throbber
AFCR ONCOLOGY
`
`459A
`
`TOPOISOMEP~%SE-HEBIATED DNA D~DE IS CfLL CYCLE DEPENDENT. D.~
`~, S Smallwood,* P Hedges,* and WE Ross, Departments of Pharma~
`~ology and bledicine, Univecsity of Florida, Cainesville, FL.
`M~ny antitumor drugs induce DNA strand breaks (St) via stabilization
`of a DNA-topoisomerase II "cleavable complex." We have examined the
`relatioeshlp between this phenomenon and cell proliferation using the
`intercalating agent m-~MSA and nhe non-lntercalatlng epipodophyllotoxin
`Vp.16. Wild type CHO cells were tremted with drug at several points
`~la~g the gro~=h c~rve and the resul=inB gB’s quantified hy alk~llne
`el~tion. An inverse relationship between =he SB frequency and cell
`density was observed, i.e., early log phase cells demonstrated the
`greatest SB frequency, while lace plateau phase ee!~s (predominantly
`by flow cytometry) showed no drug-induced SB’s. Addition of fresh
`growth media did not alter drug sensitivity. Uptake of [3H]~VP-16 was
`sos significantly different between lag and plateau phase cells.
`covaty of drug seusitivity hy trypsinlzed plateau cells seeded at low
`densi=y in new growth media was colneident with DNA synthesis as mea-
`sured by [3g]-thymidlne inaorporanion. However, inhibition of DNA
`synthesis by aphidi=olin did not ~ffect recovery of drug sensitivity,
`plateau phase cells also demonstrated ~mrked resistance to the ezra-
`toxic effects e[ WP-16 when compared to log phase calls. Our data
`suggest that ~he proliferation-dependent cytotoxicity of these agents
`is conferred by regulation of tepoisomerase II activity during the
`sell cycle. This likely provides the basis for some of the therapeu-
`tic selectivity of these dru~s. In addition, our data indicate that
`topoisomerase II and DNA polymerase ~ are not coordinately regulated
`as has been suggested for other putative components of the multienzyme
`replitase complex.
`
`IMPORTANCE OF IMPAIRED rRNA PRODUCTION IN FLUOROPYRI}~IDINE CYTDTOXI-
`ciTY, CH Tahimoto*. EC Cadman and RD Armstrung, Cancer Research Insti-
`
`However, the precise mechanism of RNA related cytctoxicity has not been
`
`0V~RCO~ING COLON CANCER R~SISTANCE ~D HEPATIC .~T~RY INPDSIONAL
`CHE~THERAPY WITH FOLINIC ACID. Glenn Tismsn, Fictoria Flea,r, Hary E.
`Jones~ L~ette Bu~k. Whittier, CA. 90601.
`Reduced relate polyglut~at~s ~nhance binding of th~idylat~
`th~tase to 5Pd~P. Increasing intrac~llular reduced relate concentra-
`tions i~ sssocia=ed wi~h revers~l of cell r~sistance to 5FUdR in some
`tumor cells. We have demonstrated that patient red bloo~ c~ll poly-
`glu~Rtes c~n be elevated by treating with large doses of intravenous
`f~lic xcld plus Cy~ocobal~in. Per~, J., 1979 has sho~ that
`Leucovorin c~ increase intracellular pslyglut~es. ~o patients with
`extensive hepatic metastases fro~ colo~ cancer w~Ye g~eated with i~tra-
`hepatic arterial infusions of 5FUdR 0.1-0.~mg/kg/d. One patient
`sponded initially ~d thee relapsed; ~no~her was resistant from the
`start. Both patients had a rapid tumor response when Leucovorin was
`added to ~he 5FUdR. In one patient ~ of the resistant dose of
`[O.15m~/k~/d) when mixed with Leucovorin ~O,07Smg/kg/d) produced
`response clearly demonstrating enhancemen~ ~£ 5~U~R activity. The
`second patient r~ceived 0.2mg/kg of 5FUdR for 18 days without response.
`Two days ~fzer adding Leucovorin 0.2mg/kg/d t0 th~ infusRte
`p~tient had ~apid iysls of fever. R~peat ~nglography20 days later
`revealed 60% decrease in ~or size. The abo~e anapests that
`Leucoverin may potentiate 5FUdR sctivi=y when both d~gs are given
`through th~ hepatic artery.
`
`POSSIBLE POT£NTIATION OF FLUOROPYRIMIDIN~ ANTI-TUMOR ACTIVIYY BY
`PTEROYLGLUTAMIC ACID (NOLIC ACID) AND CYANOCOBALA~|IN (B12). Glenn
`Tisman, Victoria Planer, Mary E. Jones, Lznette Buck. Whittier, CA.
`90601.
`Laborataryatudies confirmed ~hat both folini¢ acid and folio acid
`nan potentiate 5FU activity against different tumo~ cells. Our pre-
`liminary clinical work with attempts to potentiate 5FU activity with
`low doses ~amg) of Lencevorin was unsuccessful [Tisman, at.el., AACR,
`19, 197B, 217~). Because folio ~cid m~y be the preferred substrata for
`intracellular conversion to polyglutamates [Perry, J., at.el., 1979),
`a~d because reduced relate polyglutamates potentiate the binding ~f
`5~di~P to thy~idylats synthetase, we f~it tba~ l~r~e doses of folio
`acid might potentiate 5FU oncolytic effects clinically. Polio acid 20D
`mg/m2 plus Cy~ocobelamin 10,0COmaE [used to enhance intrRcellular
`transport of folate~ [Herbert, Tisman, at.el., Blood 4:d65, 1973~ in
`200mi. of ~N saline plus 20HEq of sodium bicarbonate was infused
`over 2 hours daily for 3 days. After the first hose of each infusion a
`bolus of 5~U 200m£/m2 was given I.V. Each treatment was repeated ~eekl)~
`Thus far 3 patients with breast cancer refractor~ to SFU containing
`regimens hare received ~6 infusions. Two of 3 patients had an exacerba-
`tion of bone pain within 12 to 4B hours Of initiation Of £herspy. All
`patients had subsequent alleviation of bone pain within i week.
`biters decremsed fn all patients. Hematologic toxicity was not signi-
`ficant in 2 ~d mild in one. ~’o of three patients devsloped
`at the end of 1 and 3 weeks, Red blood cell relate levels after therapy
`revealed red cell relates (pelyglutsmates) wets 2 to 3 times hemal,
`The above profocol is clearly associated with tu~er response to 5PD in
`
`BIOPHYSICAL AND ULTRASTRUCTUNAL CHARACTEKISTIOS OF A SARCOMATBID RENAL
`CELL CARCINOMA. D.A. Terraroe. A. Bahb~hani~ ~. King~ and F. Cuppmge.*
`Department off Pnthology, University of Kensas~ Ksnsms City. Kansas.
`Classification of renal neoplasms has been controversial as the
`kidney is a mesodermally derived organ. A clear d~stlnstion between
`the less dlfferent~ated sareomatold variant Df renal carcinoma and
`llbrosarcema is =umbersome. Tea purpose of this work was to study a
`primary renal sarcoma-like tumor that developed in the bydron~phrotla
`kidney of an elderly female. Toe primary tumor and its metastases to
`hone and skin had a spindle cell sarcoma-like morphology. Cultures
`were star~ed with cells obtained from cystic and solid tu~or areas.
`2~e ¢ell lines are presently {n passages 59 an~ 52 res~ectlvelv. ~
`cells grow ~11 in ea~le~s media with or wi£hout serum supDlement,
`Both cell l~nes possess proximal tubular intercellular junctions,
`microvilll ~larlzed towards the nutr£enh media~ a~d multiple cellular
`inte~diK~a~ions. ~elr karyo£ype is hypodiploid wi£h variable
`c~ro~osoa~al rear~an~ements and constant C-I and ~-3 mon0ssmy. ~SV-I
`and 2, Adeno-5, Echo l! and CoK-B v~ruses reDlicate well in bach l~nes.
`By means of [ntracellularly placed m~croelec~v~des, a cellular elec-
`tromotive [orc~ of -16 + !~V S.E.M, (No70) was found. ~s value ~s
`s{gnif{=an£1v lo~r th~ those measured by us and oKhers in non-neo-
`
`cin~a (Nature 186:402, 1960), giving fur=her i~s~ht into the bioloEy
`
`CLINICAL RESEARCH, VOL, 33, NO, 2, 1985
`
`Sandoz Inc.
`Exhibit 1028-0001
`
`Teva – Fresenius
`Exhibit 1028-00001
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket