Purpose: VEGF, EGF, and TGF-α are expressed in hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) and play a role in its growth. Vandetanib, a multikinase inhibitor, suppresses the phosphorylation of VEGF receptor 2 (VEGFR-2) and EGF receptor (EGFR). The aim of this study was to clarify the antitumor effect of vandetanib in mouse HCCs.

Experimental Design: We evaluated the effects of vandetanib on proliferation of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) and three hepatoma cell lines, as well as the phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR in these cells. Mice were implanted with hepatoma cells subcutaneously or orthotopically in the liver and treated with 50 or 75 mg/kg vandetanib. We analyzed the effects of treatment on tumor cell proliferation and apoptosis, vessel density, phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR, and production of VEGF, TGF-α, and EGF in tumor tissues. Adverse events on vandetanib administration were also investigated.

Results: Vandetanib suppressed phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 in HUVECs and EGFR in hepatoma cells and inhibited cell proliferation. In tumor-bearing mice, vandetanib suppressed phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR in tumor tissues, significantly reduced tumor vessel density, enhanced tumor cell apoptosis, suppressed tumor growth, improved survival, reduced number of intrahepatic metastases, and upregulated VEGF, TGF-α, and EGF in tumor tissues. Treatment with vandetanib was not associated with serious adverse events, including alanine aminotransferase abnormality, bone marrow suppression, or body weight loss.

Conclusions: The antitumor effects of vandetanib in mice suggest that it is a potentially suitable and safe chemotherapeutic agent for HCCs. Clin Cancer Res; 18(14); 3924–33. ©2012 AACR.

Translational Relevance

VEGF plays the significant role of vascular development in hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC). Recently, several clinical trials of molecular-targeted agents for advanced HCCs have been investigated. On the basis of their results, it has been proved that antiangiogenic agents such as sorafenib are effective for advanced HCCs. However, their efficacies are not fully satisfied yet. EGF receptor signaling is upregulated in HCCs. Vandetanib, a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is known to suppress the phosphorylation of EGF receptor and VEGF receptor-2 (VEGFR-2). Here, we show for the first time that vandetanib suppressed tumor growth, intrahepatic metastasis and prolonged the survival of mouse HCC model and that these effects are mainly mediated by inhibition of vascular formation. In addition, vandetanib was effective for enlarged mouse HCC model. These preclinical results suggest that vandetanib could be potentially useful for patients with advanced HCCs.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors in the tropics and the Far East, including Japan (1). Recently, in the SHARP trial, a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial established the efficacy of sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced HCCs (2, 3). It is known to suppress the activities of the Raf/mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal–regulated kinase (Raf/MEK/ERK) signaling pathway, tyrosine kinase VEGF receptor (VEGFR)-2, VEGFR-3, and platelet-derived growth factor receptor-β (PDGFR-β), in patients with advanced HCCs (4–6). However, the benefits of sorafenib are limited to prolongation of survival for only 3 months. Thus, other molecular target agents are required for the treatment of advanced HCCs.

Tumor growth and formation of metastases are dependent on the existence of adequate blood supply (7, 8).

In HCCs, the tumor tissue is supplied by blood from new arteries and the development of rich vasculature occurs in parallel with tumor development (9). VEGF plays a critical role in the process of angiogenesis (10, 11). VEGF is produced by hepatoma cells, hepatic stellate cells, and endothelial cells, and its expression level correlates with tumor growth (12). Hepatoma cells also produce EGF and TGF-α and express EGF receptor (EGFR; ref. 13). Increasing evidence has highlighted the importance of EGFR and its ligands EGF and TGF-α in hepatocarcinogenesis (14, 15).

Vandetanib (Zactima; ZD6474) is an orally bioavailable, small-molecule VEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor with additional activity against EGFR-tyrosine kinase and RET receptor tyrosine kinase (16). Therefore, vandetanib, in addition to inhibiting endothelial cell proliferation through the blockade of VEGF-induced signaling, can suppress tumor cell growth more directly through the blockade of EGFR autocrine signaling (17).

The present study was designed to assess the antitumor effects and adverse effects of vandetanib in mouse HCC models.

Reagents, cells, and animals

We used 3 hepatoma cell lines, HAK1-B, HuH-7, and KYN-2. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) and HuH-7 were obtained from CAMBREX Bio Science Walkersville Inc. KYN-2 (18) and HAK1-B (19) were obtained from the Department of Pathology of our university. Male 5-week-old nude mice (BALB/c nu/nu; Kyudo KK.) and mice with severe-combined immunodeficiency (SCID; CB-7/1cr, Kyudo KK.) were acclimatized and placed in separate cages. All animals received humane care according to the guideline of the NIH for the Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. The experimental protocol was approved by the Laboratory Animal Care and Use Committee of Kurume University (Fukuoka, Japan).

In vitro inhibition of cell proliferation by vandetanib

Approximately 1,000 HUVECs in 200 μL of endothelial cell growth medium-2 (EGM-2) medium (EGM-2 Bullet Kit; Clonetics) supplemented with 5% FBS were added to each well of 96-well plastic dishes and incubated at 37°C for 24 hours. The medium was replaced with 200 μL of EBM-2 with 5% FBS containing various concentrations of vandetanib (0, 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 10.0 μmol/L). After incubation for 30 minutes, VEGF (3 ng/mL) was added. In another experiment, approximately 1,000 hepatoma cells in 200 μL of Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium (DMEM; Gibco Invitrogen Cell Culture) supplemented with 10% FBS were added to each well of 96-well plastic dishes and incubated at 37°C for 24 hours. The medium was replaced with 200 μL of medium containing various concentrations of vandetanib (0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 μmol/L). After incubation for 72 hours, cell proliferation was measured by a tetrazolium-based assay (Cell Count Reagent SF; Nacalai Tesque Inc.). Then, we conducted cell-cycle analysis of 3 hepatoma cell lines by flow cytometry. After incubation for 72 hours with vandetanib (0, 10 μmol/L), the floating and attached cells were harvested and washed with PBS. The DNA content was assessed by staining ethanol-fixed cells with propidium iodide and monitoring by FACSCalibur (Becton Dickinson). The percentage of cells in the sub-G0/G1 population was determined using CellQuest software (BD).

Western blotting

HUVECs were cultured in serum-free and VEGF-free medium, and hepatoma cells were cultured in serum-free medium for 12 hours. HUVECs were treated with various concentrations of vandetanib (0, 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 μmol/L) for 60 minutes and then incubated with VEGF (0, 50 ng/mL) for 5 minutes. Hepatoma cells were treated with vandetanib (0, 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 μmol/L) for 60 minutes and then incubated with EGF (0, 100 ng/mL) for 5 minutes. Total cell protein (50 μg) and tissue lysates were run on 10% SDS-PAGE and transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes. The membranes were incubated overnight at 4°C with rabbit anti-phosphorylated VEGFR-2 antibody (Ty1175; Cell Signaling Technology Inc.), rabbit anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (Calbiochem-Novabiochem Corporation), rabbit anti-phosphorylated EGFR (Ty1173; Cell Signaling Technology Inc.), rabbit anti-EGFR (Cell Signaling Technology), rabbit anti-VEGF antibody (Abcam Japan), rat anti-EGF antibody (Monosan), rabbit anti-TGF-α antibody (Abcam Japan), and mouse anti-actin antibody (Sigma-Aldrich, Inc.). Each antibody was diluted 500-fold. After incubation with secondary donkey anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated IgG (dilution, 1:10,000 dilution; GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences GK), anti-rat HRP-conjugated mouse IgM (dilution, 1:2,000; Zymed Laboratories), or donkey anti-mouse HRP-conjugated IgG (dilution, 1:5,000; GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences GK) for 1 hour, immunoreactive bands were stained by an enhanced chemiluminescence Western blot analysis system (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).

Protocols of tumor growth studies of subcutaneous tumor models

Tumor cells (5 × 106) were injected subcutaneously into the dorsal side in nude mice. The tumor-bearing mice were randomly divided into PBS-treated group (n = 6) and vandetanib-treated groups (n = 6). Treatment was initiated when the average size of the tumor reached 50 to 100 mm3; the tumor-bearing mice were orally administered PBS or vandetanib (50 or 75 mg/kg) every day. To evaluate the antitumor effect of vandetanib in mice bearing large tumors of HuH-7 (>500 mm3), the mice received PBS (n = 6) or vandetanib (75 mg/kg; n = 6). Two dimensions of the tumor were measured by calipers every 3 days, and the tumor volume was calculated by the equation: length × width2 × 0.52.

Protocols of growth, survival, and intrahepatic metastases studies of liver tumor models

For tumor growth studies, nude mice were injected with KYN-2 into the liver. The mice were randomly divided into PBS-treated group (n = 6) and vandetanib-treated groups (50 mg/kg, n = 6; 75 mg/kg, n = 6). After 7 days, the mice were treated orally with vandetanib every day for 3 weeks. They were subsequently sacrificed at day 28, and tumor volume was evaluated.

For survival studies, KYN-2 cells were implanted into another group of 12 nude mice, which were then randomly divided into PBS-treated group (n = 6) and vandetanib-treated group (75 mg/kg; n = 6). Mice were sacrificed according to the clinical signs of weakness, anorexia, or more than 20% weight loss.

To evaluate intrahepatic metastasis, 2 × 106 KYN-2 cells were implanted into the liver of SCID mice. The mice were then randomly divided into PBS-treated group (n = 6) and vandetanib-treated group (75 mg/kg; n = 6). Administration of vandetanib for 3 weeks was followed by counting the number of intrahepatic nodules.

Assessment of vascular density, proliferation activity, and apoptotic index in tumor tissues of liver tumor model

The sections of liver tumor tissues were incubated with rabbit anti-mouse CD31 antibody (dilution, 1:100; Abcam Japan) and rabbit anti-PCNA antibody (dilution, 1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.) at 4°C overnight. Then, the sections were incubated with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated (dilution, 1:100) or EnVision+System-HRP-labeled polymer anti-rabbit (Dako Japan). The sections were also examined for apoptosis of tumor cells by terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase–mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) staining with In Situ Apoptosis detection kit (Oncor). The numbers of CD31-positive blood vessels in tumor tissues were counted in 50 blindly selected random fields (z-series, ×63 oil magnification). Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)- and TUNEL-positive cells among 1,000 hepatoma cells were counted in 28 blindly selected random fields.

Measurement of serum levels of α-fetoprotein, vandetanib, alanine aminotransferase, bone marrow functions, and body weight

Serum α-fetoprotein (AFP) levels were measured at the time of sacrifice in tumor-bearing mice. Serum levels of vandetanib were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) at the time of sacrifice. We also determined leukocyte and platelet counts, hemoglobin (Hb) levels, and serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels. Body weight was evaluated at the start of treatment and at sacrifice.

Statistical analysis

All data were expressed as mean ± SD. Differences between groups were examined for statistical significance using the Mann–Whitney U test, the Kruskal–Wallis rank test, and the log-rank test. A P value less than 0.05 denoted the presence of a statistically significant difference.

Vandetanib inhibits endothelial cell and hepatoma cell proliferation

Vandetanib suppressed cell proliferation of HUVECs (IC50 = 7.1 μmol/L) from 0.01 μmol/L of vandetanib in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 1A). It also suppressed cell proliferation of the human hepatoma cell line (HAK1-B; IC50 = 10.0 μmol/L) in a dose-dependent manner from 0.05 μmol/L of vandetanib (Supplementary Fig. S1A). Vandetanib also suppressed the proliferation of KYN-2 cells (IC50 = 8.1 μmol/L) and HuH-7 cells (IC50 = 9.4 μmol/L) from 5 to 10 μmol/L of vandetanib (Supplementary Fig. S1B and S1C). The rates of apoptosis of vandetanib-treated hepatoma cells (HAK1-B, 74.3%; KYN-2, 41.8%; HuH-7, 62.5%) were higher than those of nontreated hepatoma cells (HAK1-B, 20.4%; KYN-2, 10.7%; HuH-7, 31.3%; Fig. 1B).

Figure 1.

Inhibitory effects of vandetanib on cell proliferation, and phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR. A, HUVECs were cultured with a medium containing vandetanib, FBS, and VEGF. Seventy-two hours later, cell proliferation was evaluated by the tetrazolium-based assay. B, hepatoma cells were cultured with a medium containing vandetanib (0, 10 μmol/L) and FBS. Seventy-two hours after incubation, ethanol-fixed floating and attached cells were stained with propidium iodide. Cell apoptosis and cell cycle were determined by flow cytometry. C, HUVECs were cultured in the medium containing vandetanib and VEGF. D, HAK1-B hepatoma cells were cultured in a medium containing vandetanib and EGF. Data are mean ± SD. *, P < 0.05, compared with the control by Kruskal–Wallis test; **, P < 0.05, compared with the control by Mann–Whitney U test. pEGFR, phosphorylated EGFR; pVEGFR-2, phosphorylated VEGFR-2.

Figure 1.

Inhibitory effects of vandetanib on cell proliferation, and phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR. A, HUVECs were cultured with a medium containing vandetanib, FBS, and VEGF. Seventy-two hours later, cell proliferation was evaluated by the tetrazolium-based assay. B, hepatoma cells were cultured with a medium containing vandetanib (0, 10 μmol/L) and FBS. Seventy-two hours after incubation, ethanol-fixed floating and attached cells were stained with propidium iodide. Cell apoptosis and cell cycle were determined by flow cytometry. C, HUVECs were cultured in the medium containing vandetanib and VEGF. D, HAK1-B hepatoma cells were cultured in a medium containing vandetanib and EGF. Data are mean ± SD. *, P < 0.05, compared with the control by Kruskal–Wallis test; **, P < 0.05, compared with the control by Mann–Whitney U test. pEGFR, phosphorylated EGFR; pVEGFR-2, phosphorylated VEGFR-2.

Close modal

Vandetanib inhibits phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR

Vandetanib (at both 5 and 10 μmol/L) significantly inhibited VEGFR-2 phosphorylation in HUVECs (Fig. 1C). Although vandetanib (at 1–10 μmol/L) suppressed EGFR phosphorylation in the 3 hepatoma cell lines (Fig. 1D; Supplementary Fig. S2A and S2B), it did not affect the expression of total VEGFR-2 and EGFR in the same cells.

Vandetanib inhibits tumor growth of hepatoma cells in subcutaneous tumor model

In the HuH-7 xenograft model, the tumor volumes at baseline of the PBS group and 50 and 75 mg/kg vandetanib groups were 63.5 ± 11.9, 70.3 ± 16.2, and 72.3 ± 11.6 mm3, respectively. After 3 weeks of treatment, the respective tumor volumes were 4,704.7 ± 2,205.4, 773.4 ± 458.5, and 279.4 ± 91.9 mm3, respectively (Fig. 2A). In another experiment, treatment commenced when tumor volume was more than 500 mm3. Before treatment, the tumor volumes were 570.0 ± 95.6 mm3 and 614.5 ± 169.2 mm3 in the PBS and 75 mg/kg vandetanib groups, respectively. After 15 days of treatment, the respective tumor volumes were 2,491.1 ± 1,451.9 and 572.2 ± 441.5 mm3 (Fig. 2B).

Figure 2.

Serial changes in tumor growth induced by treatment with vandetanib in mice carrying subcutaneously implanted human hepatoma cell tumors. Mean ± SD tumor volume is expressed as percentage of the control (n = 6 per group). A, HuH-7 cells: treatment commenced when tumor volume was 50 to 100 mm3. *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test. B, HuH-7: treatment commenced when tumor volume was more than 500 mm3 to evaluate antitumor effect of vandetanib on enlarge tumors. *, P <0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test. (C) HAK1-B and (D) KYN-2: treatment commenced when tumor was 50 to 100 mm3. *, P <0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test.

Figure 2.

Serial changes in tumor growth induced by treatment with vandetanib in mice carrying subcutaneously implanted human hepatoma cell tumors. Mean ± SD tumor volume is expressed as percentage of the control (n = 6 per group). A, HuH-7 cells: treatment commenced when tumor volume was 50 to 100 mm3. *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test. B, HuH-7: treatment commenced when tumor volume was more than 500 mm3 to evaluate antitumor effect of vandetanib on enlarge tumors. *, P <0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test. (C) HAK1-B and (D) KYN-2: treatment commenced when tumor was 50 to 100 mm3. *, P <0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test.

Close modal

In the HAK1-B xenograft model, the tumor volumes before treatment of the PBS and 50 mg/kg vandetanib groups were 68.8 ± 12.2 and 75.6 ± 15.4 mm3, respectively. After 3 weeks, the respective tumor volumes were 461.4 ± 134.9 and 169.8 ± 37.8 mm3 (Fig. 2C). In the KYN-2 xenograft model, the tumor volumes before treatment of the PBS and 50 mg/kg vandetanib groups were 56.7 ± 12.0 and 62.6 ± 13.3 mm3, respectively, which increased at 3 weeks after the treatment to 10,092.9 ± 7,795.3 and 1,434.4 ± 903.1 mm3, respectively (Fig. 2D).

Vandetanib inhibits tumor growth and phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and EGFR

In mice implanted with KYN-2 cells, tumor volume showed a significant inverse relationship with the dose of administered vandetanib (PBS group, 2,137.4 ± 873.3 mm3; 50 mg/kg vandetanib group, 928.9 ± 515.5 mm3; 75 mg/kg vandetanib group, 295.5 ± 427.6 mm3; Fig. 3A; Supplementary Fig. S3A). Serum AFP levels were 50,567 ± 11,300 and 16,540 ± 14,297 ng/mL in the PBS and 75 mg/kg vandetanib groups, respectively (Supplementary Fig. S3B). In tumor-bearing mice treated with vandetanib, tumor tissues showed significant suppression of VEGFR-2 and EGFR phosphorylation (Fig. 3B and C). The production levels of VEGF, TGF-α, and EGF were significantly upregulated in the 50 and 75 mg/kg vandetanib-treated groups compared with the PBS-treated group (Fig. 3D).

Figure 3.

Vandetanib inhibits tumor growth in the liver in nude mice. A, comparison of tumor volume. Tumor volumes are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6 per group). *, P < 0.05, by Kruskal-Wallis test; **, P < 0.05, by Mann–Whitney U test compared with PBS-treated mice. B, expression of pVEGFR-2 and VEGFR-2. C, Expression of pEGFR and EGFR. D, expression of VEGF, TGF-α, and EGF. Tissue lysate protein (50 μg) was run on 10% SDS-PAGE. pEGFR, phosphorylated EGFR; pVEGFR-2; phosphorylated VEGFR-2.

Figure 3.

Vandetanib inhibits tumor growth in the liver in nude mice. A, comparison of tumor volume. Tumor volumes are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6 per group). *, P < 0.05, by Kruskal-Wallis test; **, P < 0.05, by Mann–Whitney U test compared with PBS-treated mice. B, expression of pVEGFR-2 and VEGFR-2. C, Expression of pEGFR and EGFR. D, expression of VEGF, TGF-α, and EGF. Tissue lysate protein (50 μg) was run on 10% SDS-PAGE. pEGFR, phosphorylated EGFR; pVEGFR-2; phosphorylated VEGFR-2.

Close modal

Vandetanib prolongs survival of tumor-bearing mice

The survival time ranged from 55 to 75 days (mean, 66.4 ± 8.6 days) in mice bearing tumors of KYN-2 treated with 75 mg/kg vandetanib. This was significantly longer than that of PBS-treated mice (range, 28–62 days; mean, 40.5 ± 11.7 days; Fig. 4A). However, all tumor-bearing mice ultimately died of tumor growth.

Figure 4.

Beneficial effects of vandetanib on the survival time and the intrahepatic metastasis in mice implanted with KYN-2 cells. A, Kaplan–Meier estimates of survival in mice treated with vandetanib (75 mg/kg) compared with those treated with PBS. The survival time was counted from the day of tumor cell transplantation. *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by log-rank test. B, numbers of tumor nodules in the liver were counted after 28 days of KYN-2 cells implantation and expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6 per group). *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test.

Figure 4.

Beneficial effects of vandetanib on the survival time and the intrahepatic metastasis in mice implanted with KYN-2 cells. A, Kaplan–Meier estimates of survival in mice treated with vandetanib (75 mg/kg) compared with those treated with PBS. The survival time was counted from the day of tumor cell transplantation. *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by log-rank test. B, numbers of tumor nodules in the liver were counted after 28 days of KYN-2 cells implantation and expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6 per group). *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated mice by Mann–Whitney U test.

Close modal

Vandetanib inhibits intrahepatic tumor metastasis

In the PBS group, the number of tumor nodules in livers implanted with KYN-2 cells ranged from 4 to 16 (mean, 7.7 ± 4.5). Treatment with 75 mg/kg vandetanib significantly reduced the number of tumor nodules (range, 3–4; mean, 3.2 ± 0.4; Fig. 4B).

Serum vandetanib levels and inhibition of tumor vascularization

Serum vandetanib levels in mice treated with 50 and 75 mg/kg ranged from 2.5 to 14.1 μmol/L (mean, 7.3 ± 4.6) and 3.8 to 12.7 μmol/L (mean, 8.5 ± 3.0) at the time of sacrifice, respectively. The mean number of vessels in tumor tissues of the PBS, 50 and 75 mg/kg vandetanib groups were 15.6 ± 7.4 per high-power field (HPF), 9.3 ± 2.9 per HPF, and 6.0 ± 2.4 per HPF, respectively. Vandetanib suppressed vascular development in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 5A and B). The vascular density in these tumors correlated with tumor volume (data not shown).

Figure 5.

Effect of vandetanib on tumor vascularization. A, immunohistochemical analysis showed fewer CD31-positive vessels in tumor tissues of mice treated with vandetanib compared with the PBS-treated mice. B, the density of CD31-positive vessels in a tumor field is represented as mean ± SD (50 fields of 18 sections from each of 6 tumors). *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated group by Kruskal–Wallis test; **, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated group by Mann–Whitney U test.

Figure 5.

Effect of vandetanib on tumor vascularization. A, immunohistochemical analysis showed fewer CD31-positive vessels in tumor tissues of mice treated with vandetanib compared with the PBS-treated mice. B, the density of CD31-positive vessels in a tumor field is represented as mean ± SD (50 fields of 18 sections from each of 6 tumors). *, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated group by Kruskal–Wallis test; **, P < 0.05, compared with PBS-treated group by Mann–Whitney U test.

Close modal

Effects of vandetanib on cell proliferation and apoptosis in tumor tissues

Vandetanib had not effect on cell proliferation of hepatoma cells (data not shown), but it increased the apoptotic index in tumor tissues from 1.2% ± 0.7% in the PBS to 2.5% ± 0.7% and 3.1% ± 0.9% in the 50 and 75 mg/kg treatment groups, respectively. The effect of vandetanib on apoptosis was dose-dependent.

Effects of vandetanib on serum ALT, body weight, and bone marrow function

There was no significant difference in body weight between the start and end of treatment in the PBS group, 50, and 75 mg/kg vandetanib groups. There were also no significant differences in body weight of the 3 groups at the start of treatment and at sacrifice (Fig. 6A). There were also no significant differences of serum ALT levels, leukocyte count, platelet count, and Hb levels among the 3 groups at sacrifice (Fig. 6B and C).

Figure 6.

Effects of vandetanib on body weight, serum ALT levels, and bone marrow function in tumor-bearing mice. A, body weight of tumor-bearing mice in the PBS- and vandetanib-treated groups (50 and 75 mg/kg) at the start of treatment and at sacrifice. There was no significant difference in body weight between start of treatment and at sacrifice in each group. B, serum ALT levels in mice treated with PBS and vandetanib (50 and 75 mg/kg). C, leukocyte count, Hb level, and platelet count in PBS- and vandetanib-treated mice (50 and 75 mg/kg). Vandetanib did not result in any significant change in all 4 parameters. n.s., not significant; WBC, white blood cells.

Figure 6.

Effects of vandetanib on body weight, serum ALT levels, and bone marrow function in tumor-bearing mice. A, body weight of tumor-bearing mice in the PBS- and vandetanib-treated groups (50 and 75 mg/kg) at the start of treatment and at sacrifice. There was no significant difference in body weight between start of treatment and at sacrifice in each group. B, serum ALT levels in mice treated with PBS and vandetanib (50 and 75 mg/kg). C, leukocyte count, Hb level, and platelet count in PBS- and vandetanib-treated mice (50 and 75 mg/kg). Vandetanib did not result in any significant change in all 4 parameters. n.s., not significant; WBC, white blood cells.

Close modal

In general, signal transduction through VEGFR-2 participates in endothelial cell proliferation much more than VEGFR-1 (20). Gule and colleagues (16) reported that the antitumor effects of vandetanib were mediated through inhibition of VEGF signaling and antiangiogenesis rather than through direct antiproliferative effects on tumor cells. In our in vivo study, vandetanib dose dependently suppressed the phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 and microvascular development. Furthermore, vandetanib also induced apoptosis of hepatoma cells in vivo, although it did not suppress the proliferation of hepatoma cells. O'Reilly and colleagues (21) reported that antiangiogenic therapy upregulated the apoptotic index of tumor cells but did not reduce the proliferation of tumor cells. The above results suggest that vandetanib mainly suppresses tumor growth through its tumor antiangiogenic effect by inhibition of VEGF signaling rather than suppressing the proliferation of tumor cells. In our study, however, vandetanib at relatively high concentrations suppressed cell proliferation and increased apoptosis of hepatoma cells in vitro. In addition to EGF, fibroblast growth factor (FGF), and PDGF also participate in hepatoma cell proliferation (22, 23). At relatively high concentrations, vandetanib inhibits FGFR and PDGFR kinases (24). Because serum vandetanib levels were relatively high, high rate of apoptosis in vivo might be induced through inhibition of EGF and PDGF signaling, as well as FGF signaling. Thus, the inhibition of these signaling pathways seems important for the effects of vandetanib in the mouse HCC model, in addition to the inhibition of VEGF signaling.

In the orthotopic liver tumor xenograft model, which mirrors the clinical course of hepatoma more accurately than the subcutaneous xenograft model, serum vandetanib levels in 50- and 75 mg/kg–treated mice were not significantly different. However, tumor volume was significantly suppressed in a dose-dependent manner. In addition, vandetanib prolonged the survival time of tumor-bearing mice. It also suppressed the growth of larger HuH-7 xenografts. These findings suggest that vandetanib is potentially useful for patients with advanced HCCs. However, our study did not provide answers to why the antitumor effect of 75 mg/kg vandetanib was superior to that of 50 mg/kg even though the serum levels were not significantly different. Further studies of pharmacodynamics of vandetanib are needed.

Our results also showed that vandetanib significantly suppressed intrahepatic metastasis of KYN-2 cells. In their in vitro study, Giannelli and colleagues (25) reported that vandetanib blocked the proliferation, adhesion, migration, and invasion of hepatoma cells via inhibition of the EGFR pathway. Several studies have investigated tumor cell proliferation and metastasis (16, 25, 26), as well as the correlation between angiogenesis and tumor metastasis (27). What are the mechanisms of vandetanib-induced suppression of intrahepatic macrometastasis? While no direct mechanism was identified, our study showed 3 possible mechanisms. First, vandetanib suppresses tumor cell migration from the primary tumor by inhibiting primary tumor growth and expansion. Second, vandetanib inhibits the EGFR pathway and thus suppresses the adhesion, migration, and invasion of hepatoma cells (28), which are critical steps in the metastatic process. Third, vandetanib inhibits metastatic tumor enlargement ensuring inactivity of micrometastases (29).

Vandetanib administration did not reduce body weight, increase ALT, induce bone marrow suppression, or cause other serious adverse events. Recent clinical studies on the use of vandetanib in patients with lung cancer, the most common adverse events that resulted in discontinuation of vandetanib were diarrhea, rashes, and QTc prolongation (30). In the present study, we did not experience severe diarrhea and skin rash in tumor-bearing nude mice. These differences could represent differences in species.

Several types of molecular-targeted agents are currently being investigated clinically. A recent study on advanced HCCs described the efficacy of the combination therapy of bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody for VEGF-A, and erlotinib, which inhibits the phosphorylation of EGFR (31). The median survival period of patients on the combination therapy was 15.6 months and appeared favorable. The dual inhibition of VEGF and EGF signaling may be more effective in the treatment of HCCs. Several reports indicated that a larger EGFR gene copy number and the presence of EGFR mutation enhanced the therapeutic efficacy of EGFR inhibitors in lung cancer and metastatic colorectal cancer (32, 33). If such predictive markers are proved to be useful in HCCs, it will be easier to select patients with HCCs who will benefit most from vandetanib. In this study, we used xenograft HCC models and thus could not evaluate the influences of cirrhosis on treatment outcome. Such model might not precisely mirror the situation of human HCCs. Another investigation using HCC model with liver cirrhosis is required before any clinical application of vandetanib is possible.

In conclusion, we have shown in this study that vandetanib, a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR-2 and EGFR, significantly inhibited tumor growth and intrahepatic metastasis of hepatoma cells, had no serious adverse events, and prolonged the survival time of tumor-bearing mice.

M. Sata other entity (e.g., expert testimony) in MSD. No potential conflicts of interests were disclosed by the other authors.

Conception and design: K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, H. Masuda, O. Hashimoto, T. Ueno, M. Sata

Development of methodology: K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, H. Masuda, M. Abe, O. Hashimoto, H. Koga, T. Ueno

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, H. Masuda, O. Hashimoto, H. Koga, T. Ueno, M. Sata

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, H. Masuda, O. Hashimoto, H. Koga, T. Ueno, M. Sata

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, H. Masuda, O. Hashimoto, H. Koga, T. Ueno, M. Sata

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, H. Iwamoto, H. Masuda, O. Hashimoto, T. Ueno, H. Yano

Study supervision: K. Inoue, T. Torimura, T. Nakamura, O. Hashimoto, T. Ueno, M. Sata

Helped in K. Inoue's experiments: H. Iwamoto

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.

1.
Yang
JD
,
Roberts
LR
. 
Hepatocellular carcinoma: a global view
.
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol
2010
;
7
:
448
58
.
2.
Llovet
JM
,
Ricci
S
,
Mazzaferro
V
,
Hilgard
P
,
Gane
E
,
Blanc
JF
, et al
Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
.
N Engl J Med
2008
;
359
:
378
90
.
3.
Llovet
JM
,
Bruix
J
. 
Testing molecular therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: the need for randomized phase II trials
.
J Clin Oncol
2009
;
27
:
833
5
.
4.
Wilhelm
SM
,
Carter
C
,
Tang
L
,
Wilkie
D
,
McNabola
A
,
Trail
PA
, et al
BAY 43–9006 exhibits broad spectrum oral antitumor activity and targets the RAF/MEK/ERK pathway and receptor tyrosine kinases involved in tumor progression and angiogenesis
.
Cancer Res
2004
;
64
:
7099
109
.
5.
Strumberg
D
,
Richly
H
,
Hilger
RA
,
Schleucher
N
,
Korfee
S
,
Tewes
M
, et al
Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of the Novel Raf kinase and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor BAY 43–9006 in patients with advanced refractory solid tumors
.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
965
72
.
6.
Carlomagno
F
,
Anaganti
S
,
Guida
T
,
Salvatore
G
,
Troncone
G
,
Wilhelm
SM
, et al
BAY 43-9006 inhibition of oncogenic RET mutants
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2006
;
98
:
326
34
.
7.
Kirsch
M
,
Schackert
G
,
Black
PM
. 
Metastasis and angiogenesis
.
Cancer Treat Res
2004
;
117
:
285
304
.
8.
Geiger
TR
,
Peeper
DS
. 
Metastasis mechanisms
.
Biochim Biophys Acta
2009
;
1793
:
293
308
.
9.
Kudo
M
. 
Early detection and characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma: value of imaging multistep human hepatocarcinogenesis
.
Intervirology
2006
;
49
:
64
9
.
10.
Miura
H
,
Miyazaki
T
,
Kuroda
M
,
Oka
T
,
Machinami
R
,
Kodama
T
, et al
Increased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in human hepatocellular carcinoma
.
J Hepatol
1997
;
27
:
854
61
.
11.
Yamaguchi
R
,
Yano
H
,
Iemura
A
,
Ogasawara
S
,
Haramaki
M
,
Kojiro
M
. 
Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in human hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Hepatology
1998
;
28
:
68
77
.
12.
Torimura
T
,
Sata
M
,
Ueno
T
,
Kin
M
,
Tsuji
R
,
Sujaku
K
, et al
Increased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor is associated with tumor progression in hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Hum Pathol
1998
;
29
:
986
91
.
13.
Borlak
J
,
Meier
T
,
Halter
R
,
Spanel
R
,
Spanel-Borowski
K
. 
Epidermal growth factor-induced hepatocellular carcinoma: gene expression profiles in precursor lesions, early stage and solitary tumours
.
Oncogene
2005
;
24
:
1809
19
.
14.
Thorgeirsson
SS
,
Grisham
JW
. 
Molecular pathogenesis of human hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Nat Genet
2002
;
31
:
339
46
.
15.
Sagmeister
S
,
Drucker
C
,
Losert
A
,
Grusch
M
,
Daryabeigi
A
,
Parzefall
W
, et al
HB-EGF is a paracrine growth stimulator for early tumor prestages in inflammation-associated hepatocarcinogenesis
.
J Hepatol
2008
;
49
:
955
64
.
16.
Gule
MK
,
Chen
Y
,
Sano
D
,
Frederick
MJ
,
Zhou
G
,
Zhao
M
, et al
Targeted therapy of VEGFR2 and EGFR significantly inhibits growth of anaplastic thyroid cancer in an orthotopic murine model
.
Clin Cancer Res
2011
;
62
:
4645
55
.
17.
McCarty
MF
,
Wey
J
,
Stoeltzing
O
,
Liu
W
,
Fan
F
,
Bucana
C
, et al
ZD6474, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor with additional activity against epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, inhibits orthotopic growth and angiogenesis of gastric cancer
.
Mol Cancer Ther
2004
;
3
:
1041
8
.
18.
Yano
H
,
Maruiwa
M
,
Murakami
T
,
Fukuda
K
,
Ito
Y
,
Sugihara
S
, et al
A new human pleomorphic hepatocellular carcinoma cell line, KYN-2
.
Acta Pathol Jpn
1988
;
38
:
953
66
.
19.
Yano
H
,
Iemura
A
,
Fukuda
K
,
Mizoguchi
A
,
Haramaki
M
,
Kojiro
M
. 
Establishment of two distinct human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines from a single nodule showing clonal dedifferentiation of cancer cells
.
Hepatology
1993
;
18
:
320
7
.
20.
Takahashi
T
,
Yamaguchi
S
,
Chida
K
,
Shibuya
M
. 
A single autophosphorylation site on KDR/Flk-1 is essential for VEGF-A-dependent activation of PLC-gamma and DNA synthesis in vascular endothelial cells
.
EMBO J
2001
;
20
:
2768
78
.
21.
O'Reilly
MS
,
Holmgren
L
,
Shing
Y
,
Chen
C
,
Rosenthal
RA
,
Moses
M
, et al
Angiostatin: a novel angiogenesis inhibitor that mediates the suppression of metastases by a Lewis lung carcinoma
.
Cell
1994
;
79
:
315
28
.
22.
Sasaki
S
,
Ishida
T
,
Toyota
M
,
Ota
A
,
Suzuki
H
,
Ashida
M
, et al
Interferon-α/β and anti-fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 monoclonal antibody suppress hepatic cancer cells in vitro and in vivo
.
PLoS One
2011
;
6
:
e19618
.
23.
Stock
P
,
Monga
D
,
Tan
X
,
Micsenyi
A
,
Loizos
N
,
Monga
SP
. 
Platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha: a novel therapeutic target in human hepatocellular cancer
.
Mol Cancer Ther
2007
;
6
:
1932
41
.
24.
Wedge
SR
,
Ogilvie
DJ
,
Dukes
M
,
Kendrew
J
,
Chester
R
,
Hennequin
LF
. 
ZD6474 inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor signaling, angiogenesis, and tumor growth following oral administration
.
Cancer Res
2002
;
62
:
4645
55
.
25.
Giannelli
G
,
Azzariti
A
,
Sgarra
C
,
Porcelli
L
,
Antonaci
S
,
Paradiso
A
. 
ZD6474 inhibits proliferation and invasion of human hepatocellular carcinoma cells
.
Biochem Pharmacol
2006
;
71
:
479
85
.
26.
Arao
T
,
Fukumoto
H
,
Takeda
M
,
Tamura
T
,
Saijo
N
,
Nishio
K
. 
Small in-frame deletion in the epidermal growth factor receptor as a target for ZD6474
.
Cancer Res
2004
;
64
:
9101
4
.
27.
Saaristo
A
,
Karpanen
T
,
Alitalo
K
. 
Mechanisms of angiogenesis and their use in the inhibition of tumor growth and metastasis
.
Oncogene
2000
;
19
:
6122
9
.
28.
Matsuo
,
Sakurai
H
,
Saiki
I
. 
ZD1839, a selective epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, shows antimetastatic activity using a hepatocellular carcinoma model
.
Mol Cancer Ther
2003
;
2
:
557
61
.
29.
Holmgren
L
,
O'Reilly
MS
,
Folkman
J
. 
Dormancy of micrometastases: balanced proliferation and apoptosis in the presence of angiogenesis suppression
.
Nat Med
1995
;
1
:
149
53
.
30.
Natale
RB
,
Badkin
D
,
Govinndan
R
,
Sleckman
GB
,
Rizvi
NA
,
Capo
A
, et al
Vandetanib versus gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a two-part, double-blind, randomized phase II study
.
J Clin Oncol
2009
;
27
:
2523
9
.
31.
Thomas
MB
,
Morris
JS
,
Chadha
R
,
Iwasaki
M
,
Kaur
H
,
Lin
E
, et al
phase II trial of the combination of bevacizumab and erlotinib in patients who have advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
.
J Clin Oncol
2009
;
27
:
843
50
.
32.
Linardou
H
,
Dahabreh
IJ
,
Kanaloupiti
D
,
Siannis
F
,
Bafaloukos
D
,
Kosmidis
P
, et al
Assessment of somatic k-RAS mutations as a mechanism associated with resistance to EGFR-targeted agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and metastatic colorectal cancer
.
Lancet Oncol
2008
;
9
:
962
72
.
33.
Gazdar
AF
. 
Personalized medicine and inhibition of EGFR signaling in lung cancer
.
N Engl J Med
2009
;
361
:
1018
20
.