Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22104283›Full record

ArticleBMC systems biology2011

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of VEGF-neutralizing antibodies.

Stacey D Finley, Marianne O Engel-Stefanini, P I Imoukhuede, Aleksander S Popel

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC systems biology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Sex differences in cancer mechanisms.Biology of sex differences · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Monitoring Severity of Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome: New Technologies.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2017
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stacey D FinleyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, 720 Rutland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. sdfinley@jhu.edu
Marianne O Engel-Stefanini
P I Imoukhuede
Aleksander S Popel
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Predictive experiment-based multiscale models of the tumor immune microenvironment and immunotherapy in breast cancerR01CA138264 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI POPEL, ALEKSANDER S. · 2009 to 2023
$8.1M
Predictive model of pro- and anti-angiogenic factors involved in breast cancerF32CA154213 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FINLEY, STACEY DELERIA · 2010 to 2012
$121k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA138264NCI NIH HHS R01CA138264
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a potent regulator of angiogenesis, and its role in cancer biology has been widely studied. Many cancer therapies target angiogenesis, with a focus being on VEGF-mediated signaling such as antibodies to VEGF. However, it is difficult to predict the effects of VEGF-neutralizing agents. We have developed a whole-body model of VEGF kinetics and transport under pathological conditions (in the presence of breast tumor). The model includes two major VEGF isoforms VEGF121 and VEGF165, receptors VEGFR1, VEGFR2 and co-receptors Neuropilin-1 and Neuropilin-2. We have added receptors on parenchymal cells (muscle fibers and tumor cells), and incorporated experimental data for the cell surface density of receptors on the endothelial cells, myocytes, and tumor cells. The model is applied to investigate the action of VEGF-neutralizing agents (called "anti-VEGF") in the treatment of cancer.

resultsThrough a sensitivity study, we examine how model parameters influence the level of free VEGF in the tumor, a measure of the response to VEGF-neutralizing drugs. We investigate the effects of systemic properties such as microvascular permeability and lymphatic flow, and of drug characteristics such as the clearance rate and binding affinity. We predict that increasing microvascular permeability in the tumor above 10-5 cm/s elicits the undesired effect of increasing tumor interstitial VEGF concentration beyond even the baseline level. We also examine the impact of the tumor microenvironment, including receptor expression and internalization, as well as VEGF secretion. We find that following anti-VEGF treatment, the concentration of free VEGF in the tumor can vary between 7 and 233 pM, with a dependence on both the density of VEGF receptors and co-receptors and the rate of neuropilin internalization on tumor cells. Finally, we predict that free VEGF in the tumor is reduced following anti-VEGF treatment when VEGF121 comprises at least 25% of the VEGF secreted by tumor cells.

conclusionsThis study explores the optimal drug characteristics required for an anti-VEGF agent to have a therapeutic effect and the tumor-specific properties that influence the response to therapy. Our model provides a framework for investigating the use of VEGF-neutralizing drugs for personalized medicine treatment strategies.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, NeutralizingAntineoplastic AgentsBreast NeoplasmsCell LineCells, CulturedComputer SimulationFemaleHumansKineticsMiceModels, BiologicalNeuropilin-2Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorSystems BiologyVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAntibodies, NeutralizingAntineoplastic AgentsNeuropilin-2Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorVascular Endothelial Growth Factor A

Identifiers

PMID22104283
PMCPMC3229549
OpenAlexW1995031555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.