Back to Authors

Öberg, Anette I.

Mayo Clinic

University of Maryland, Baltimore

Citations 1

PD01-06: Endoxifen Exhibits Potent Anti-Tumor Activity and Regulates Different Genes Than Tamoxifen in an Aromatase Expressing MCF7 Model Resistant to Letrozole.
Goetz, MP, Suman, VJ, Reinicke, Kathryn E., Kuffel, Mary J., Haluska, P., Öberg, Anette I., Grill, Diane E. , Reid, J, Brodie, Angela, Ingle, J , Ames, M, Hou, Xiaoying

Cancer Research | June 27, 2012 | Volume: 71 | Issue: 24_Supplement | Pages: PD01-06-PD01-06

10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs11-pd01-06 Get It

Abstract Background: First in human studies of Z-endoxifen hydrochloride (E), the active metabolite of tamoxifen (T), are underway in metastatic breast cancer (BC). Previous data have demonstrated the superiority of aromatase inhibitors (AI's) over T in estrogen receptor (ER) + BC. Using an in vivo aromatase expressing model (MCF7/AC1), we compared the antitumor activity of E with T and Letrozole (L), as well as the antitumor activity and global gene expression changes of E with T in an L-resistant model. Methods: MCF7/AC1 tumors were stimulated with androstenedione. Once tumor size reached 300 mm3, mice (30/group) were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups: control (daily, po), T (500 μg/day, sc), endoxifen 25 mg/kg/day p.o.(LDE) endoxifen 75 mg/kg/day p.o. (HDE) or letrozole, 10 μg/day s.c for 4 weeks. Tumors were harvested from control, T, and E groups while the L group continued treatment until the development of resistance defined as an increase in tumor volume of at least 300% from day 1. Mice with L-resistant tumors were randomly assigned to T (n=4) or E (n=5) for 4 weeks and then sacrificed. Gene expression in L-resistant tumors was quantified using Affymetrix U133+2 and changes in gene expression profiles [comparing T and E with L-resistant (n=3)] were analyzed. Genes identified as significantly different were confirmed by real-time RT-PCR assays. Results: At the 4 week time point, both doses of E and L resulted in greater anti-tumor activity than control (Wilcoxon rank sum test: all p < 0.0001); however, tumor burden did not differ between T and control (p=0.095). HDE resulted in significantly less tumor burden than T (p=0.002) but was similar to L. In mice that continued on L, resistance developed at 24 weeks in 9/25 mice. These mice were randomly assigned to either T (n=4) or E (n=5) for 4 weeks. Tumor volume (expressed as a% of its size prior to randomization) was significantly different comparing E (73.3%; range: 69.3 to 80.75%) versus T (148.39%; range: 114.07 to 165.99%) (Wilcoxon rank sum test p=0.016). Compared to control, microarray studies identified 1518 unique probe sets regulated by E (p<0.001) compared to 441 for T including estrogen-regulated genes such as progesterone receptor (PGR) and amphiregulin (AREG) that were significantly down-regulated in the E group [PGR (−6.2 fold, p=0.000008) and AREG (−3.2 fold, p=.0006) but unchanged or up-regulated in the T group (PGR unchanged and AREG +9.2 fold p=0.00002). These findings were confirmed by RT-PCR. Conclusions: Using the MCF7/AC1 model previously used to show the superiority of AI's over T, HDE demonstrated similar antitumor activity to L and was superior to T. In cells resistant to L, E was superior to T and gene expression changes demonstrate that E down-regulates while T activates estrogen regulated genes. These findings support the ongoing development of E for the treatment of ER+ BC. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr PD01-06.