Emerging Role of EGFR-Targeted Therapies and Radiation in Head and Neck Cancer

By John Song, MD¹, Changhu Chen, MD, PhD², David Raben, MD³ | December 1, 2004

¹Assistant Professor, Department of Otolaryngology ²Assistant Professor, Department of Radiation Oncology ³Associate Professor and Scientist, Tobacco Related Malignancy Program and Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Aurora, Colorado

Hurdles to Overcome

Predicting Response to EGFR Inhibitors

If EGFR inhibitors are to be relevant in the treatment of HNSCC, we need to determine exactly how they work. A key issue is whether EGFR expression is a relevant predictor of response; a cancer may not necessarily rely on EGFR signaling alone for its survival. In addition, the integrity of the EGFR-activated downstream intracellular signal transduction machinery may influence the response to these drugs. Recent experimental evidence suggests that cancer cells may escape growth inhibition by using alternative growth pathways or by constitutive activation of downstream signaling effectors.

Despite the promising preclinical findings seen with EGFR blockade in many epithelial malignancies, the clinical response in pretreated HNSCC patients receiving EGFR inhibitors has hovered at ~15%. Why haven't we observed a higher response when so many HNSCC cancers express EGFR? The current thought is that a host of molecular abnormalities play a role in determining head and neck carcinogenesis and biologic behavior. Therefore, similar histologic types notwithstanding, the activated cell survival pathways may vary among HNSCCs. Differences in activated EGFR-associated phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K), MAPK, or STAT3 may account for the differences in tumor response to EGFR antagonists. This hypothesis can be partially addressed by a panel of correlative biomarker studies examining the association between the expression profiles of these molecules and the tumor response, along with other as of yet unknown proteins/genes, using tumor specimens of patients enrolled into prospective trials.

Understanding which HNSCC cancers will respond to EGFR inhibition may also relate to the expression and activity of the remaining family members of EGFR (erbB2-4). Also, the presence of exogenous EGF-related ligands may, in part, govern tumor response to anti-EGFR agents, and thus, dual or multiple blocking of other family members of EGFR may be required to achieve the desired effects.[ 46] Increased expression levels or mutations in downstream proteins such as Ras, Raf, PTEN, and Akt may also predict response, along with other as yet unknown proteins/genes, independent of EGFR expression, as shown in Figure 4.

FIGURE 4

Mutated Elements of the EGFR-Kinase Pathway in Tumors May Predict for Response to EGFR Inhibitors

An emerging issue is whether rash is predictive of response to EGFR inhibitors as well as survival. Across the board in phase II studies employing cetuximab(Drug information on cetuximab)-including a trial in patients with advanced HNSCC-patients who developed the acne-like rash survived longer than those who did not develop a rash, and the more intense the rash, the longer the survival. The findings from four phase II studies incorporating cetuximab, as presented by Saltz et al at ASCO 2003, suggests that skin rash may be an important surrogate predictor of efficacy.[ 47] Similar findings were seen in a phase II study in advanced HNSCC patients treated with gefitinib(Drug information on gefitinib) monotherapy.[ 28] This observation has not held up in stage IV lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib. Perhaps individualizing patient dosing to stimulate skin rash will be more closely evaluated in future clinical trials with EGFR inhibitors.

Preventing Resistance to EGFR Inhibition

Recent experimental evidence suggests that cancer cells may escape growth inhibition by using alternative growth or angiogenic pathways. For example, resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies such as cetuximab and hR3 has been reported in A431 tumors in mice. Overexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) may have been a contributor to resistance through the upregulation of angiogenesis.[48] Activation of the insulin-like growth factor receptor I contributed to continuous activation of the antiapoptotic PI3K-signaling pathway that blocked EGFR inhibitors such as gefitinib in human glioblastoma cells in vitro.[49]

These observations, along with increasing evidence that superfluous growth pathways are active in neoplastic cells, form the basis for testing therapeutic strategies targeting multiple pathways. Indeed, preclinical studies have shown significant and sustained antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo by combining anti-EGFR agents with, for example, inhibitors of the cAMP-dependent protein kinase (type I PKA)[50] or a VEGF antisense oligonucleotide.[51] Other promising strategies have included concurrent blockage of the VEGF receptor (VEGFR) using PTK 787 and EGFR by PKI 166, both tyrosine kinase inhibitors directed at VEGFR and EGFR signaling respectively in a pancreatic model,[52] and the combination of gefitinib with the anti-erbB2 antibody trastuzumab(Drug information on trastuzumab) (Herceptin).[53] Figure 3 presents possible polytargeted scenarios against HNSCC.

An alternative method that might prevent the development of resistance to EGFR blockade would be to administer single agents with dual inhibitory action toward EGFR and VEGFR signaling. ZD6474 represents such an agent. It is a small-molecule inhibitor of KDR/VEGFR-2 tyrosine kinase activity and of a variety of other tyrosine and serine-threonine kinases including those activated by EGFR.[54] In animals bearing human colon cancer xenografts with acquired resistance to gefitinib or cetuximab, ZD6474 administration resulted in significant tumor growth inhibition.[55] Tumor cells resistant to cetuximab or gefitinib exhibited a marked increase in activated MAPK, cyclooxygenase- 2, and VEGF compared with the control GEO cells. These data indicate that inhibition of VEGF signaling has potential as an anticancer strategy, even in tumors that are resistant to EGF inhibitors.

Another attractive approach applicable to the treatment of HNSCC might include the combination of two molecules acting on different domains of EGFR. Gefitinib plus cetuximab provided supra-additive cancer growth inhibition on the high EGFR-expressing A431 tumor in vitro and in vivo (P < .05) [56]. In this particular model, 25 mg/kg of gefitinib plus cetuximab resulted in a 90% growth inhibition and induced complete remissions in 3 out of 10 tumors, and 50 mg/kg of gefitinib plus cetuximab resulted in 100% complete remission. This suggests that hindering both the extracellular and intracellular activation sites of EGFR may prevent the cancer cell from overriding a specific blockade.

Because other EGFR family members may play a role in HNSCC, preventing coupling of, for example, erbB2 to EGFR (or erbB1) might prevent redundant signaling from overriding or bypassing EGFR blockade. In this regard, 2C4-which binds to a different portion of the extracellular domain than trastuzumab (Herceptin) and prevents the receptor from dimerizing with other erbB family members- is under investigation and appears active irrespective of EGFR status.[57,58] Further studies assessing the role of 2C4 in polytargeted therapy against HNSCC are ongoing.

Sequencing Issues With EGFR Inhibitors

One of the concerns recently raised is the potential antagonistic effects that might be seen with concurrent administration of TKIs and chemotherapy. Several clinical trials combining TKIs with chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced lung cancer failed to show a survival benefit over chemotherapy alone.[59,60] It is unclear whether there are differences in interactions with antibodies vs TKIs and chemotherapy and whether the type of chemotherapy dictates synergy or antagonism.

An early report by the Lung Cancer CetuximAb Study (LUCAS), presented at ASCO 2003,[61] evaluated the response rate of the combination of cetuximab plus cisplatin(Drug information on cisplatin)/vinorelbine or of the same chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment in patients with EGFR-positive stage IIIB/IV NSCLC. The overall response rates were 50% (nine partial responses, eight confirmed; seven cases of stable disease; and two cases of progressive disease) in arm A and 29% (five partial responses, three confirmed; six cases of stable disease; and six cases of progressive disease) in arm B. The trial continues to accrue patients with the intent of recruiting a total of 40 patients per arm. It will be interesting to see if these response rates hold up with mature follow-up. Limited information is available on sequencing issues using EGFR inhibitors and radiation, and this is an area that warrants further preclinical and clinical investigation.

Conclusions

In this review, we have tried to provide a review of the emerging role of targeted therapies in HNSCC. The goal of targeted therapy should include the development and testing of agents with selective activity against HNSCC and low systemic toxicity. Ideally, a molecular target in HNSCC meets the following criteria: (1) it drives tumor growth, (2) it demonstrates reversible function by pharmacologic inhibition, (3) its inhibition is tolerated by normal cells, and (4) effects on it are measurable in tumor tissue.

We are clearly establishing new ground in the fight against HNSCC with the introduction of drugs that attack specific parts of the cancer cell growth pathways. Despite the gains achieved with concurrent chemoradiotherapy, the toxicities can be daunting at times. Thus, the foundations established with EGFR inhibitors and radiotherapy should embolden oncology investigators to design clinical trials that incorporate combinations of targeted agents with different mechanisms of action. An additional task is to return to the laboratory and understand why EGFR inhibitors work, why they are active in EGFR-negative as well as EGFR-positive tumors, how to better predict response, and the optimal way to sequence these drugs with radiation. Advancement in these areas will lead to optimal stratification or selection of patients based on tumor or serum markers, for testing promising novel multitargeted therapy regimens in clinical trials.

Financial Disclosure: Dr. Raben has received partial financial support for preclinical studies conducted through the University of Colorado Comprehensive Cancer Center from AstraZeneca.

Pages: 1 2 3

This article reviewed

Commentary (Grandis/Foon): Emerging Role of EGFR-Targeted Therapies and Radiation in Head and Neck Cancer

Commentary (Sartor): Emerging Role of EGFR-Targeted Therapies and Radiation in Head and Neck Cancer

JENNIFER R. GRANDIS, MD and KENNETH A. FOON, MD
CAROLYN SARTOR, MD

1. Sessions R, Harrison L, Forastiere A: Tumors of the larynx and hypopharynx, in DeVita Jr VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds): Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven, 1997.
2. Parkin D, Pisani P, Ferlay J: Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 49:33-64, 1999.
3. Vokes E, Weichselbaum R, Lippman S, et al: Head and Neck Cancer. N Engl J Med 328:184-194, 1993.
4. Cancer: Adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced head and neck squamous carcinoma. Final Report of the Head and Neck Contracts Program. Cancer 60:301-311, 1987.
5. Santini J, Formento J, Francoual M, et al: Characterization, quantification, and potential clinical value of the epidermal growth factor receptor in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Head Neck 13:132-139, 1991.
6. Ang K, Berkey B, Tu X, et al: Impact of epidermal growth factor receptor expression on survival and pattern of relapse in patients with advanced head and neck carcinoma. Cancer Res 62:7350-7356, 2002.
7. Modjtahedi H, Dean C: The receptor for EGF and its ligands: Expression, prognostic value and target for therapy in cancer (review). Int J Oncol 4:277-296, 1994.
8. Thomas S, Grandis J: Pharacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of EGFR inhibitors under clinical investigation. Cancer Treat Rev 30:255-256, 2004.
9. Ibrahim S, Vasstrand E, Liavaag P, et al: Expression of c-erbB protonocogene family members in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Anticancer Res 17: 4539-4546, 1997.
10. Xia W, Lau Y, Zhang H, et al: Strong correlation between c-erbB-2 overexpression and overall survival of patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 3:3-9, 1997.
11. Shintani S, Funayama T, Yoshihama Y, et al: Prognostic significance of ERBB3 overexpression in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Lett 95:79-83, 1995.
12. Grandis J, Tweardy D: Elevated levels of transforming growth factor alpha and epidermal growth factor receptor messenger RNA are early markers of carcinogenesis in head and neck cancer. Cancer Res 53:3579-3584, 1993.
13. Rubin Grandis J, Melhem M, Barnes E, et al: Quantitative immunohistochemical analysis of transforming growth factor-alpha and epidermal growth factor receptor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Cancer 78:1284-1292, 1996.
14. Rubin Grandis J, Zeng Q, Tweardy D: Retinoic acid normalizes the increased gene transcription rate of TGF-alpha and EGFR in head and neck cancer cell lines. Nature Med 2:237-240, 1996.
15. Hendler F, Shum-Siu A, Nanu L, et al: Overexpression of EGF receptors in squamous tumors is associated with poor survival. J Cell Biochem 12:105, 1988.
16. Miyaguchi M, Olofosson J, Hellquist H: Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in glottic carcinoma and its relation to recurrence after radiotherapy. Clin Otolaryngol 16:466-469, 1991.
17. Rubin Grandis J, Melhem MF, Gooding WE, et al: Levels of TGF-alpha and EGFR protein in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and patient survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:824- 832, 1998.
18. Akimoto T, Hunter N, Buchmiller L, et al: Inverse relationship between epidermal growth factor receptor expression and radiocurability of murine carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 5:437-443, 1999.
19. Balaban N, Moni J, Shannon M, et al: The effect of ionizing radiation on signal transduction: Antibodies to EGF receptor sensitize A431 cells to radiation. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1314:147-156, 1996.
20. Mendelsohn J: Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibition by a monoclonal antibody as anticancer therapy. Clin Cancer Res 3:2703- 2707, 1997.
21. Huang S, Bock J, Harari P: Epidermal growth factor receptor blockade with C225 modulates proliferation, apoptosis, and radiosensitivity in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Cancer Res 59:1935-1940, 1999.
22. Huang S, Harari P: Modulation of radiation response after epidermal growth factor receptor blockade in squamous cell carcinomas: Inhibition of damage repair, cell cycle kinetics, and tumor angiogenesis. Clin Cancer Res 6:2166-2174, 2000.
23. Dent P, Reardon D, Park J, et al: Radiation- induced release of transforming growth factor alpha activates the epidermal growth factor receptor and mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway in carcinoma cells, leading to increased proliferation and protection from radiation- induced cell death. Mol Biol Cell 10:2493-506, 1999.
24. Harari P, Huang S: Head and neck cancer as a clinical model for molecular targeting of therapy: Combining EGFR blockade with radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 49:427- 433, 2001.
25. Ciardiello F, Caputo R, Bianco R, et al: Antitumor effects and potentiation of cytotoxic drugs: Activity in human cancer cells by ZD1839 (Iressa), and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Clin Cancer Res 6:2053-2063, 2000.
26. Sirotnak F, Zakowski M, Miller V, et al: Efficacy of cytotoxic agents against human tumor xenografts is markedly enhanced by coadministration of ZD1839 (Iressa), an inhibitor of EGFR tyrosine kinase. Clin Cancer Res 6:4885-4892, 2000.
27. Senzer N, Soulieres D, Siu L, et al: Phase 2 evaluation of OSI-774, a potent oral antagonist of the EGFR-TK in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (abstract 6). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 20:2a, 2001.
28. Cohen E, Rose F, Stadler W, et al: Phase II trial of ZD1839 in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. J Clin Oncol 21:1980-1987, 2003.
29. Shin D, Nemunaitis J, Zinner R, et al: A phase I clinical and biomarker study of CI- 1033, a novel pan-ErbB tyrosine kinase inhibitor in patients with solid tumors (abstract 324). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 20:82a, 2001.
30. Vanhoefer U, Tewes M, Rojo F, et al: Phase I study of the humanized antiepidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody EMD72000 in patients with advanced solid tumors that express the epidermal growth factor. J Clin Oncol 1:175-184, 2004.
31. Foon K, Yang X, Weiner L, et al: Preclinical and clinical evaluations of ABX-EGF, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 58:984-990, 2004.
32. Shin D, Donato N, Perez-Soler R, et al: Epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapy with C225 and cisplatin in patients with head and neck cancer. Clin Cancer Res 7:1204- 1213, 2001.
33. Burtness B, Li Y, Flood W, et al: Phase III trial comparing cisplatin (C) + placebo (P) to C + anti-epidermal growth factor antibody (EGF-R) C225 in patients (pts) with metastatic/ recurrent head & neck cancer (HNC) (abstract 901). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 21:226a, 2002.
34. Chan A, Hsu M, Goh E, et. al.: A phase II study of cetuximab (C225) in combination with carboplatin in patients (pts) with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) who failed platinum based chemotherapy (abstract 2000). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncology 22:497, 2003.
35. Vega-Villegas E, Awada A, Mesia R, et al: A phase I study of cetuximab in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients (pts) with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (abstract 2020). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22:502, 2003.
36. Robert F, Ezekiel M, Spencer S, et al: Phase I study of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody cetuximab in combination with radiation therapy in patients with advanced head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:3234-3243, 2001.
37. Bonner JA, Biralt J, Harari PM, et al: Cetuximab prolongs survival in patients with locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck: A phase III study of high dose radiation therapy with or without cetuximab (late-breaking abstract 5507). Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 40th Annual Meeting, New Orleans, 2004.
38. Pfister D, Aliff T, Kraus D, et al: Concurrent cetuximab, cisplatin and concomitant boost radiation therapy (RT) for locoregionally advanced, squamous cell head and neck cancer (SCHNN): Preliminary evaluation of a new combined modality paradigm (abstract 1993). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22:495, 2003.
39. Raben D, Weng E, Kane M, et al: Preliminary report on toxicity of a phase I trial of gefitnib (Iressa) in combination with radiation/ chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) (abstract C186). Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics, Boston, 2003.
40. Azemar M, Schmidt M, Arlt F, et al: Recombinant antibody toxins specific for ErbB2 and EGF receptor inhibitors in vitro growth of human head and neck cancer cells and cause rapid tumor regression in vivo. Int J Cancer 86: 269-275, 2000.
41. Grandis J, Drenning S, Chakraborty A, et al: Requirement of Stat3 but not Stat1 activation for epidermal growth factor receptor-mediated cell growth in vitro. J Clin Invest 102:1385-1392, 1998.
42. Song J, Grandis J: STAT signaling in head and neck cancer. Oncogene 19:2489- 2495, 2000.
43. Sriuranpong V, Park J, Amornphimoltham P, et al: Epidermal growth factor receptor-independent constitutive activation of STAT3 in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma is mediated by the autocrine/paracrine stimulation of the interleukin6/gp130 cytokine system. Cancer Res 63:2948-2956, 2003.
44. Sarkaria J, Tibbetts R, Busby E, et al: Inhibition of phosphoinositide 3-kinase related kinases by the radiosensitizing agent wortmannin. Cancer Res 58:4375-4382, 1998.
45. Hidalgo M, Rowinsky E: The rapamycinsensitive signal transduction pathway as a target for cancer therapy. Oncogene 19:6680-6686, 2000.
46. Motoyama A, Hynes N, Lane H: The efficacy of ErbB receptor-targeted anticancer therapeutics is influenced by the availability of epidermal growth factor-related peptides. Cancer Res 62:3151-3158, 2002.
47. Saltz L, Kies M, Abbruzzese J, et al: The presence and intensity of the cetuximab-induced acne-like rash predicts increased survival in studies across multiple malignancies (abstract 817). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22:204, 2003.
48. Viloria-Petit A, Crombet T, Jothy S, et al: Acquired resistance to the antitumor effect of epidermal growth factor receptor-blocking antibodies in vivo. Cancer Res 61:5090-5101, 2001.
49. Chakravarti A, Loeffler J, Dyson N: Insulin- like growth factor receptor I mediates resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy in primary human glioblastoma cells through continued activation of phosphoinositide 3-kinase signaling. Cancer Res 62:200-207, 2002.
50. Ciardiello F, Caputo R, Bianco R, et al: Cooperative inhibition of renal cancer growth by anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody and protein kinase A antisense oligonucleotide. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1087-1094, 1998.
51. Ciardiello F, Bianco R, Damiano D, et al: Antiangiogenic and antitumor activity of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor C225 monoclonal antibody in combination with vascular endothelial growth factor. Clin Cancer Res 6:3739-3747, 2000.
52. Baker C, CC S, Fidler I: Blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and epidermal growth factor receptor signaling for therapy of metastatic human pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res 62:1996-2003, 2002.
53. Normanno N, Campiglio M, De Luca A, et al: Cooperative inhibitory effect of ZD1839 (Iressa) in combination with trastuzumab (Herceptin) on human breast cancer cell growth. Ann Oncol 13:65-72, 2002.
54. Wedge S, Ogilvie D, Dukes M, et al: ZD6474 inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor signaling, angiogenesis, and tumor growth following oral administration. Cancer Res 62:4645-4655, 2002.
55. Ciardiello F, Bianco R, Caputo R, et al: Antitumor activity of ZD6474, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in human cancer cells with acquired resistance to antiepidermal growth factor receptor therapy. Clin Cancer Res 10:784-793, 2004.
56. Matar P, Rojo R, Guzman M, et al: Combined anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib (ZD 1839, "Iressa") and a monoclonal antibody (IMC-C225): Evidence of synergy. Proc AACR 44:917, 2003.
57. Agus D, Akita R, Fox W, et al: Targeting ligand-activated ErbB2 signaling inhibits breast and prostate tumor growth. Cancer Cell 2:127-137, 2002.
58. Baselga J: A new anti-ErbB2 strategy in the treatment of cancer: Prevention of liganddependent ErbB2 receptor heterodimerization. Cancer Cell 2:93-95, 2002.
59. Giaccone G, Johnson D, Manegold C, et al: A phase III clinical trial of ZD1839 (Iressa) in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (INTACT 1). Ann Oncol 13:2, 2002.
60. Johnson D, Herbst R, Giaccone G, et al: ZD1839 ("Iressa") in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Results from a phase III clinical trial (INTACT 2). Ann Oncol 13:127, 2002.
61. Gatzemeier U, Rosell R, Ramlau R, et al: Cetuximab (C225) in combination with cisplatin/vinorelbine vs. cisplatin/vinorelbine alone in the first-line treatment of patients (pts) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (abstract 2582). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22:642, 2003.