhibited xenograft growth in a range of models while significantly affecting EGFR, erbB2, and erbB3 phosphorylation and downstream signaling pathways, apoptosis, and proliferation.Conclusions: AZD8931 has a unique pharmacologic profile providing equipotent inhibition of EGFR, erbB2, and erbB3 signaling and showing greater antitumor activity than agents with a narrower spectrum of erbB receptor inhibition in specific preclinical models. AZD8931 provides the opportunity to investigate whether simultaneous inhibition of erbB receptor signaling could be of utility in the clinic, particularly in the majority of solid tumors that do not overexpress erbB2. Clin Cancer Res; 16(4); 1159-69. ©2010 AACR.The erbB receptor family is composed of four related receptor tyrosine kinases [epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR, erbB1), erbB2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, HER2), erbB3 (HER3), and erbB4 (HER4)]. ErbB2 lacks ligand-binding capacity and erbB3 is intrinsically inactive as a kinase. There are two main ligand classes: the first bind specifically to EGFR whereas the second includes the neu differentiation factors, or heregulins, which bind erbB3 and erbB4 (1). In cancer, activation of erbB2 may arise by (a) receptor overexpression inducing homodimerization and (b) receptor heterodimerization with another family member, of which erbB3 is considered to be the preferred and most oncogenic partner (2).Homodimerization and/or heterodimerization of erbB receptors results in the phosphorylation of key tyrosine residues in the intracellular domain and leads to the stimulation of numerous intracellular signal transduction pathways involved in cell proliferation and survival (3, 4). The deregulation of erbB family signaling promotes proliferation, invasion, metastasis, angiogenesis, and tumor cell survival and has been described in many human cancers, in...

Two small-molecule epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, gefitinib and erlotinib, have been approved for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Here, we compare the pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of these agents, and reflect on how these properties may affect important clinical questions including the clinical efficacy, optimum dose, and whether there is a relationship between skin rash and clinical outcome for each of these agents. Gefitinib and erlotinib have similar mechanisms of action and pharmacological profiles; however, different molecular structures confer pharmacokinetic differences that may have important clinical implications. Although gefitinib 250 mg/day produces lower mean plasma concentrations and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve compared with erlotinib 150 mg/day, published data suggest that gefitinib significantly accumulates in tumour tissue. This difference may partly explain why it seems possible to achieve maximum clinical efficacy with gefitinib at doses significantly lower than its maximum tolerated dose and, hence, use of an optimal biological dose approach with this agent. We hypothesize that gefitinib is used and is effective at a dose below the maximum tolerated dose as it accumulates in tumour tissue, thus providing the concentration needed at its target to achieve effective epidermal growth factor receptor inhibition in the tumour while causing less skin toxicity than erlotinib; therefore, skin rash is not a useful predictive factor for efficacy with gefitinib.