throbber
0013-7227/98/$03.00/0
`Endocrinology
`Copyright © 1998 by The Endocrine Society
`
`Vol. 139, No. 5
`Printed in USA.
`
`Comparison of the Effects of the New Orally Active
`Antiestrogen EM-800 with ICI 182 780 and Toremifene
`on Estrogen-Sensitive Parameters in the
`Ovariectomized Mouse
`
`CELINE MARTEL, CLAUDE LABRIE, ALAIN BELANGER, SYLVAIN GAUTHIER,
`YVES MERAND, XUN LI, LOUIS PROVENCHER, BERNARD CANDAS, AND
`FERNAND LABRIE
`
`Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, CHUL Research Center, Quebec, Canada G] V 4G2
`
`ABSTRACT
`inhibitory effect on this parameter under the experimental conditions
`used. Comparable effects were observed when estrogen receptor pro-
`The nonsteroidal antiestrogen EM-800 is approximately 10-fold
`tein levels were measured by enzyme immunoassay. After oral ad-
`more potent than ICI 182 780, the most potent known steroidal an-
`ministration, EM-800 exerted maximal 83% and 88% inhibitions of
`tiestrogen, at inhibiting estrone-stimulated uterine weight in ovari-
`uterine and vaginal weight, respectively, whereas maximal inhibi-
`ectomized mice (half-maximal inhibitory daily sc doses of 0.2 and 2.0
`tions limited to 51% and 67% were achieved with toremifene. This
`ug, respectively). At maximal doses, however, both compounds lead
`to a similar maximal 90% inhibition of estrone-stimulated uterine
`limited inhibition by toremifene ofthe stimulatory effect of estrone on
`uterine and vaginal weight is probably due to the intrinsic estrogenic
`weight. A 10-fold higher activity of EM-800 compared with ICI 182
`activity of the compound. The present data also show that the ste-
`780 was also observed on estrone-stimulated vaginal weight, with
`roidal antiestrogen ICI 182 780 has less than 3% the activity of
`maximal inhibitions of 96% and 90%, respectively, achieved by the
`EM-800 when administered by the oral route. In fact, EM-800 ad-
`two compounds. In addition, EM-800 injected sc or administered
`ministered orally is 2- to 3-fold more potent than ICI 182 780 injected
`orally led to a marked loss of uterine and vaginal estrogen receptor
`
`levels measured by binding assay, whereas ICI 182 780 exerted no sc. (Endocrinology 139: 2486—2492, 1998)
`
`STROGENS are recognized to play the predominant role
`in breast cancer development and growth (1). As the
`first step in the action of estrogens in target tissues is binding
`to the estrogen receptor (ER), a logical approach for the
`treatment of estrogen-sensitive breast cancer is the use of
`antiestrogens, or compounds that block the interaction of
`estrogens of all sources with the ER. Tamoxifen, the only
`antiestrogen widely used for the treatment of breast cancer
`in women, behaves as a mixed agonist/ antagonist of estro-
`gen action (2), thus potentially limiting its therapeutic po-
`tential for the treatment of breast cancer in women.
`
`(3—5), 113-
`Recently, 7a-alkyl derivatives of estradiol
`amidoalkoxyphenyl estradiols (6), or estradiol 7a-alkyl de-
`rivatives possessing additional changes designed to increase
`their affinity for the ER and / or increase their bioavailability
`(7—1 1) have been synthesized and shown to possess pure and
`potent antiestrogenic activity in the most rigorous in vitro
`and in viva systems (3, 11), including human breast cancer
`cells in vitro (3, 7, 9, 10) and in vivo in nude mice (4, 8, 12, 13).
`These 7a-alkyl and 11 B-amidoalkoxyphenyl derivatives of
`estradiol, however, have low oral bioavailability, thus lim-
`iting their acceptability for the treatment of breast cancer. We
`have thus developed a series of even more potent estrogen
`antagonists that possess high oral bioavailability in the
`
`mouse, rat, monkey, and human. The present study com-
`pares the characteristics of the new antiestrogen EM-800
`(14 —17) on well characterized estrogen-sensitive parameters
`in the mouse with the effects of lCl 182 780 (4, 12) and
`toremifene, an analog of tamoxifen (18—22).
`
`Materials and Methods
`
`Animals
`
`Female BALB/c mice (BALB/cAnNCrlBR), approximately 50 days
`old and weighing 18—20 g, were obtained from Charles-River (St. Con—
`stant, Canada) and housed 4—5 / cage in a temperature (23 i 1 C)— and
`light (12 h light / day, lights on at 0715 h)—controlled environment. The
`mice were fed rat chow and tap water ad libitum. The animals were
`ovariectomized (OVX) under general anesthesia (Avertin) Via bilateral
`flank incisions and randomly assigned to groups of 9—10 animals. Ten
`mice were kept intact as controls.
`
`Chemicals
`
`EM—800 [( + )—7—pivaloyloxy—3—(4 ’—pivaloyloxyphenyl)—4—methyl—2—(4”—
`( ’"—piperidinoethoxy)phenyl)—2H—benzopyran]
`(14) and lCl 182 780
`were synthesized in the medicinal chemistry division of our laboratory.
`Both compounds analyzed under Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) con—
`ditions were more than 99% pure. Toremjfene citrate was provided by
`Orion Corp. (Farmos, Finland). The structures of these antiestrogens are
`illustrated in Fig. 1.
`
`Treatments
`
`Received June 27, 1997.
`Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Prof. Fer—
`nand Labrie, Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, CHUL Research
`Center, 2705 Laurier Boulevard, Quebec, Canada G1V 4G2.
`
`For the experiment described in Figs. 2—5, EM—800 and lCl 182 780
`were injected sc once daily at different doses (0.1, 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, or 10
`ug/injection), whereas in Figs. 6—9, EM—800, lCl 182 780 and toremifene
`were administered orally by gavage once daily at a dose of 0.3, 1.0, 3.0,
`
`2486
`
`The Endocrine Society. Downloaded from press.endocrine.org by [${individualUsendisplayName}] on 18 December 2014. at 15:32For personal use only. No other uses wilhout permission. . All rights reserved.
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2159 p. 1
`InnoPharma Licensing LLC V. AstraZeneca AB IPR2017-00904
`
`

`

`COMPARATIVE ANTIESTROGENIC ACTIVITY OF EM-800
`
`2487
`
`
`
`HO
`
`M'” (CH2)950(CH2)302F5
`ICI 182780
`
`ER assays
`
`Binding assay. Preparation of cytosol: Vaginal and uterine tissues were
`minced and homogenized at 4 C with two 10—sec bursts of a Polytron PT
`10—ST (Brinkmann Instruments, Westbury, NY) in 20 vol buffer A (25 mM
`Tris—HCI, 1.5 mM EDTA disodium salt, 10 mM a—monothioglycerol, 10%
`glycerol, and 10 mM sodium molybdate, pH 7.4). For each group, three
`different homogenates were used, and each homogenate was prepared
`from a pool of two or three uteri or vaginas. The homogenates were then
`centrifuged at 105,000 X g for 60 min at 4 C. The steroid binding assay
`was performed with freshly prepared cytosol. The protein concentration
`of cytosol was determined using the method of Bradford (23) with BSA
`as standard.
`
`Estrogen binding assay: [2,4,6,7—3H]Estradiol (SA, 87 Ci / mmol) was
`purchased from New England Nuclear (Boston, MA), whereas dieth—
`ylstilbestrol was obtained from Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO).
`[3H]Estradiol binding was measured using the dextran—coated charcoal
`absorption technique, essentially as previously described (24 —27). In
`brief, 0.2—ml aliquots of the cytosol preparation were incubated with 0.1
`ml [3H]estradiol (final concentration, 3—5 nM) in the presence or absence
`of a 100fold excess of diethylstilbestrol for 3 h at room temperature.
`Unbound steroids were separated by incubation for 15 min at 4 C with
`0.3 ml of 0.5% Norit-A and 0.05% dextran T—70 in buffer B (1.5 mM EDTA
`disodium salt, 10 mM a—monothioglycerol, and 10 mM Tris—HCI, pH 7.4)
`and centrifugation at 3000 X g for 15 min. Aliquots of the supernatant
`(0.3 ml) were then taken for radioactivity measurement after the addition
`of 10 ml liquid scintillation cocktail.
`
`Enzyme immunoassay (ER-BIA). Preparation of cytosol: Cytosols were pre-
`pared as described for the binding assay, except that vaginal tissue was
`homogenized in 10 vol of a different buffer (10 mM Tris—HCI, 1.5 mM
`EDTA disodium salt, 1 mM a—monothioglycerol, and 5 mM sodium
`molybdate, pH 7.4). For each group, only one homogenate prepared
`from a pool of three vaginas was used.
`ER—EIA assay: The ER—EIA monoclonal kit from Abbott Laborato—
`ries (Diagnostics Division, North Chicago, IL) used for this assay is
`an enzyme immunoassay based on the sandwich principle, using
`monoclonal rat antibodies. A detailed description of the method used
`is given in the instruction manual supplied with the kit. In brief,
`cytosols (100 pil) were incubated at 4 C for 18 h with antibody (rat
`anti—ER; D547)—coated polystyrene beads that bind ER proteins. A
`second antibody (rat anti—ER; H222) conjugated to horseradish per-
`oxidase was then incubated with the beads at 37 C for 1 h to label the
`
`bound receptor. A further incubation (30 min at room temperature)
`of the beads with the enzyme substrate hydrogen peroxide and the
`color reagent / electron donor o—phenylenediamine-2HCI produced a
`phenazine polymer chromophore that was measured at 492 nm. Each
`incubation step was completed by washing the beads with distilled
`water, and the enzyme reaction was stopped by the addition of 1 N
`sulfuric acid. A standard curve was obtained by plotting the ER
`concentration of ER standards (0 and dilutions of 500 meI/ ml ER
`stock, supplied in the Abbott kit) vs. their absorbance.
`
`Statistical analysis
`
`The effects of drugs and doses were analyzed using a two—factor
`nested ANOVA model. When main effects were significant (P < 0.05),
`a posteriori pairwise comparison between the control and treated groups
`was performed with Fisher’s least significant difference test
`(LS—
`MEANS), requiring P < 0.01 to declare significance. Original scale val—
`ues were used to analyze the variables with normally distributed re—
`siduals and respecting the hypothesis of homoscedasticity. If not, a log
`or a rank transformation was applied to the measurements before anal—
`ysis. The two routes of administration (sc and oral) were analyzed
`separately using a common intact group. All data are presented as the
`mean : SEM.
`
`Results
`
`To assess the relative efficacy of EM-800 and the steroidal
`antiestrogen ICI 182 780 under optimal conditions of bio-
`availability, the two compounds were first injected sc daily
`for 9 days, starting 2 days after ovariectomy and 3 days
`
`O
`/ Q
`
`'
`/—/N—
`O
`
`G O
`
`Toremifene
`
`FIG. 1. Chemical structures of antiestrogens.
`
`IEM-eoo
`IC|182780
`
`u
`
`
`
`ANTIESTROGEN (ug, s.c., ID)
`ESTRONE (0.06119, s.c., BID)
`OVARIECTOMIZED
`
`
`lNTACT com
`
`
`‘2
`E 140
`.3-
`,g
`120
`3’
`2 100
`2’
`7;
`En
`
`so
`so
`
`a E
`
`fl:
`Lu
`5
`.“
`
`_
`40
`20—
`_
`
`s
`:
`
`0-
`
`FIG. 2. Effect on uterine weight of increasing concentrations of EM-
`800 and ICI 182 780 injected sc for 9 days to ovariectomized mice
`simultaneously treated With estrone. **, P < 0.0001 vs. estrone-
`treated control.
`
`or 10.0 pig / animal. Treatment with the antiestrogens was initiated 2 days
`after ovariectomy, whereas treatment with estrone (0.06 Mg, sc, twice
`daily) was started 3 days later (5 days postovariectomy). Thereafter,
`estrone and antiestrogens were administered in combination for a 6—day
`period. Compounds were dissolved in a 50:50 (vol/vol) mixture of
`polyethylene glycol 600 and ethanol and administered in a 1% (wt /vol)
`gelatin—0.9% NaCl solution (final concentration of polyethylene glycol
`600 / ethanol was 8%). Mice in the intact and OVX control groups re—
`ceived the vehicle alone during the 9—day period. The animals were
`killed by cervical dislocation on the 11th morning after ovariectomy. The
`uteri and vagina were rapidly dissected and weighed, and then frozen
`in liquid nitrogen and stored at —80 C.
`
`The Endocrine Society. Downloaded from press.endocrine.org by [${individualUsendisplayNameH on 18 December 2014. at 15:32For personal use only. No other uses without permission. . All rights reserved.
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2159 p. 2
`
`

`

`2488
`
`COMPARATIVE ANTIESTROGENIC ACTIVITY OF EM-800
`
`Endo I 1998
`Vol 139 - No 5
`
`estradiol receptors from 426 i 31 to 128 i 14 fmol/mg
`protein (P < 0.0001) was observed, whereas further inhibi-
`tion was observed at the 3.0- and 10-ug doses, thus decreas-
`ing uterine ER levels to 46 i 3 fmol/ mg protein (89% re-
`duction; P < 0.0001) and 9 i 3 fmol/mg protein (98%
`reduction; P < 0.0001), respectively. ICI 182 780, on the other
`hand, had no significant effect on the same parameter at the
`0.3-, 1.0-, and 3.0-pLg daily doses, whereas a 65% stimulation
`of uterine ER levels (705 i 105 fmol/mg protein; P < 0.001)
`was observed at the highest dose used (10 Mg). It can also be
`seen in Fig. 4 that ovariectomy increased uterine ERs from
`418 i 6 fmol/mg protein in intact animals to 1235 i 163
`fmol/ mg protein (P < 0.0001 US. intact) in ovariectomized
`rats, an increase that was completely reversed by the ad-
`ministration of estrone to ovariectomized animals.
`
`before treatment with estrone. As illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3,
`EM-800 was approximately 10-fold more potent than ICI 182
`780 in blocking the stimulatory effect of estrone (0.06 Mg, sc,
`twice daily) on uterine (Fig. 2) and vaginal (Fig. 3) weight,
`respectively. The P values associated with the treatment and
`dose (treatment) nested effects are reported in Table 1 for
`both oral and sc routes. In fact, at the lowest daily dose used
`(0.1 lug or ~0.005 mg/ kg), EM-800 caused a 33% decrease
`(P < 0.0001) in uterine weight, whereas doses of 0.3, 1.0, 3.0,
`and 10 ug caused respective 72%, 84%, 91%, and 87% de-
`creases (P < 0.0001 for all doses 05. control) of estrone-
`stimulated uterine weight. lCl 182 780, on the other hand,
`had no significant effect at the two lowest doses used and
`caused 38%, 75%, and 90% decreases in uterine weight at
`doses of 1.0, 3.0, and 10 Mg, respectively (P < 0.0001 at all
`doses 275. control).
`A similar 10-fold higher activity of EM-800 compared with
`lCl 182 780 was observed on estrone-stimulated vaginal
`weight (Fig. 3). The daily 0.1-pLg dose of EM-800 caused a 37%
`(P < 0.0001) inhibition of estrone-stimulated vaginal weight,
`whereas doses of 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, and 10 ug caused 66%, 91%,
`98%, and 96% (P < 0.0001 for all groups US. control) inhibi-
`tions of vaginal weight, respectively. ICI 182 780, on the other
`hand, had no detectable effect at
`the two lowest doses,
`whereas the 1.0-, 3.0-, and 10-pLg daily sc doses caused re-
`spective 32%, 53%, and 90% inhibitions of estrone-stimulated
`vaginal weight (P < 0.0001 for all of these groups vs. control).
`As illustrated in Fig. 4, treatment with EM-800 caused an
`almost complete loss of ER measured by binding assay in the
`uterus of mice supplemented with estrone. The daily 0.3-pLg
`dose of EM-800 caused a 30% (P < 0.01) loss of uterine ER
`levels. With the daily 1.0-pLg dose, a 70% loss of uterine
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`mouseVAGINALWEIGHT(mgI20gBodyWeight)
`
`I EM-800
`
`140
`
`120
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`4O
`
`20
`
`
`
`ICI 132 780
`
`Comparable effects were observed on vaginal ER levels
`measured by binding assay (Fig. 5). Thus, sc injection of 0.3,
`1.0, 3.0, and 10 Mg EM-800 caused 40% (P < 0.01), 82% (P <
`0.001), 97% (P < 0.0001), and 99% (P < 0.0001) inhibitions of
`vaginal ER levels, respectively. ICI 182 780, on the other
`hand, had no significant effect on this parameter under the
`assay conditions used.
`We next compared the activities of EM-800, ICI 182 780,
`and toremifene administered by the oral route. Whereas
`EM-800 caused an 18% (P = NS) inhibition of estrone-stim-
`ulated uterine weight at the daily oral dose of 0.3 pg (Fig. 6),
`doses of 1.0, 3.0, and 10 ng of the antiestrogen caused re-
`spective 46%, 71%, and 83% inhibitions of estrone-stimulated
`uterine weight (P < 0.0001 for all the three highest doses US.
`control). Toremifene, a close analog of tamoxifen, caused 9%
`(P = NS), 25% (P < 0.001), 48% (P < 0.0001), and 51% (P <
`0.0001) inhibitions of estrone-stimulated uterine weight at
`the 0.3-, 1.0-, 3.0-, and 10-pig doses, respectively. The only
`significant inhibitory effect of ICI 182 780, namely a 21%
`inhibition (P < 0.01), was observed at the highest dose used
`(10 lug daily), indicating at least a 30-fold lower activity of this
`compound compared with that of EM-800.
`The daily oral administration of EM-800 led to respective
`10% (P = NS), 38%, 64%, and 88% inhibitions of vaginal
`weight (P < 0.0001 for the three highest doses used US. con-
`trol) at the 0.3-, 1.0-, 3.0-, and 10-ng doses (Fig. 7), whereas
`ICI 182 780 exerted no significant inhibitory effect on this
`parameter. Toremifene, on the other hand, caused 4% (P =
`NS), 24%, 52%, and 67% inhibitions of vaginal weight at the
`0.3-, 1.0-, 3.0-, and 10-pLg doses, respectively (P < 0.0001 for
`the three highest doses used US. control).
`As illustrated in Fig. 8, only oral administration of the
`highest dose of EM-800 led to a significant decrease in uterine
`ER levels measured by binding assay (58% reduction; P <
`0.01), whereas ICI 182 780 and toremifene had no effect on
`this parameter at any of the doses used.
`Finally, as shown in Fig. 9, vaginal ER levels measured by
`TABLE 1. P values associated with the treatment and dose (treatment) nested effects for both the oral and sc routes of administration
`
` Route of administration Source Uterine wt Vaginal wt Uterine ER levels Vaginal ER levels
`
`
`
`
`sc
`Treatment
`<0.0001
`<0.0001
`<0.0001
`<0.0001
`Dose (treatment)
`<0.0001
`<0.0001
`0.0006
`0.0029
`Treatment
`<0.0001
`<0.0001
`0.0010
`<0.0001
`Oral
`
`Dose (treatment) <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0249
`
`
`
`
`
`ESTRONE (0.06ug, s.c., BID)
`
`OVAHIECTOMIZED
`
`I
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FIG. 3. Effect on vaginal weight of increasing concentrations of EM-
`800 and ICI 182 780 injected sc for 9 days to ovariectomized mice
`simultaneously treated with estrone. **, P < 0.0001 vs. estrone-
`treated control.
`
`The Endocrine Society. Downloaded from pressendocrineorg by [$(individualUser.displayNameH on 18 December 2014. at 15:32For personal use only. No other uses wilhout permission. . All rights reserved.
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2159 p. 3
`
`

`

`COMPARATIVE ANTIESTROGENIC ACTIVITY OF EM-SOO
`
`2489
`
`1400—
`
`**
`
`I EM-800
`ICI 182 780
`
`
`
`1200—
`
`_A OOO
`
`
`
`UTERINE(3H)E2BINDING
`
`
`
`(fmol/mgprotein)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ANTIESTROGEN (pg, s.c., ID)
`ESTRONE (0.06m. s.c., BID)
`OVARIECTOMIZED
`
`FIG. 4. Effect on uterine ER levels of increasing concentrations of
`EM-800 and ICI 182 780 injected sc for 9 days to ovariectomized mice
`simultaneously treated with estrone. +;P < 0.01; *;P < 0.001; **;P <
`0.0001 (vs. estrone-treated control).
`
`300—
`
`+ I EM-800
`ICI 182 780
`
`|
`
`I
`
`NOO
`
`
`
`(fmol/mgproteIn) 8D
`
`
`
`VAGINAL(3H)E2BINDING
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MOUSEUTERINEWEIGHT(mgl209BodyWeight)
`
`140
`120
`
`100
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`EM-BOO
`ICI 182 780
`
`El TOREMIFENE
`
`+
`
`OVARIECTOMIZED
`
`INTACT
`
`CONT
`
`CONT
`
`0.3
`
`1.0
`
`3.0
`
`10
`
`ANTIESTROGEN (pg, per os, ID)
`ESTRONE (0.06)J.g, s.c., BID)
`
`1 4o
`120
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`EM-800
`ICI 182 780
`IE TOREMIFENE
`
`OVARIECTOMIZED
`
`INTACT
`
`com
`
`com
`
`0.3
`
`1.0
`
`3.0
`
`10
`
`ANTIESTROGEN (pg, per 05, ID)
`ESTRONE (0.0m, s.c., BID)
`
`FIG. 6. Effect on uterine weight of increasing concentrations of EM-
`800; ICI 182 780; and toremifene administered orally for 9 days to
`ovariectomized mice simultaneously treated with estrone. +, P <
`0.01; *, P < 0.001; **, P < 0.0001 (vs. estrone-treated control).
`
`
`
`MOUSEVAGINALWEIGHT(mg/209BodyWeight)
`
`
`
`
`
`FIG. 7. Effect on vaginal weight of increasing concentrations of EM-
`800; ICI 182 780; and toremifene administered orally for 9 days to
`ovariectomized mice simultaneously treated with estrone. **; P <
`0.0001 (vs. estrone-treated control).
`
`toremifene (administered orally) on vaginal ER protein levels
`measured by ER-EIA. As shown in Table 2, treatment with
`increasing doses of EM-800 inhibited vaginal ER protein
`levels by 26%, 40%, and 71% at daily doses of 1.0, 3.0, and 10
`lug, respectively. As measurements of ER protein levels by
`EIA were performed on a pooled tissue homogenate, no
`statistical analysis could be performed. In animals treated
`with lCl 182 780, only a small 10 —11% decrease in vaginal ER
`protein levels was observed at doses ranging from 1—10 lug,
`whereas treatment with toremifene caused a 27% inhibition
`
`of this parameter only at the highest dose used (10 ug).
`
`Discussion
`
`The present data show that EM-800 administered under
`conditions of maximal bioavailability (sc) is approximately
`10 times more potent than ICI 182 780, the most potent of the
`known steroidal antiestrogens (4, 5, 12, 28, 29) previously
`studied in phase II clinical trials (4, 12, 30). In fact, a similar
`difference in the estimated potencies were obtained when the
`effects of the two antiestrogens were measured on estrone-
`
`
` INT
`
`CONT CONT
`
`
`
`
`
`ANTIESTROGEN (ug, s.c., ID)
`ESTRONE(0.0GI19,S.C., BID)
`OVARIECTOMIZED
`
`L l
`FIG. 5. Effect on vaginal ER levels of increasing concentrations of
`EM-800 and ICI 182 780 injected sc for 9 days to ovariectomized mice
`simultaneously treated with estrone. +;P < 0.01; *;P < 0.001; **;P <
`00001 (US. estrone-treated control).
`
`binding assay decreased from 157 i 12 fmol/ mg protein in
`estrone-treated rats to 123 i 5 fmol/ mg protein (P = NS) in
`animals treated with the 0.3-ug daily dose of EM-800,
`whereas daily treatment with the 1.0-, 3.0-, and 10-)ug doses
`reduced vaginal ER levels to 89 i 0.1 fmol / mg protein (43%
`reduction; P < 0.0001), 87 i 10 fmol/mg protein (45% re-
`duction; P < 0.0001), and 30 i 4 fmol/mg protein (81%
`reduction; P < 0.0001), respectively. Toremifene, on the other
`hand, caused 36% (P < 0.001), 21% (NS), 47% (P < 0.0001),
`and 45% (P < 0.0001) inhibitions of vaginal ER levels at daily
`doses of 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, and 10 ug, respectively. ICI 182 780 had
`no significant effect on vaginal estradiol receptor levels un-
`der the experimental conditions used.
`To ensure that the down-regulation of ER levels observed
`with EM-800 does not result from a failure of [3H]estradiol
`to exchange with EM-800 [or its metabolite(s)], we evaluated
`the effects of treatments with EM-800, ICI 182 780, and
`
`The Endocrine Society. Downloaded from pressendocrineorg by [${individualUseLdisplayName)] on 18 December 2014. at 15:32For personal use only. No oIher uses wilhout permission. . All rights reserved.
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2159 p. 4
`
`

`

`2490
`
`COMPARATIVE ANTIESTROGENIC ACTIVITY OF EM-800
`
`Vollihllgg : 11%)?
`
`I EM_800
`ICI 182 780
`
`E TOREMIFENE
`
`TABLE 2. Vaginal estrogen receptor levels measured by enzyme
`immunoassay (ER-ETA) after oral administration for 9 days of
`increasing doses of EM-800, ICI 182 780, and toremifene to
`ovariectomized mice supplemented With estrone
`
`700
`600
`
`500
`
`400
`
`300
`
`200
`
`100
`
`
`
`(fmol/mgproteln)
`
`
`
`UTERINE(3H)E2BINDING
`
`OVAHIECTOMIZED
`
`CONT CONT
`
`0.3
`
`3.0
`1.0
`ANTIESTROGEN (pg, per 05, ID)
`ESTRONE (0.06ug, s.c., BID)
`
`FIG. 8. Effect on uterine ER levels of increasing concentrations of
`EM-800, ICI 182 780, and toremifene administered orally for 9 days
`to ovariectomized mice simultaneously treated With estrone. +, P <
`0.01 (vs. estrone-treated control).
`
`I EM-800
`Z |C|182 780
`: TOREMIFENE
`
`
`
`
`300
`
`200
`
`100
`
`
`
`(fmol/mgproteln)
`
`
`
`VAGINAL(3H)E2BINDING
`
`0
`
`
`
`ER levels (finol/mg protein)
`Treatment
`414
`OVX (control)
`238
`OVX -- E1
`175
`EM-800 (1 pg)
`OVX
`E1
`143
`EM-SOO (3 Mg)
`OVX
`E1
`69
`EM-800 (10 Mg)
`OVX
`E1
`211
`ICI 182 780 (1 Mg)
`OVX
`E1
`212
`ICI 182 780 (3 Mg)
`OVX
`E1
`216
`ICI 182 780 (10 Mg)
`OVX
`E1
`262
`toremifene (1 [.Lg)
`OVX
`E1
`240
`toremifene (3 Mg)
`OVX
`E1
`
`OVX
`E1
`toremifene (10 Mg)
`173
`
`
`
`
`Ovariectomized mice receiving the vehicle alone were used as ad-
`ditional controls.
`
`effect achieved with the daily 10-ug dose of toremifene on
`uterine weight is limited to about 51% compared with an
`inhibitory effect of 83% observed for EM-800 at the same
`dose. The maximal inhibitory effects achieved by toremifene
`and EM-800 on vaginal weight at the highest dose used (10
`Mg) were 67% and 88%, respectively (P < 0.0001 between the
`two compounds). Thus, in addition to its lower potency to
`neutralize the stimulatory effect of estrone, toremifene at
`high doses exerts a lower maximal inhibitory effect than can
`be achieved with EM-800. This situation is analogous to that
`observed with tamoxifen.
`
`Tamoxifen has long been known not to completely prevent
`binding of estrogen to the ER (31, 32). In agreement with the
`present in viva data, the pharmacology of toremifene has
`been found to be similar that of tamoxifen (33, 34). In the
`mouse uterus, toremifene has relatively potent estrogenic
`activity, whereas its estrogenic activity is weaker in the rat
`uterus (18, 33). Tamoxifen and toremifene have also shown
`cross-resistance in the clinic (35).
`It can be seen in the present study that the maximal in-
`hibitory effects of EM-800 and ICI 182 780, administered sc,
`are of similar magnitude, namely 87% and 90% inhibitions of
`estrogen-stimulated uterine weight and 96% and 90% inhi-
`bitions of estrogen-stimulated vaginal weight, respectively.
`In the rat, at the highest dose used (1 mg / kg~day), treatment
`with ICI 182 780 for 14 days led to a 92% inhibition of uterine
`weight compared with the effect of ovariectomy (5). Such
`data are in agreement with the present finding of a 90%
`inhibition at the daily 0.5 mg / kg~d ose. As mentioned above,
`the present data achieved with EM-800 and lCl 182 780 are
`very different from those observed with tamoxifen and
`toremifene, where the maximal inhibition obtained on uter-
`ine weight is about 50%, whereas it is limited to 67% for
`vaginal weight. As mentioned above, the much lower max-
`imal blockade of estrogen action on these two parameters by
`tamoxifen and toremifene can be explained by the intrinsic
`estrogenic activity of these two compounds.
`The present study shows that a half-maximal inhibitory
`effect of estrogen action on mouse uterine weight by ICI 182
`780 administered sc is obtained at a dose of 2—3 ug/ day or
`0.1— 0.2 mg / kg~day. These data can be compared with a half-
`maximal inhibitory dose of 0.5 mg/ kg obtained in a recent
`
`
`
`CONT CONT
`
`0.3
`
`3.0
`
` 1.0
`
`ANTIESTROGEN (pg, per 05, ID)
`ESTHONE (0.06119. s.c., BID)
`
`OVARIECTOMIZED
`FIG. 9. Effect on vaginal ER levels of increasing concentrations of
`EM-800, ICI 182 780, and toremifene administered orally for 9 days
`to ovariectomized mice simultaneously treated With estrone. *, P <
`0.001; **, P < 0.0001 (vs. estrone-treated control).
`
`stimulated uterine and vaginal weights in ovariectomized
`mice. To eliminate the potential problem of variable absorp-
`tion of the two compounds, both antiestrogens were initially
`administered by sc injection, a route of administration likely
`to lead to optimal exposure to the drugs.
`In addition, the present data confirm the low oral bio-
`availability of the steroidal antiestrogen ICI 182 780 (4, 5).
`Although much higher doses of lCl 182 780 would need to
`be used to achieve an accurate assessment of the potency of
`this antiestrogen by the oral route, the present data indicate
`that ICI 182 780 has less than 3% the activity of EM-800 after
`oral administration.
`
`On the other hand, the intrinsic estrogenic activity of
`toremifene, a close analog of tamoxifen (19, 20), is likely to
`be responsible for the limited maximal ability of this com-
`pound to reverse the stimulatory effect of estrone on mouse
`uterine and vaginal weight. In fact, the maximal inhibitory
`
`The Endocrine Society. Downloaded from pressendocrineorg by [${individualUsendisplayName)] on 18 December 2014. at 15:32For personal use only. No other uses without permission. . All rights reserved.
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2159 p. 5
`
`

`

`COMPARATIVE ANTIESTROGENIC ACTIVITY OF EM-800
`
`2491
`
`study, also performed in ovariectomized mice (5). The some-
`what higher activity of ICI 182 780 observed in the present
`study can possibly be explained at least in part by the dif-
`ferent vehicles used and the different durations of treatment.
`
`0)
`
`
`
`(eds) Estrogen Receptors in Human Breast Cancer. Raven Press, New York, pp
`177
`. Furr BJ, Jordan VC 1984 The pharmacology and clinical uses of tamoxifen.
`Pharmacol Ther 25:1277205
`. Wakeljng AE, Bowler] 1988 Biology and mode of action of pure antiestrogens.
`J Steroid Biochem 30:1417147
`. Wakeling AE, Dukes M, Bowler J 1991 A potent specific pure antiestrogen
`with clinical potential. Cancer Res 51:386773873
`. Wakeljng AE, Bowler J 1992 ICI 182,780, a new antioestrogen with clinical
`potential. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 43:1737177
`. Nique F, Van de Velde P, Brémaud J, Hardy M, Philibert D, Teutsch G 1994
`11 BrAmidoalkoxyphenyl estradiols, a new series of pure antiestrogens. J Ste
`roid Biochem Mol Biol 50:21729
`Simard J, Dauvois S, Haagensen DE, Lévesque C, Mérand Y, Labrie F 1990
`Regulation of progesteronerbinding breast cyst protein GCDFP724 secretion by
`estrogens and androgens in human breast cancer cells: a new marker of steroid
`action in breast cancer. Endocrinology 126:322373231
`. Dauvois S, Geng CS, Levesque C, Mérand Y, Labrie F 1991 Additive inhibr
`itory effects of an androgen and the antiestrogen EM7170 on estradiolsstimr
`ulated growth of human ZR77571 breast tumors in athymic mice. Cancer Res
`51:313173135
`. de Launoit Y, Dauvois S, Dufour M, Simard J, Labrie F 1991 Inhibition of cell
`cycle kinetics and proliferation by the androgen 5wdihydrotestosterone and
`antiestrogen N, nebutyerrmethylrl1r(16’archloror3’,17Brdihydroxyrestrar
`l',3',5’r(10’)triene7’aryl)undecanamide in human breast cancer ZR77571 cells.
`Cancer Res 51:279772802
`Lévesque C, Mérand Y, Dufour JM, Labrie C, Labrie F 1991 Synthesis and
`biological activity of new halorsteroidal antiestrogens.
`J Med Chem
`34:162471630
`Labrie C, Martel C, Dufour JM, Lévesque C, Mérand Y, Labrie F 1992 Novel
`compounds inhibit estrogen formation and action. Cancer Res 52:6107615
`Wakeling AE 1993 The future of new pure antiestrogens in clinical breast
`cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 25:179
`. Gottardis MM, Jiang SY, Jeng MH, Jordan VC 1989 Inhibition of tamoxifen
`stimulated growth of an MCF77 tumor variant in athymic mice by novel
`steroidal antiestrogens. Cancer Res 49:409074093
`Gauthier S, Caron B, Cloutier J, Dory YL, Favre A, Larouche D, Mailhot J,
`Ouellet C, Schwerdtfeger A, Leblanc G, Martel C, Simard J, Mérand Y,
`Bélanger A, Labrie C, Labrie F 1997 (S)r(+)r[4r[7r(2, 27dimethyle‘le
`oxopropoxy)r4rmethyl727[4r[2r(lrpiperidinyl)ethoxy]phenyl]72H717benzopyr
`rane3ryl]phenyl]72,2rdimethylpropanoate (EM7800): a highly potent, specific
`and orally active nonrsteroidal antiestrogen. J Med Chem 401211772122
`. Luo S, Martel C, Sourla A, Gauthier S, Mérand Y, Bélanger A, Labrie C,
`Labrie F, Comparative effects of 28day treatment with the new antiestrogen
`M7800 and tamoxifen on estrogenrsensitive parameters in the intact mouse.
`nt J Cancer, in press
`. Simard J, Labrie C, Bélanger A, Gauthier S, Singh SM, Mérand Y, Labrie F
`997 Characterization of the effects of the novel nonrsteroidal antiestrogen
`.EM7800 on basal and estrogenrinduced prolieration of T747D, ZRr7571 and
`MCF77 human breasts cancer cells in vitra. Int J Cancer 73:3817391
`Martel C, Provencher L, Li X, St-Pierre A, Leblanc G, Gauthier S, Mérand Y,
`Labrie F, Binding characteristics of novel nonsteroidal antiestrogens to the rat
`uterine estrogen receptors. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, in press
`. Kallio S, Kangas L, Blanco G, Johansson R, Karjalajnen A, Perila M, Pippo
`I, Sundqujst H, Sodervall M, Toivola R 1986 A new triphenylethylene come
`pound, FC71157a.
`I. Hormonal effects. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
`17:1037108
`. Robinson SP, Jordan VC 1989 Antiestrogenic action of toremifene on hore
`monerdependent, and heterogeneous breast tumor growth in athymic mouse.
`Cancer Res 49:175871762
`di Salle E, Zaccheo T, Ornati G 1990 Antiestrogenic and antitumor properties
`of the new triphenylethylene derivative toremifene in the rat. JSteroid Biochem
`110:2037206
`Kangas L 1990 Review of the pharmacological properties of toremifene. J
`Steroid Biochem 36:1917195
`Iino Y, Takai Y, Ando T, Sugamata N, Maemura M, Takeo T, Ohwada S,
`Morishita Y 1993 Effect of toremifene on the growth, hormone receptors and
`insulinrlike growth factorrl of hormonedependent MCF77 tumors in athymic
`mice. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 32:3537358
`Bradford MM 1976 A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of
`microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of proteinrdye binding.
`Anal Biochem 72:2487254
`Asselin J, Kelly PA, Caron MG, Labrie F 1977 Control of hormone receptor
`levels and growth of 7,12dimethylbenz(a)anthraceneinduced mammary tue
`mors by estrogens, progesterone and prolactin. Endocrinology 101:6667671
`Asselin J, Labrie F 1978 Effects of estradiol and prolactin on steroid receptor
`levels in 7,127dimethylbenz(a)anthracenerinduced mammary tumors and
`uterus in the rat. J Steroid Biochem 9:107971082
`Asselin J, Mélangon R, Moachon G, Bélanger A 1980 Characteristics of bind
`ing to estrogen, androgen, progestin and glucocorticoid receptors in 7,127
`dimethylbenz(a)anthraceneinduced mammary tumors and their hormonal
`control. Cancer Res 40:161271622
`
`The lower inhibition of vaginal ER protein levels measured
`by enzyme immunoassay compared with the protein binding
`assay indicate that EM-652, the active metabolite of the pro-
`drug EM-800, occupies part of the ER binding sites. For ICI
`182 780-treated animals, there is no apparent loss of ER-
`binding sit

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