“…Exceptions are chemotherapeutic-resistant metastatic melanoma M21 (covalent daunorubicin immunochemotherapeutics synthesized using antichondroitin sulfate proteoglycan 9.2.27 surface marker) [68,71,156] ; chemotherapeutic-resistant mammary carcinoma MCF-7AdrR (covalent anthracycline-ligand chemotherapeutics utilizing epidermal growth factor (EGF) or an EDF fragment) [157] ; and chemotherapeutic-resistant mammary adenocarcinoma (SKBr-3) populations (epirubicin-anti-HER2/neu and epirubicin-anti-EGFR, gemcitabine-anti-HER 2/neu), [38,64,75,76,92] and chemotherapeutic-resistant pulmonary adenocarcinoma A549 (fludarabine-(C 2 -methylhydroxyphosphoramide)-[anti-IGF-1R]). [79] A high degree of probability exists that in vivo, gemcit abine-(5 ′ -phosphoramidate)-[anti-IGF1R], gemcitabine-(C 2methylcarbamate)-[anti-HER2/neu], [155] and gemcitabine-(C 2 -methylhydroxylamide)-[anti-EGFR] [76] would provide planes of antineoplastic cytotoxic potency that would be at least equivalent to, if not surpass that of gemcitabine chemotherapeutic due to several contributing parameters. More specifically, under in vivo conditions, it is anticipated that the antineoplastic cytotoxicity of gemcitabine-(5′-phosphoramidate)-[anti-IGF-1R] would be further complemented by the attributes and advantages of (i) enhanced pharmacokinetic profiles; (ii) greater cytosol concentrations within 'targeted' cancer cell populations over time, all in collective concert with; and (iii) stimulation of the endogenous host immune responses of antibodydependent cell cytotoxicity (ADCC), complement-mediated cytolysis (CMC), and opsonization/phagocytosis subsequent to formation of membrane IgG-antigen complexes.…”