Skip Navigation

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1996 88(19):1399-1404; doi:10.1093/jnci/88.19.1399
© 1996 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ding, I.
Right arrow Articles by Okunieff, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ding, I.
Right arrow Articles by Okunieff, P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 88, No. 19, 1399-1404, October 2, 1996
© 1996 Oxford University Press

Tumor Growth and Tumor Radiosensitivity in Mice Given Myeloprotective Doses of Fibroblast Growth Factors

Ivan Ding, Kundi Huang, Matthew L. Snyder, John Cook, Lurong Zhang, Nancy Wersto, Paul Okunieff

Radiation Oncology Branch, Division of Clinical Sciences, National Cancer Institute Bethesda, MD

Correspondence to: Paul Okunieff, M.D., National Institutes of Health, Bldg. 10, Rm. B3B69, Bethesda, MD 20892

BACKGROUND:: Radiation at doses high enough to cure cancer also frequently destroys normal tissue. Development of agents that protect normal tissue without also protecting diseased tissue has been difficult. In vivo radioprotection of bone marrow by acidic and basic fibroblast growth factors (FGF1 and FGF2, respectively) has recently been demonstrated after whole-body irradiation of C3H/HeN mice.

PURPOSE:: Our purpose was to determine whether myeloprotective doses of those growth factors also protect malignant tumors.

METHODS:: First, we investigated the effects of exogenous FGF1 or FGF2 (FGF1/2) administration (treatment group receiving two intravenous injections of 3 µg FGF1/2 per mouse 24 hours and 4 hours before local irradiation of right hind leg and control group receiving two intravenous injections of 0.1 mL of saline) on growth and radiosensitivity of three transplantable murine tumors (one squamous cell carcinoma [SCC-VII] and two sarcomas [KHT and Rif-1]), all of which were grown in C3H/HeN mice. We then evaluated the effect of FGF1/2 on tumor cell proliferation, cell cycle distribution, and pulmonary metastatic frequency in the mice. Specifically, survival studies were performed in mice treated with 0, 6, 6.5, 7.5, 8.5, 9, or 10 Gy whole-body irradiation with or without FGF2 (n = 250). Rif-1 (n = 40), KHT (n = 40), and SCC-VII (n = 40) tumors were implanted in the hind leg of mice, and mice were treated with FGF2 or saline when their tumor-bearing thighs were 9 mm in diameter. In separate experiments (treatment group receiving two injections of 3 µg each of FGF2 [6 µg total] either intravenously or intratumorally 24 hours and 4 hours before local tumor irradiation and control group receiving 0.1 mL saline), tumor growth was followed, and mice were killed to count lung metastases and measure tumor proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) and bromodeoxyuridine labeling at various times thereafter (three to eight mice per group). Tumor growth curves of untreated and irradiated tumors were determined with and without intravenous or intratumoral FGF1/2 in SCC-VII tumors (n = 120). Radiation doses to the tumor-bearing leg were 15 and 30 Gy for SCC-VII, 30 Gy for Rif-1, and 15 Gy for KHT. From each experiment, the mean (±1 standard error) was calculated from data obtained from three to 20 mice. Statistical tests used included two-tailed Student's t test, the chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test. All P values represent two-tailed tests of statistical significance.

RESULTS:: There was no statistically significant difference in tumor growth rate between FGF2-treated and saline-treated mice when FGF2 was administered intravenously at doses and schedules found to be optimally myeloprotective in whole-body irradiation experiments. Intravenous administration of FGF2 did not induce lung metastases, and it did not augment the S-phase fraction of tumor cells. Likewise, there was no evidence of enhanced cell proliferation as measured by PCNA-labeling index. Intratumoral injection of FGF1/2 did increase the size of SCC-VII tumors (P<.05 [Student's t test] at 3 days after treatment); however, the radiation response after intratumoral injection of growth factor was not compromised.

CONCLUSION:: Low intravenous doses of FGF1 or FGF2 appear to protect bone marrow from the toxic effects of radiation without increasing the rates of tumor growth or metastases or decreasing the radiosensitivity of tumors.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cardiovasc ResHome page
Z.-S. Jiang, W. Srisakuldee, F. Soulet, G. Bouche, and E. Kardami
Non-angiogenic FGF-2 protects the ischemic heart from injury, in the presence or absence of reperfusion
Cardiovasc Res, April 1, 2004; 62(1): 154 - 166.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
A. Matsuyama, H. Inoue, K. Shibuta, Y. Tanaka, G. F. Barnard, K. Sugimachi, and M. Mori
Hepatoma-derived Growth Factor Is Associated with Reduced Sensitivity to Irradiation in Esophageal Cancer
Cancer Res., August 1, 2001; 61(15): 5714 - 5717.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
L. A. Peña, Z. Fuks, and R. N. Kolesnick
Radiation-induced Apoptosis of Endothelial Cells in the Murine Central Nervous System: Protection by Fibroblast Growth Factor and Sphingomyelinase Deficiency
Cancer Res., January 1, 2000; 60(2): 321 - 327.
[Abstract] [Full Text]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.