Clinical Cancer Research Meeting Calendar AACR Membership
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Scala, S.
Right arrow Articles by Castello, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Scala, S.
Right arrow Articles by Castello, G.
Clinical Cancer Research Vol. 11, 1835-1841, March 2005
© 2005 American Association for Cancer Research

Imaging, Diagnosis, Prognosis

Expression of CXCR4 Predicts Poor Prognosis in Patients with Malignant Melanoma

Stefania Scala1, Alessandro Ottaiano1, Paolo Antonio Ascierto1, Manuela Cavalli1, Ester Simeone1, Paola Giuliano1, Maria Napolitano1, Renato Franco2, Gerardo Botti2 and Giuseppe Castello1,3

Departments of 1 Clinical Immunology and 2 Clinical Pathology National Cancer Institute, G. Pascale Foundation and 3 Melanoma Cooperative Group of Naples, Italy

Requests for reprints: Stefania Scala, Department of Clinical Experimental Immunology, National Cancer Institute, via Mariano Semmola, 80131, Naples, Italy. Phone: 39-081-5903678; Fax: 39-081-5903820; E-mail: ale.otto{at}libero.it.


   ABSTRACT
Top
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Purpose: CXCR4 receptor and its unique ligand, the CXCL12 chemokine, have been recently implicated in cancer metastasis. Evidence about the role of CXCR4/CXCL12 axis has been reported in several cancers including melanoma. Our goal was to investigate if CXCR4 expression has a prognostic value in malignant melanoma.

Experimental Design: Immunohistochemical expression of CXCR4 was evaluated on 71 specimens of primary cutaneous melanoma with a Breslow tumor thickness of >1 mm after radical resection. Associations between baseline patient features and tumors were analyzed by {chi}2 test. The prognostic value of CXCR4 expression was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses adjusted by age, sex, Breslow tumor thickness, presence of ulceration, and sentinel lymph node metastases.

Results: CXCR4 expression was detected in 31 of 71 (43.6%) primary cutaneous melanomas. Membrane or cytoplasmic staining for CXCR4 protein was absent in 56% of the tumors. The positive cases were divided into three score classes according to their staining: low in 15 cases (21%), moderate in 10 (14%), and high in 6 (8%). After a median follow-up of 38 months, 26 patients progressed (16 of 26 expressed CXCR4) and 19 died (12 of 19 expressed CXCR4). The CXCR4 expression on tumor cells was correlated with an unfavorable prognosis with a median disease-free and overall survival of 22 and 35 months, respectively. The hazard ratios of relapse and death, compared with patients with CXCR4-negative tumors, were 2.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-6.1) and 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-7.2), respectively. Median time-to-event (progression and survival) was not reached in patients with CXCR4-negative tumors. In the multivariate analysis, CXCR4 expression, presence of ulceration, and sentinel lymph node status emerged as independent prognostic factors.

Conclusions: This article provides the first evidence that CXCR4 expression could be an independent and powerful prognostic marker in primary cutaneous malignant melanomas.

Key Words: CXCR4 • CXCL12 • malignant melanoma • prognosis


   INTRODUCTION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Malignant melanoma represents about 2% to 3% of all malignancies in the United States and North Europe. The incidence of malignant melanoma has increased steadily during the last decades with a high mortality rate because of the metastatic dissemination of tumor cells and generation of chemoresistance (1). Although surgery can be curative in localized disease, a large number of patients develop distant metastases. Despite multiple clinical trials that have tested a wide variety of anticancer strategies, ranging from surgery to immunotherapy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, the average survival rate is of 6 to 10 months. To date, the most important prognostic factors are Breslow's tumor thickness, ulceration, and lymph node status (2). Diagnosis of malignant melanoma at very early stages (i.e., before the malignant melanocytes become invasive) allows for complete surgical excision of the primary tumors. In these cases there is over a 95% success rate at stage I/II and it can even substantially extend the long term survival of patients with lymph node infiltration (stage III; refs. 1, 2).

The migration of tumor cells to a secondary site from their primary location one is a key event in cancer metastasis. Many studies suggest the mechanisms used for homing of leukocytes and hematopoietic progenitors may be appropriated for the dissemination of tumors via the bloodstream and lymphatics. CXCR4 is a seven-domain trans-membrane chemokine receptor predominantly expressed on lymphocytes where it activates chemotaxis. The CXCR4/CXCL12 pathway has been recently involved in stimulating the metastatic process of many different neoplasms (3), where CXCR4 is able to activate a plethora of phenomena such as chemotaxis, invasion, angiogenesis, and proliferation. These phenomena have been shown with different methodologic approaches in breast cancer (4, 5) , small cell lung cancer (6), ovarian cancer (7, 8), pancreatic cancer (9), lymphoma (10–12), neuroblastoma (13), glioblastoma (14, 15), renal cell carcinoma (16), thyroid cancer (17–19), rabdomyosarcoma (20), prostate cancer (21), and colorectal cancer (22).

The role of CXCR4 receptor in the biology of malignant melanoma has been previously described. CXCR4 expression was detected in human melanoma cell lines and in patient samples. The authors described expression of CXCR3 and CXCR4 receptors regulating cell motility during invasion as well as cell proliferation and survival (23). Insights into this mechanism showed that CXCL12 promotes melanoma cell invasion through activation of membrane type I–bound matrix metalloproteinase and small GTPase proteins RhoA, Rac1, and CDC42 (24). Interestingly, CXCR4 expression on melanoma cells is increased by transforming growth factor-ß1 and specific inhibition with anti-transforming growth factor-ß antibodies blocked CXCR4 expression and melanoma cell invasion toward CXCL12 (24). Overexpression of CXCR4 dramatically enhanced the metastatic accumulation of B16 melanoma cells in mice lungs (25). Expression of functional CXCR4 receptor on melanoma cells indicates that it might contribute to cell motility during invasion of lymph nodes as well as to regulation of cell proliferation and survival.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the expression of CXCR4 in malignant melanoma patients and its possible prognostic value in 71 human primary melanoma samples and relative sentinel lymph nodes (SLN).


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Patients were seen at the Clinical Immunology Department of the National Cancer Institute of Naples from 1996 to 2003. The histologic sections were reviewed by two expert pathologists (G.B. and R.F.) to verify the histologic diagnosis of malignant melanoma, before performing immunohistochemistry. Standard therapeutic strategies were applied for these patients, according to SLN status. Patients with soft tissue recurrence or local disease were treated with surgery. Patients with advanced disease were mainly treated with palliative chemotherapy. A few selected patients underwent pulmonary metastasectomy in the case of a solitary lesion or single lobe involvement and adequate disease-free survival (DFS, at least 1 year). Locations of the primary tumor were grouped in four classes: head/neck, trunk, extremities, and feet. Breslow's tumor thickness in the studied samples was selected to be >1 mm. SLN status was recorded. In particular, the presence of metastasis was considered as follows: micrometastasis if their diameter was ≤2 mm, macrometastasis if the diameter was >2 mm.

Immunohistochemistry. Two serial 5-µm sections of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cutaneous melanoma samples were stained one by standard H&E and the other by the biotin-streptavidin-peroxidase method (YLEM). Deparaffinized sections were microwaved in 1 mmol/L EDTA (pH 8.0) for two cycles of 5 minutes each to unmask epitopes. After treatment with 1% hydrogen peroxidase for 30 minutes to block endogenous peroxidases, the sections were incubated with monoclonal antibodies (anti-CXCR4, clone 44716, R&D systems, Minneapolis, MN) for 2 hours at room temperature. The sections were then incubated with biotin-labeled secondary antibody (1:30) for 30 minutes and with streptavidin-peroxidase (1:30) for 10 minutes. Slides were stained for 10 minutes with AEC chromogen (DAKO, Milan, Italy) and then counterstained with hematoxylin, washed, and mounted in waterish medium. The dilutions of the monoclonal antibody, biotin-labeled secondary antibody, and streptavidin-peroxidase were made with PBS (pH 7.4) containing 5% bovine serum albumin. All series included positive controls of well-characterized sections (melanomas and breast cancer). Negative controls were obtained by substituting the primary antibody with a mouse myeloma protein of the same subclass, at the same concentration as the monoclonal antibody. All controls gave satisfactory results. In all cases, normal epithelial cells were negative for CXCR4 expression. Neoplastic cells with CXCR4 cytoplasmatic and/or membrane immunohistochemical expression were considered positive cells. Macrophage positivity was used as adequate internal positive control for each case, to validate technical procedure. Staining was categorized into four semiquantitative classes based on the rate of stained (positive) tumor cells: absence of staining, <10% positive cells (low), 10% to 50% positive cells (moderate), and >50% positive cells (high). Topographical expression of CXCR4 was also evaluated. Prevalent expression in radial or vertical component was considered when expression in such component was twofold compared with the other. Moreover, CXCR4 expression was evaluated in SLN. In particular, cases were considered positive when >10% of metastatic cell showed cytoplasmatic and/or membrane CXCR4 expression. Slides were evaluated by two blinded observers (G.B. and R.F.); discordant cases were discussed and concordance was then achieved.

Statistical Analysis. Correlations between CXCR4 expression, baseline patient features, and tumors were studied by contingency tables and the {chi}2 test. DFS was defined as the time elapsed from the date of the initial diagnosis to the appearance of local relapse or distant metastasis or death, whichever occurred first. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time elapsed from the date of the initial diagnosis to death or to the date of the last available information on vital status. Kaplan-Meier product limit method was applied to draw DFS and OS curves. Univariate analysis was done with the log-rank test. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to analyze the effect of several risk factors on DFS and OS. The probability of the end point (hazard) was estimated with a coefficient: exp(b). The quantity exp(b) can be interpreted as the instantaneous relative risk of an event, at any time, for an individual with the risk factor present compared with an individual with the risk factor absent, given both individuals are the same on all other covariates. Risk factors (covariates) were considered dichotomous (male versus female, age < 70 versus age ≥ 70, ulceration versus no ulceration, SLN involved versus SLN not involved, Breslow ≤ 2.00 mm versus >2.00 mm, CXCR4 absent versus CXCR4 expressed). Ninety-five percent confidence intervals (95% CI) of hazard ratios are also reported.


   RESULTS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Patient's Features. From 1996 to 2003, 71 specimens from surgically resected primary cutaneous malignant melanomas with Breslow tumor thickness >1 mm were tested for the CXCR4 expression. All resections and SLN biopsies were done by the same surgical team (Surgical Oncology B, National Cancer Institute of Naples). Three patients referred to our center only at the moment of the diagnosis and there was no adequate follow-up to allow time-to-event analysis. Characteristics of all patients and primitive melanoma are summarized in Table 1. Overall, 31 of 71 tumors (43.6%) expressed CXCR4. Median age was 53 years; 14 patients ages ≥70 years. Genders were equally represented. Melanomas located in the trunk or extremities accounted for 61.9% and 29.5% of the cases, respectively. Twenty-nine patients (40.8%) had Breslow tumor thickness >1.00 and ≤ 2.00 mm, 26 (36.6%) patients >2.00 and <4.00 mm, and 16 patients >4.00 mm. Clark level was II in one case (1.4%), III in 24 cases (33.8%), and IV in 46 cases (64.7%). Ulceration was present in 33 cases (46.5%) and nodular appearance in 32 lesions (45.1%). Twenty-five SLNs (35.3%) were infiltrated by malignant melanoma; in particular, 12 were micrometastasis. No correlation was found between CXCR4 expression and clinicopathologic characteristics.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1 Patient characteristics

 
CXCR4 Expression in Primary Melanoma: Pattern of Expression. Out of 71 melanoma specimens tested for the CXCR4 expression 31 (43.7%) stained positive for CXCR4. The positive cases were divided into three score classes according to their staining: low in 15 cases (48%), moderate in 10 (32%), and high in 6 (19%). Figure 1 shows representative positive staining of human melanoma (A-F) and sentinel lymph nodes (G and H). In all melanoma specimens, normal skin tissue resulted in negative staining. Melanoma samples showed mainly a subepidermal expression (Fig. 1A and B; high and low expression group, respectively). A small subgroup of 10 of 31 positive cases expressed CXCR4 also in the vertical growth phase (Fig. 1C and D; high and low expression group, respectively). Different cellular localization of CXCR4 were detected; the staining was cytoplasmic (Fig. 1E) and/or membrane (Fig. 1F). The staining mainly involved cytoplasms. In a few cases, CXCR4 was exclusively detected at the membrane level (8 of 31, 25%). CXCR4 expression was detected in involved lymph nodes in both diffuse metastasis (Fig. 1G) and micrometastatis (Fig. 1H).



View larger version (140K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 1 CXCR4 expression in primary melanoma and SLN metastases. CXCR4 immunohistochemical staining in malignant melanoma (A-F). Subepidermal areas: high expression, 200x (A) and low expression, 200x (B). CXCR4 expression in vertical growth face: high expression, 100x (C) and low expression, 100x (D). CXCR4 expression at cytoplasmatic localization (E, 600x). Cytoplasmic and/or membrane expression (F, 400x). CXCR4 immunohistochemical staining in sentinel lymph node metastasis (G, H). CXCR4 staining in macrometastasis (G, 100x) and micrometastases (H, 200x).

 
CXCR4 Expression: Correlation with Outcome. At the time of this analysis, after a median follow-up for alive patients of 38 months, 25 patients progressed, and 19 died. Univariate analysis of prognostic factors for DFS and OS is summarized in Table 2. SLN metastases, presence of ulceration and CXCR4 expression had a significant prognostic value for DFS and OS. The predictive ability of ulceration and CXCR4 expression for DFS, and of SLN metastases and CXCR4 expression for OS were confirmed by a multivariate analysis Table 3) adjusted by age, sex, Breslow, SLN status, presence of ulceration, and CXCR4 expression. Graphic pattern of Kaplan-Meier estimated curves (Fig. 2A and B) suggest that prognosis is unfavorable for patients expressing CXCR4. For CXCR4-positive tumors median DFS and OS were 22 and 35 months, respectively; and hazard ratios of relapse and death as compared with patients with CXCR4-negative tumors of 2.5 (95% CI, 1.2-6.1) and 3.1 (95% CI, 1.1-7.2).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2 Univariable analysis

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3 Multivariable analysis

 


View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 2 CXCR4 expression: correlation with outcome. A, Kaplan-Meier DFS; B, OS curves for patients with malignant melanoma according to CXCR4 expression [negative (CXCR4–); low (CXCR4+); moderate (CXCR4++); high (CXCR4+++)].

 
Lymph node spreading represents the most common way of metastasis in malignant melanoma. Expression of CXCR4 in SLN biopsies was done in 56 of 71 primary melanoma. As described, 25 SLNs were infiltrated by melanoma. CXCR4 expression was detected in 10 of 17 (58.8%) evaluable and melanoma-positive SLNs.


   DISCUSSION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
In the present study, we investigated the potential role of CXCR4 as a prognostic factor in human melanoma. CXCR4 expression was detected in 31 of 71 primary cutaneous melanoma selected to have a Breslow > 1 and in 10 of 17 evaluable melanoma involved lymph nodes. Interestingly, the expression of CXCR4 was able to predict the prognosis and this ability holds true both for DFS (P = 0.0154) and OS (P = 0.0009). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report demonstrating the prognostic role for CXCR4 in malignant melanoma.

It has been postulated that organ specific metastasis might be governed, in part, by interactions between chemokine receptors on cancer cells with metastatic potential and chemokine gradients in target organs (26). Melanoma cell lines express functional chemokine receptors CCR7, CXCR3, CCR10, and CXCR4 which are able to activate cell motility during invasion, cell proliferation, and survival (23–25). CXCR4 staining mainly involved cytoplasms. In a few cases, CXCR4 was exclusively detected at the membrane level (8 of 31, 25%). It is noteworthy that four of eight patients showing a specific membrane staining died at the observation time point (38 months of follow-up). However, we will not approach any conclusions since the number of examined events is too small. The cytoplasmatic detection of the CXCR4 receptor was previously described in cancers of the breast (29), lung (30), colon (31–33), prostate (34), pancreas (9), and in CD34+ hematopoietic cells (35). It might represent a functional status of the receptor because the binding to the specific ligand induce receptor internalization (36) and specific signals are required in order to express CXCR4 on cell surface (22).

The presence of metastasis in the SLN is important for staging and prognosis (1, 2). The metastatic potential of primary melanoma is considerably higher than that of other primary solid tumors when comparing the size of primary lesion. Malignant melanoma metastasizes frequently to regional tumor-draining lymph nodes, preferentially via the lymphatics. Notably, only 8 of 27 melanomas with Breslow between 1 and 2 mm (T2 tumors at tumor-node-metastasis, American Joint Committee on Cancer 2002 staging system) relapsed in lymph nodes; six out of these tumors expressed CXCR4. These observations might suggest that thin melanomas CXCR4-positive cells are more prone to move toward the draining lymph node. Previous reports described a correlation between CXCR4 expression and lymph node metastasis in 79 surgically resected invasive ductal carcinomas (29) and with clinical outcome in 61 patients with completely resected non–small cell lung cancer (30). In melanoma-forced expression of CXCR4 in B16 melanoma cells enhances pulmonary metastasis, but metastasis to lymph nodes, liver, or kidney are not affected (25). Interestingly, we detected CXCR4 expression in 10 of 17 evaluable melanoma involved lymph nodes; only seven involved lymph nodes derived from primary melanoma expressed CXCR4 suggesting a role of other chemokine receptors such as CCR7 (27) and CXCR3 (28) in lymph node metastasis.

Our data show that the higher the expression of CXCR4 the worst the prognosis of patients supporting the inhibition of CXCR4 as a possible therapeutic target in melanoma. Blocking anti-CXCR4 monoclonal antibody (4) or to inhibitory peptide (37) specifically inhibited metastasis to the lungs in breast cancer models. Inhibition of the CXCR4/CXCL12 axis was previously studied since CXCR4 plays an important role in HIV type-1 (HIV-1) infection (38, 39) . AMD3100 is a byciclam noncompetitive antagonist of CXCL12 binding to CXCR4. Rubin showed that systemic administration of AMD3100 inhibits intracranial growth of glioblastoma and medulloblastoma xenograft increasing apoptosis and decreasing cell proliferation (40). AMD3100 seemed safe and effective in patients affected by multiple myeloma and NHL aimed to induce a rapid mobilization of CD34+ cells (41). Other than AMD3100 several CXCR4 inhibitors are already available (4, 37–42). Recently, a single treatment with a microcapsule containing a CXCR4 antagonist, (4F-benzoyl-TE14011-PLA) was showed to suppress pulmonary metastasis of murine melanoma (42). The expression of the receptor at the protein and at the RNA levels in melanoma cell line derived from patient samples will allow studies on testing of specific CXCR4 inhibitors.

Combating melanoma metastasis remains a major clinical challenge, and thus far results are disappointing. Having a molecular "diagnosis" in melanoma would permit identification of patients at high risk of relapse and death. CXCR4 inhibitors alone or in association with other biological agents targeting enhanced proliferation, increased resistance to apoptosis and increased cell migration may provide therapeutic alternatives and/or support to conventional cytotoxic therapies. Our results are consistent with the hypotesis that the CXCR4/CXCL12 pathway activation could promote tumor progression.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank the Melanoma Cooperative Group of Naples: Aprea P., Ascierto P.A., Ayala F., Beneduce G., Bosco L., Botti G., Caracò C., Castello G., Celentano E., Chiofalo M.G., Comella G., Daponte A., De Marco M.R., Graziano F., Leonardi E., Lombardi M.L., Marfella A., Montella M., Mori S., Mozzillo N., Napolitano M., Peluso G.F., Perrone F., Pirozzi G., Satriano S.M.R., Scala S., and Tatangelo F. (National Cancer Institute, G. Pascale, Naples, Italy); Satriano R.A., Vozza A., Ruocco V (2nd University of Naples, Italy); Palmieri G. [Division of Cancer Genetics, ICB-Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Alghero (SS), Italy]; Cossu A., Tanda F. (University of Sassari, Italy); Dr. M.R. Ventura for data management; and J. Bryce for technical assistance.


   FOOTNOTES
 
Grant support: Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Note: S. Scala and A. Ottaiano contributed equally.

Received 9/14/04; revised 12/ 3/04; accepted 12/13/04.


   REFERENCES
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Jemal A, Devesa SS, Hartge P, Tucker MA. Recent trends in cutaneous melanoma incidence among Whites in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:678–83.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Soong SJ, et al. Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3635–48.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Murphy PM. Chemokines and the molecular basis of cancer metastasis. N Engl J Med 2001;345:833–5.[Free Full Text]
  4. Muller A, Homey B, Soto H, et al. Involvement of chemokine receptors in breast cancer metastasis. Nature 2001;410:50–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. Bachelder RE, Wendt MA, Mercurio AM. Vascular endothelial growth factor promotes breast carcinoma invasion in an autocrine manner by regulating the chemokine receptor CXCR4. Cancer Res 2002;62:7203–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Kijima T, Maulik G, Ma PC, et al. Regulation of cellular proliferation, cytoskeletal function, and signal transduction through CXCR4 and c-Kit in small cell lung cancer cells. Cancer Res 2002;62:6304–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Scotton C, Milliken D, Wilson J, Raju S, Balkwill F. Analysis of CC chemokine and chemokine receptor expression in solid ovarian tumours. Br J Cancer 2001;85:891–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
  8. Scotton CJ, Wilson JL, Scott K, et al. Multiple actions of the chemokine CXCL12 on epithelial tumour cells in human ovarian cancer. Cancer Res 2002;62:5930–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Koshiba T, Hosotani R, Miyamoto Y, et al. Expression of stromal cell-derived factor 1 and CXCR4 ligand receptor system in pancreatic cancer: a possible role for tumour progression. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:3530–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Bertolini F, Dell'Agnola C, Mancuso P, et al. CXCR4 neutralization, a novel therapeutic approach for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Cancer Res 2002;62:3106–12.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Corcione A, Ottonello L, Tortolina G, et al. Stromal cell-derived factor 1 as a chemoattractant for follicular center lymphoma B cells. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:628–35.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Arai J, Yasukawa M, Yakushijin Y, Miyazaki T, Fujita S. Stromal cells in lymph nodes attract B lymphoma cells via production of stromal cell-derived factor-1. Eur J Haematol 2000;64:323–32.[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Geminder H, Sagi-Assif O, Goldberg L, et al. A possible role for CXCR4 and its ligand, the CXC chemokine stromal cell-derived factor-1, in the development of bone marrow metastases in neuroblastoma. J Immunol 2001;167:4747–57.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Rempel SA, Dudas S, Ge S, Gutierrez JA. Identification and localization of the cytokine SDF1 and its receptor, CXC chemokine receptor 4, to regions of necrosis and angiogenesis in human glioblastoma. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:102–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Barbero S, Bonavia R, Bajetto A, et al. Stromal cell-derived factor 1a stimulates human glioblastoma cell growth through the activation of both extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2 and Akt. Cancer Res 2003;63:1969–74.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Schrader AJ, Lechner O, Templin M, et al. CXCR4/CXCL12 expression and signalling in kidney cancer. Br J Cancer 2002;86:1250–56.[CrossRef][Medline]
  17. Aust G, Steinert M, Kiessling S, Kamprad M, Simchen C. Reduced expression of stromal-derived factor 1 in autonomous thyroid adenomas and its regulation in thyroid derived cells. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001;86:3368–74.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Hwang JH, Hwang JH, Chung HK, et al. CXC chemokine receptor 4 expression and function in human anaplastic thyroid cancer cells. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;88:408–16.
  19. Castellone MD, Guarino V, De Falco V, et al. Functional expression of the CXCR4 chemokine receptor is induced by RET/PTC oncogenes and is a common event in human papillary thyroid carcinomas. Oncogene 2004;23:5958–67.[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Libura J, Drukala J, Majka M, et al. CXCR4-SDF-1 signaling is active in rhabdomyosarcoma cells and regulates locomotion, chemotaxis, and adhesion. Blood 2002;100:2597–606.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Taichman RS, Cooper C, Keller ET, Pienta KJ, Taichman NS, McCauley LK. Use of the stromal cell-derived factor-1/CXCR4 pathway in prostate cancer metastasis to bone. Cancer Res 2002;62:1832–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Zeelenberg IS, Ruuls-Van Stalle L, Roos E. The chemokine receptor CXCR4 is required for outgrowth of colon carcinoma micrometastases. Cancer Res 2003;63:3833–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Robledo MM, Bartolome RA, Longo N, et al. Expression of functional chemokine receptors CXCR3 and CXCR4 on human melanoma cells. J Biol Chem 2001;276:45098–105.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Bartolome RA, Galvez BG, Longo N, et al. Stromal cell-derived factor-1{alpha} promotes melanoma cell invasion across basement membranes involving stimulation of membrane-type 1 matrix metalloproteinase and Rho GTPase activities. Cancer Res 2004;64:2534–43.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Murakami T, Maki W, Cardones AR, et al. Expression of CXC chemokine receptor-4 enhances the pulmonary metastatic potential of murine B16 melanoma cells. Cancer Res 2002;62:7328–34.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Balkwill F. Cancer and the chemokine network. Nat Rev Cancer 2004;4:540–50.[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Takeuchi H, Fujimoto A, Tanaka M, Yamano T, Hsueh E, Hoon DSB. CCL21 chemokine regulates chemokine receptor CCR7 bearing malignant melanoma cells. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:2351–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Kawada K, Sonoshita M, Sakashita H, et al. Pivotal role of CXCR3 in melanoma cell metastasis to lymph nodes. Cancer Res 2004;64:4010–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Kato M, Kitayama J, Kazama S, Nagawa H. Expression pattern of CXC chemokine receptor-4 is correlated with lymph node metastasis in human invasive ductal carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res 2003;5:144–50.
  30. Spano JP, Andre F, Morat L, et al. Chemokine receptor CXCR4 and early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: pattern of expression and correlation with outcome. Ann Oncol 2004;15:613–17.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Jordan NJ, Kolios G, Abbot SE, et al. Expression of functional CXCR4 chemokine receptors on human colonic epithelial cells. J Clin Invest 1999;104:1061–69.[Medline]
  32. Dwinell MB, Eckmann L, Leopard JD, Varki NM, Kagnoff MF. Chemokine receptor expression by human intestinal epithelial cells. Gastroenterology 1999;117:359–67.[CrossRef][Medline]
  33. Ottaiano A, di Palma A, Napoletano M, et al. Inhibitory effects of anti-CXCR4 antibodies on human colon cancer cells. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2005. In press.
  34. Mochizuki H, Matsubara A, Teishima J, et al. Interaction of ligand-receptor system between stromal-cell-derived factor-1 and CXC chemokine receptor 4 in human prostate cancer: a possible predictor of metastasis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2004;320:656–63.[CrossRef][Medline]
  35. Zhang Y, Foudi A, Geay JF, et al. Intracellular localization and constitutive endocytosis of CXCR4 in human CD34+ hematopoietic progenitor cells. Stem Cells 2004;22:1015–29.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Roland J, Murphy BJ, Ahr B, et al. Role of the intracellular domains of CXCR4 in SDF-1-mediated signaling. Blood 2003;101:399–406.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Liang Z, Wu T, Lou H, et al. Inhibition of breast cancer metastasis by selective synthetic polypeptide against CXCR4. Cancer Res 2004;64:4302–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Juarez J, Bendall L, Bradstock K. Chemokines and their receptors as therapeutic targets: the role of the SDF-1/CXCR4 axis. Curr Pharm Des 2004;10:1245–59.[CrossRef][Medline]
  39. Seibert C, Sakmar TP. Small-molecule antagonists of CCR5 and CXCR4: a promising new class of anti-HIV-1 drugs. Curr Pharm Des 2004;10:2041–62.[CrossRef][Medline]
  40. Rubin JB, Kung AL, Klein RS, et al. A small-molecule antagonist of CXCR4 inhibits intracranial growth of primary brain tumours. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100:13513–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Devine SM, Flomenberg N, Vesole DH, et al. Rapid mobilization of CD34+ cells following administration of the CXCR4 antagonist AMD3100 to patients with multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1095–102.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Takenaga M, Tamamura H, Hiramatsu K, et al. A single treatment with microcapsules containing a CXCR4 antagonist suppresses pulmonary metastasis of murine melanoma. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2004;320:226–32.[CrossRef][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
I. Molina-Ortiz, R. A. Bartolome, P. Hernandez-Varas, G. P. Colo, and J. Teixido
Overexpression of E-cadherin on Melanoma Cells Inhibits Chemokine-promoted Invasion Involving p190RhoGAP/p120ctn-dependent Inactivation of RhoA
J. Biol. Chem., May 29, 2009; 284(22): 15147 - 15157.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
S. Yanagisawa, I. Kadouchi, K. Yokomori, M. Hirose, M. Hakozaki, H. Hojo, K. Maeda, E. Kobayashi, and T. Murakami
Identification and Metastatic Potential of Tumor-Initiating Cells in Malignant Rhabdoid Tumor of the Kidney
Clin. Cancer Res., May 1, 2009; 15(9): 3014 - 3022.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
B. E. G. Rothberg, M. B. Bracken, and D. L. Rimm
Tissue Biomarkers for Prognosis in Cutaneous Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
J Natl Cancer Inst, April 1, 2009; 101(7): 452 - 474.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
R. A. Bartolome, S. Ferreiro, M. E. Miquilena-Colina, L. Martinez-Prats, M. L. Soto-Montenegro, D. Garcia-Bernal, J. J. Vaquero, R. Agami, R. Delgado, M. Desco, et al.
The Chemokine Receptor CXCR4 and the Metalloproteinase MT1-MMP Are Mutually Required during Melanoma Metastasis to Lungs
Am. J. Pathol., February 1, 2009; 174(2): 602 - 612.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Molecular Cancer TherapeuticsHome page
S. Singh, V. C. Bond, M. Powell, U. P. Singh, H. L. Bumpers, W. E. Grizzle, and J. W. Lillard Jr.
CXCR4-gp120-IIIB interactions induce caspase-mediated apoptosis of prostate cancer cells and inhibit tumor growth
Mol. Cancer Ther., January 1, 2009; 8(1): 178 - 184.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
F. Diomedi-Camassei, H. P. McDowell, M. A. De Ioris, S. Uccini, P. Altavista, G. Raschella, R. Vitali, O. Mannarino, L. De Sio, D. A. Cozzi, et al.
Clinical Significance of CXC Chemokine Receptor-4 and c-Met in Childhood Rhabdomyosarcoma
Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2008; 14(13): 4119 - 4127.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
J. Meijer, J. Ogink, B. Kreike, D. Nuyten, K. E. de Visser, and E. Roos
The Chemokine Receptor CXCR6 and Its Ligand CXCL16 Are Expressed in Carcinomas and Inhibit Proliferation
Cancer Res., June 15, 2008; 68(12): 4701 - 4708.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
F. F. Amersi, A. M. Terando, Y. Goto, R. A. Scolyer, J. F. Thompson, A. N. Tran, M. B. Faries, D. L. Morton, and D. S.B. Hoon
Activation of CCR9/CCL25 in Cutaneous Melanoma Mediates Preferential Metastasis to the Small Intestine
Clin. Cancer Res., February 1, 2008; 14(3): 638 - 645.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann OncolHome page
N Cabioglu, Y Gong, R Islam, K. Broglio, N Sneige, A Sahin, A. Gonzalez-Angulo, P Morandi, C Bucana, G. Hortobagyi, et al.
Expression of growth factor and chemokine receptors: new insights in the biology of inflammatory breast cancer
Ann. Onc., June 1, 2007; 18(6): 1021 - 1029.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.Home page
I. Kryczek, S. Wei, E. Keller, R. Liu, and W. Zou
Stroma-derived factor (SDF-1/CXCL12) and human tumor pathogenesis
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, March 1, 2007; 292(3): C987 - C995.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nutr Clin PractHome page
R. A. Siddiqui, K. A. Harvey, G. P. Zaloga, and W. Stillwell
Modulation of Lipid Rafts by {Omega}-3 Fatty Acids in Inflammation and Cancer: Implications for Use of Lipids During Nutrition Support
Nutr Clin Pract, February 1, 2007; 22(1): 74 - 88.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
J. Meijer, I. S. Zeelenberg, B. Sipos, and E. Roos
The CXCR5 Chemokine Receptor Is Expressed by Carcinoma Cells and Promotes Growth of Colon Carcinoma in the Liver
Cancer Res., October 1, 2006; 66(19): 9576 - 9582.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Molecular Cancer TherapeuticsHome page
C.-h. Lee, T. Kakinuma, J. Wang, H. Zhang, D. C. Palmer, N. P. Restifo, and S. T. Hwang
Sensitization of B16 tumor cells with a CXCR4 antagonist increases the efficacy of immunotherapy for established lung metastases.
Mol. Cancer Ther., October 1, 2006; 5(10): 2592 - 2599.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Pathol.Home page
R Bauer, P J Wild, S Meyer, F Bataille, A Pauer, M Klinkhammer-Schalke, F Hofstaedter, and A K Bosserhoff
Prognostic relevance of P-cadherin expression in melanocytic skin tumours analysed by high-throughput tissue microarrays
J. Clin. Pathol., July 1, 2006; 59(7): 699 - 705.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
A. Ottaiano, R. Franco, A. Aiello Talamanca, G. Liguori, F. Tatangelo, P. Delrio, G. Nasti, E. Barletta, G. Facchini, B. Daniele, et al.
Overexpression of Both CXC Chemokine Receptor 4 and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Proteins Predicts Early Distant Relapse in Stage II-III Colorectal Cancer Patients.
Clin. Cancer Res., May 1, 2006; 12(9): 2795 - 2803.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
S. Scala, P. Giuliano, P. A. Ascierto, C. Ierano, R. Franco, M. Napolitano, A. Ottaiano, M. L. Lombardi, M. Luongo, E. Simeone, et al.
Human Melanoma Metastases Express Functional CXCR4
Clin. Cancer Res., April 15, 2006; 12(8): 2427 - 2433.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Leukoc. Biol.Home page
T. Kakinuma and S. T. Hwang
Chemokines, chemokine receptors, and cancer metastasis
J. Leukoc. Biol., April 1, 2006; 79(4): 639 - 651.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BloodHome page
J. A. Burger and T. J. Kipps
CXCR4: a key receptor in the crosstalk between tumor cells and their microenvironment
Blood, March 1, 2006; 107(5): 1761 - 1767.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
F. S. Hodi
Well-Defined Melanoma Antigens as Progression Markers for Melanoma: Insights into Differential Expression and Host Response Based on Stage
Clin. Cancer Res., February 1, 2006; 12(3): 673 - 678.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Cell Sci.Home page
H. Schabath, S. Runz, S. Joumaa, and P. Altevogt
CD24 affects CXCR4 function in pre-B lymphocytes and breast carcinoma cells
J. Cell Sci., January 15, 2006; 119(2): 314 - 325.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
R. A. Bartolome, I. Molina-Ortiz, R. Samaniego, P. Sanchez-Mateos, X. R. Bustelo, and J. Teixido
Activation of Vav/Rho GTPase Signaling by CXCL12 Controls Membrane-Type Matrix Metalloproteinase-Dependent Melanoma Cell Invasion
Cancer Res., January 1, 2006; 66(1): 248 - 258.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
I. Airoldi, L. Raffaghello, E. Piovan, C. Cocco, B. Carlini, A. Amadori, M. V. Corrias, and V. Pistoia
CXCL12 Does Not Attract CXCR4+ Human Metastatic Neuroblastoma Cells: Clinical Implications
Clin. Cancer Res., January 1, 2006; 12(1): 77 - 82.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Scala, S.
Right arrow Articles by Castello, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Scala, S.
Right arrow Articles by Castello, G.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online