Dipa Patel

Mel-CAM-specific genetic suppressor elements inhibit melanoma growth and invasion through loss of gap junctional communication

Normal human melanocytes are interspersed singly among keratinocytes along the basement membrane of the epidermis, whereas melanoma cells readily adhere to each other during invasion of the dermis or distant organs. The tumorigenic and metastatic phenotype of melanoma cells often correlates with increased expression of cell–cell and cell-matrix adhesion receptors. Mel-CAM (MCAM, MUC 18, CD146) is a cell–cell adhesion receptor highly expressed by melanoma cells but not normal melanocytes. We show here that inhibition of Mel-CAM expression in metastatic melanoma cells using genetic suppressor elements of Mel-CAM cDNA leads to inhibition of adhesion between melanoma cells and to downregulation of the tumorigenic phenotype. Growth was not inhibited in genetic suppressor elements-transduced melanoma cells cultured in monolayers but was inhibited when cells were maintained anchorage-independently in soft agar and greatly reduced in immunodeficient mice. A three-dimensional epidermal skin equivalent model demonstrated that Mel-CAM allows melanoma cells to separate from the epidermis and invade the basement membrane zone and dermis. However, melanoma cells with little or no Mel-CAM were poorly invasive, possibly due to their loss of gap junctional communication. These results suggest the multifunctional role of a melanoma-associated cell–cell adhesion receptor in tumor progression.

IgG isotype, glycosylation, and EGFR expression determine the induction of antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity in vitro by cetuximab

PURPOSE To evaluate the antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) of cetuximab, an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) IgG1 antibody, in vitro. METHODS Binding to human Fc receptors was measured by ELISA. ADCC against a panel of tumor cell lines was evaluated using peripheral blood mononuclear cells or NK cells as effectors and lactate dehydrogenase release as a marker of cell killing. Cetuximab was compared with two glycan variants of cetuximab and with panitumumab, an anti-EGFR IgG2. RESULTS Cetuximab bound with high affinity to FcγRI (EC50 = 0.13 nM) and FcγRIIIa (EC50 = 6 nM) and effectively induced ADCC across multiple tumor cell lines. Panitumumab and aglycosylated cetuximab did not bind to FcγRI or FcγRIIIa nor have ADCC activity even at high effector-target cell ratios, even though the EGFR-binding affinity of cetuximab and panitumumab were shown to be comparable (KD = 87 pM and 83 pM, respectively). The extent of cetuximab-elicited ADCC was associated with the level of EGFR expression on tumor cells. CONCLUSIONS Cetuximab elicits effective ADCC activity against a wide range of tumor cells in vitro. This activity is dependent on antibody glycosylation and IgG1 isotype as well as tumor-cell EGFR expression. These findings suggest that ADCC may contribute to the antitumor activity of cetuximab.