Background: Methods: Results: Conclusion:

Fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) play key roles in proliferation, differentiation, and tumorigenesis. Many urothelial carcinomas contain activating point mutations or increased expression of FGFR3. However, little is known about the role of other FGFRs. We examined FGFR expression in telomerase-immortalized normal human urothelial cells, urothelial carcinoma cell lines, and tumor samples and showed that FGFR1 expression is increased in a high proportion of cell lines and tumors independent of stage and grade. To determine the role of FGFR1 in low-stage bladder cancer, we overexpressed FGFR1 in telomerase-immortalized normal human urothelial cells and examined changes in proliferation and cell survival in response to FGF2. FGFR1 stimulation increased proliferation and reduced apoptosis. To elucidate the mechanistic basis for these alterations, we examined the signaling cascades activated by FGFR1. FRS2α and PLCγ were activated in response to FGF2, leading to activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. The level of mitogen-activated protein kinase activation correlated with the level of cyclin D1, MCL1, and phospho-BAD, which also correlated with FGFR-induced proliferation and survival. Knockdown of FGFR1 in urothelial carcinoma cell lines revealed differential FGFR1 dependence. JMSU1 cells were dependent on FGFR1 expression for survival but three other cell lines were not. Two cell lines (JMSU1 and UMUC3) were dependent on FGFR1 for growth in soft agar. Only one of the cell lines tested (UMUC3) was frankly tumorigenic; here, FGFR1 knockdown inhibited tumor growth. Our results indicate that FGFR1 has significant effects on urothelial cell phenotype and may represent a useful therapeutic target in some cases of urothelial carcinoma. [Cancer Res 2009;69(11):4613–20]

Purpose: Combretastatin A4 phosphate (CA4P) and its structural analog, combretastatin A1 phosphate (CA1P), are soluble prodrugs capable of interacting with tubulin and causing rapid vascular shutdown within tumors. CA4P has completed Phase I clinical trials, but recent preclinical studies have shown that CA1P displays a greater antitumor effect than the combretastatin A4 (CA4) analog at equal doses. The aim of this study, therefore, is to compare pharmacokinetics and metabolism of the two compounds to determine whether pharmacokinetics plays a role in their differential activity. Experimental Design: NMRI mice bearing MAC29 tumors received injection with either CA4P or CA1P at a therapeutic dose of 150 mg·kg⁻¹, and profiles of both compounds and their metabolites analyzed by a sensitive and specific liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy method. Results: The metabolic profile of both compounds is complex, with up to 14 metabolites being detected for combretastatin A1 (CA1) in the plasma. Many of these metabolites have been identified by liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy. Initial studies, however, focused on the active components CA4 and CA1, where plasma and tumor areas under the curve were 18.4 and 60.1 μg·h·ml⁻¹ for CA4, and 10.4 and 13.1 μg·h·ml⁻¹ for CA1, respectively. In vitro metabolic comparisons of the two compounds strongly suggest that CA1 is metabolized to a more reactive species than the CA4. Conclusions: Although in vitro studies suggest that variable rates of tumor-specific prodrug dephosphorylation may explain these differences in pharmacokinetics profiles, the improved antitumor activity and altered pharmacokinetic profile of CA1 may be due to the formation of a more reactive metabolite.