throbber
Neuro
`endocrinology
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(supp| 1):94—98
`DOI: 10.1159/000080749
`
`From Basic to Clinical Research in
`
`Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor
`Disease — The Clinician-Scientist Perspective
`
`Bertram Wiedenmann Ulrich-Frank Pape
`
`Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Interdisciplinary Center of
`Metabolism and Endocrinology, Charité, Campus Virchow Hospital, University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany
`
`Key Words
`Basic and clinical research - New drugs-
`Neuroendocrine tumor - Unresolved clinical issues
`
`Abstract
`
`Patients with rare tumors represent a diagnostic and
`therapeutic challenge for non-specialized physicians,
`surgeons and other medical doctors. Whereas several
`specialized centers have gathered data for an improved
`diagnosis and therapy of neuroendocrine tumor disease,
`numerous clinical issues have not been resolved on an
`
`evidence—based medicine level. Furthermore, the evalua-
`
`tion of new treatment options has been overshadowed
`by the low incidence of the disease.
`In this article, a
`major medical challenge forthe diagnosis and therapy of
`neuroendocrine tumor disease is addressed. As well,
`new therapeutic treatment options translated from cur-
`rent findings in the fields of molecular and tumor biology
`are discussed.
`
`Copyright O 2004 S. KargerAG, Basel
`
`Neuroendocrine tumors (NETS) originate in different
`organs and sites [1, 2]. Based on their diverse primary
`tumor localizations, NETS of the gastroenteropancreatic
`(GEP) system encompass a family of distinct or even indi-
`vidual tumors, which have to be considered as distinct as
`adenocarcinomas of the stomach, rectum and pancreas
`[3]. NET cells also exhibit, in relation to their primary
`origin, distinct cell biological features, such as distinct
`secretory as well as growth and differentiation properties
`[4].
`For example, NETS located in the rectum (also called
`rectal carcinoids) practically never secrete hormones or
`biogenic amines to cause hypersecretion-related symp-
`toms and syndromes. They usually grow slowly and me-
`tastasize late, i.e. only once a tumor exceeds a diameter of
`1-2 cm [5, 6].
`By contrast, NETS of the colon are usually dedifferen-
`tiated and metastasize early [7]. On the other hand, they
`are similar to NETS of the rectum in that they are non-
`functional, i.e. no secretion of hormones and biogenic
`amines is observed which can cause hypersecretion-relat-
`ed syndromes and symptoms. Despite this, however,
`functionally inactive polypeptides such as chromogranin
`A can be detected in patients with metastatic disease in
`the bloodstream [8].
`By contrast, NETS of the pancreas often secrete hor-
`mones (e.g. insulin, gastrin, glucagon and VIP) but very
`
`E R
`Fax +4161 306 12 34
`E-Mail karger@ka.rger.ch
`www.karger.com
`
`© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
`0028-3835/04/0807—0094$21.00/0
`
`Accessible online at:
`www.ka.rger.com/nen
`
`Bertram Wiedenmann, Department of Internal Medicine, Division ofHepatology and
`Gastroenterology, Interdisciplinary Center ofMetabolism and Endocrinology
`Charité, Campus Virchow Hospital, University Medicine Berlin
`Augustenburger Platz 1, DE—13353 Berlin (Germany), Tel. +49 30 450 553 022
`Fax +49 30 450 553 902, E-Mail bertram.wiedenmann@charite.de
`
`
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 001
`
`

`

`rarely biogenic amines (e.g. serotonin and catechol-
`amines) [5, 9].
`This clinical and tumor biological phenomenon is con-
`trasted by NETS of the ileum, which often secrete biogenic
`amines but rarely hormones (the only exception being
`tachykinins). Similar for both NETs of the pancreas and
`the ileum is their usually low proliferation index as deter-
`mined by Ki67 (< 10%) [2, 5].
`Based on these tumor biological and clinical facts,
`NETs have been diagnosed and treated as separate dis-
`eases, i.e. according to their primary location, state of dif-
`ferentiation and stage [10, l 1].
`NET patients often represent a difficult diagnostic
`challenge at their first doctor’s visit. This holds especially
`true for patients who only exhibit discrete functionality
`such as mild phases of impaired consciousness (e.g. insuli-
`noma), epigastric pain (e.g. gastrinoma) or intermittent,
`nocturnal diarrhea (e.g. carcinoid syndrome).
`This also holds true for patients with MEN-1, which
`are known to be genetically affected by a menin mutation
`[12, 13]; however, in the early tumor stage, only provoca-
`tion tests can detect small or even minimal disease. Clear-
`
`ly, laboratory diagnosis without provocation tests will
`practically always be negative in these very early tumor
`stages. Aside from provocation tests, the bona fide tumor
`markers, chromogranin A and 5-HIAA, will only be raised
`once metastases have formed. Furthermore, these mark-
`ers have to be considered with care, since synthesis of
`these marker molecules depends on the primary tumor
`location as well as the state of tumor differentiation [14].
`Histological diagnosis, in a preoperative setting, re-
`quires the imaging of NET lesions, be they liver metas-
`tases, gastric or rectal polyps or pancreatic lesions. In
`some cases, functionality as well as a positive laboratory
`test may be present but no lesion can be detected [4, 15].
`Only during the course of the disease can the tumor lesion
`be detected. Therefore, more sensitive diagnostic proce-
`dures are required allowing the consistent earlier detec-
`tion of tumor lesions smaller than 5 or even 2 mm. This
`
`would also imply the hope that tumors consisting of less
`than, for example, 1 million tumor cells (corresponding to
`a diameter of approximately 3 mm) should be detectable
`in living tissue. Clearly, in contrast to the given limited in
`vivo conditions, immunohistology can allow the detection
`of a single tumor cell, for example in lymph nodes or in
`bone marrow. Thus, improvement of our current in vivo
`imaging standards is required to come close to the well-
`established in vitro imaging conditions.
`Similarly, endoscopic ultrasound, the continuously im-
`proving MRI technology as well as somatostatin receptor
`
`scintigraphy represent moves in the right direction in
`order to come closer to the ideal in the possible detection
`of the first and only tumor cell [16, 17].
`As far as new therapeutic options in NET disease are
`concerned, surgical methods have been improved by new
`minimally invasive procedures, for example in laparo-
`scopic ileocecal resection. However, it remains to be deter-
`mined if this approach will substitute for the conventional
`‘open’ approach. Considering, for example, that we can
`evaluate the lymph node status in ileal NET just as well by
`laparoscopy as by ‘open surgery’ is very promising.
`Furthermore, local ablative procedures have increas-
`ingly been used by now in NET disease. Although promis-
`ing in terms of control of symptoms, no data have been
`obtained so far in a prospective, randomized, multicen-
`tric setting demonstrating a prolonged survival in NET
`patients.
`Similarly, peptide-guided radioreceptor therapy has
`been used in several trials and shown to be quite promis-
`ing for both control of hypersecretion-related symptoms
`as well as control of tumor growth [l7—19]. So far, how-
`ever, only one prospective multicenter trial with radiola-
`beled octreotate coupled to yttrium 90 via a chemical
`DOTATOC bridge (Octreother) has been performed. Fi-
`nal results of this trial are not yet ready.
`Furthermore, chemotherapy has only partially been
`effective in two NET groups: in pancreatic as well as in
`undifferentiated NETs. In the first group, streptozotocin-
`based regimens combined with 5-FU or doxorubicin are
`of some value [20]. For undifferentiated, anaplastic
`NETs, cis-platinum plus VP16/etoposide can lead to
`some responses [21]. However, these responses last only a
`few months. Based on these limited effects of presently
`used chemotherapeutic agents, new chemotherapeutics
`may be worth testing such as oxalip1atin- or taxol-based
`regimens in anaplastic NETs [22].
`Clearly, based on the above-given limited clinical
`knowledge in the field of diagnostics, as well as therapeu-
`tics in NET disease, a substantial number of clinical ques-
`tions have to be answered in prospective pan-European or
`even global trials.
`The major issues and questions to be answered are:
`(1) development of a staging, grading and subsequent
`TNM classification as an objective measure for prognosis
`in NET patients; (2) evaluation of conventional entero-
`clysma as compared to the newly developed MR-Sellink
`procedure; (3) determination of the cost-effectiveness of
`somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in comparison to oth-
`er imaging procedures in a prospective multicentric set-
`ting; (4) performance of a randomized prospective study
`
`Basic and Clinical Research of GEP NETs
`in an International Context
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl l):94—98
`
`9 5
`
`
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 002
`
`

`

`Table 1 . Overexpression of growth factors and their cognate recep-
`tors in GEP NETs
`
`PDGF
`bFGF
`TGF-a
`TGF-B
`HGF
`IGF
`VEGF
`
`PDGF-a-R
`FGF-RI, FGF-RII
`EGF-R
`TGF-[3-RI, TGF-B-RII
`HGF-R
`IGF-R
`KDR, Flt-1
`
`25
`26
`27, 28, 29
`24
`29
`30, 31
`23
`
`on surgical debulking vs. medical therapy in patients with
`noncuratively resectable cancer; (5) evaluation of local
`ablative procedures (radiofrequency thermal ablation, la-
`ser-induced thermotherapy and others) in comparison
`with medical therapy under the aspects of both, control of
`symptoms as well as tumor growth; (6) evaluation of
`embolization vs. chemoembolization in a prospective set-
`ting; (7) determination of the antiproliferative effect of
`biotherapeutics in relation to primary localization, tumor
`differentiation and drug bioavailability; (8) evaluation of
`the antiproliferative effect of ‘cold’ vs. ‘hot’ somatostatin
`analogues; (9) evaluation of newly developed biothera-
`peutics (see below); (10) evaluation of the effect of perito-
`neal carcinosis on gastrointestinal motility; (11) evalua-
`tion of the prognostic value of micrometastasis in lymph
`nodes, liver and blood, and (12) evaluation of certain
`tumor biological phenomena such as anoikis, angiogene-
`sis and cell cycle activity in differentiated and undifferen-
`tiated NET cells in vitro. In addition to new chemothera-
`
`peutic agents, biotherapy or targeted therapy should be
`helpful in the expansion of our current therapeutic arma-
`mentarium (see below).
`Clearly, on a cellular level, we will have to learn more
`about the key molecular players involved in the tumor
`biology of NET disease. Furthermore, as far as NET cell
`crosstalk is concerned, aside from NET cells, we have very
`little knowledge concerning the interaction of immuno-
`cytes, endothelial cells, non-NET epithelial cells and neu-
`rons with NET cells. Furthermore, we do not know if
`clonal development of NET cells varies in relation to a
`given specific cellular compartment.
`Despite this, however, new agents developed in the
`field of targeted therapy will, we hope, allow us to study
`possible interference/inhibition of various growth factor
`signalling pathways. Similarly, signalling pathways linked
`
`with G-protein-coupled receptors as well as calcium chan-
`nels represent promising therapeutic targets.
`Interference with these pathways will also include
`interference with angiogenesis and cellular crosstalk (e.g.
`via integrins). It might also allow an improved therapeutic
`control of nuclear replication and membrane transport/
`secretion. This may not only hold true for NET cells but
`may also include immunocytes and other non-NET cells.
`Among the most promising new therapeutic ap-
`proaches in targeted therapy may be the inhibition of syn-
`thesis and/or secretion, as well as receptor binding of
`growth factors such as vascular endothelial growth factors
`[23, 24]. Based on their action on endothelial cell activa-
`tion, followed by a consecutive vascular hyperperrneabili-
`ty and matrix permeation, followed in turn by the induc-
`tion of endothelial proliferation, migration, lumen forma-
`tion and stabilization of pericytes, this growth factor fami-
`ly warrants further detailed studies in NETs. This ap-
`proach is further supported by the fact that NET disease is
`characterized by hypervascularization within the tumor
`tissue [25].
`Growth factor signalling in GEP NETs has so far been
`quite extensively studied [23, 24, 26-32]. Biological pa-
`rameters such as growth, glucose metabolism, survival
`and mitogenesis have mainly been studied in vitro by the
`overexpression of growth factors and their cognate recep-
`tors in GEP NET cell lines. Details and references on the
`
`signalling pathways of PDGF, bFGF, EGF, HGF, IGF
`and VEGF in GEP NET are shown in table 1. Aside from
`
`the biological functions of the various growth factors, the
`function of somatostatin including its analogues has been
`extensively studied in NET [33].
`As comprehensively discussed by Schmid et al. [34],
`somatostatin as well its analogues play an important role
`in the treatment of hypersecretion-related symptoms in
`NETs. However, in order to improve the potency of these
`pharmacological agents, more detailed studies are re-
`quired analyzing the crosstalk of somatostatin analogues
`with phosphatases and calcium channels. In addition, a
`variety of mechanisms of interferon-a action on NET cells
`has been elucidated [35, 36] and justifies this substance as
`both an antisecretory as well as an antiproliferative agent,
`although its side effects have to be considered [37, 38].
`In this context, it is of note that a recent study by
`Mergler et al. [39, 40] suggested for the first time that R-
`type Ca2+ channels are expressed in NETs, which in turn
`can be used as therapeutic targets by interfering with their
`function such as with SNX-482.
`
`Aside from new drug targets, a number of medical
`agents are available on the market for other indications.
`
`96
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl l):94—98
`
`Wiedenmann/Pape
`
`
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 003
`
`

`

`The antiproliferative action of COX-2/NSAIDs in NET
`cells has recently been demonstrated in vitro for the first
`time [41]. Clearly, COX-2 inhibitors represent an inter-
`esting new therapeutic approach for NETS based on their
`low side effects and their possible combination with other
`orally available agents (e.g. capecitabine).
`Similarly, other pharmaceutical agents, characterized
`by their signalling via growth factor receptors, G-protein-
`coupled receptors, calcium channels, integrins and nu-
`clear proteins are currently evaluated in numerous clini-
`cal, oncological trials for non-NET indications. These
`include targeted therapeutics such as gefinitib (Iressa®)
`interfering with EGF receptor signalling; imatinib inter-
`fering with PDGF c-kit signalling; SOM 230 interfering
`with somatostatin signalling; bevacizumab (Avastin®) in-
`terfering with VEGF-A signalling; PTK/ZK interfering
`with VEGFR 1-3, PDGFR c-kit and c-Fms signalling;
`Medi-522 and cilengitide interfering with integrin-OLVB3
`signalling; flavopyridol and rapamycin interfering with
`nuclear replication and membrane transport/secretion.
`
`In summary, numerous questions remain to be an-
`swered, both at the level of diagnostics and therapeutics.
`To answer these primary questions, multicentric, pro-
`spective, randomized studies are required in order to gen-
`erate better evidence-based medicine levels than those
`
`that have been obtained so far. Clearly, this also implies
`the performance of studies evaluating the cost-benefit of
`currently applied diagnostics and therapeutics. In addi-
`tion, new therapeutic strategies are required in order to
`improve current, rather limited treatment options espe-
`cially in metastatic NET disease. Here, new targeted ther-
`apies offer new hope especially in the fields of angiogene-
`sis, nuclear replication, cellular adhesion and signal trans-
`duction.
`
`Acknowledgments
`
`The authors are indebted to M. Szott-Emus and E. Zach, Berlin,
`Germany, for their excellent editorial support.
`
`References
`
`Modlin IM, Lye KD, Kidd M: A 5-decade anal-
`ysis of 13,715 carcinoid tumors. Cancer 2003;
`97:934-959.
`Rindi G, Bordi C: Highlights of the biology of
`endocrine tumours of the gut and pancreas.
`Endocr Relat Cancer 2003; 10:427-436.
`Kloppel G, Perren A, Heitz PU: The gastroen-
`teropancreatic neuroendocrine cell system and
`its tumors: The WHO classification. Ann N Y
`Acad Sci 2004; 101 4: 1 3-27.
`Wiedenmann B, John M, Ahnert-Hilger G,
`Riecken E0: Molecular and cell biological as-
`pects of neuroendocrine tumors of the gas-
`troenteropancreatic system. J Mol Med 1998;
`76:637-647.
`Caplin ME, Buscombe JR, Hilson AJ, Jones
`AL, Watkinson AF, Burroughs AK: Carcinoid
`tumour. Lancet 1998;352:799-805.
`Federspiel BH, Burke AP, Sobin LH, Shekitka
`KM: Rectal and colonic carcinoids. A clinico-
`pathologic study of 84 cases. Cancer 1990;65:
`135-140.
`Bemick PE, Klimstra DS, Shia J, Minsky B,
`Saltz L, Shi W, Thaler H, Guillem J, Paty P,
`Cohen AM, Wong WD: Neuroendocrine carci-
`nomas ofthe colon and rectum. Dis Colon Rec-
`tum 2004;47:163-169.
`Lamberts SW, Hofland LJ, Nobels FR: Neu-
`roendocrine tumor markers. Front Neuroendo-
`crino12001;22:309-339.
`
`9
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`13
`
`Polak JM, Bloom SR, Adrian TE, Heitz P,
`Bryant MG, Pearse AG: Pancreatic polypep-
`tide in insulinomas, gastrinomas, vipomas, and
`glucagonomas. Lancet 1976;i:328-330.
`Pape UF, Bohmig M, Bemdt U, Tiling N,
`Wiedenmann B, Plockinger U: Survival and
`clinical outcome of patients with neuroendo-
`crine tumors of the gastroenteropancreatic
`tract in a German referral center. Ann N Y
`Acad Sci 2004;1014:222-233.
`Wiedenmarm B, Jensen RT, Mignon M, Mod-
`lin CI, Skogseid B, Doherty G, Oberg K: Preop-
`erative diagnosis and surgical management of
`neuroendocrine
`gastroenteropancreatic
`tu-
`mors: General recommendations by a consen-
`sus workshop. World J Surg 1998;22:309-318.
`Lemmens 1, Van de Ven WJ, Kas K, Zhang
`CX, Giraud S, Wautot V, Buisson N, De Witte
`K, Salandre J, Lenoir G, Pugeat M, Calender
`A, Parente F, Quincey D, Gaudray P, De Wit
`MJ, Lips CJ, Hoppener JW, Khodaei S, Grant
`AL, Weber G, Kytola S, Teh BT, Famebo F,
`Thakker RV: Identification of the multiple en-
`docrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) gene. The
`European Consortium on MENl. Hum Mol
`Genet 1997;6:1177-1183.
`Chandrasekharappa SC, Guru SC, Manickam
`P, Olufemi SE, Collins FS, Emmert-Buck MR,
`Debelenko LV, Zhuang Z, Lubensky IA, Liotta
`LA, Crabtree JS, Wang Y, Roe BA, Weisemann
`J, Boguski MS, Agarwal SK, Kester MB, Kim
`YS, Heppner C, Dong Q, Spiegel AM, Burns
`AL, Marx SJ: Positional cloning of the gene for
`multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1. Science
`1997;276:404-407.
`
`14 Brandi ML, Gagel RF, Angeli A, Bilezikian JP,
`Beck-Peccoz P, Bordi C, Conte-Devolx B, Fal-
`chetti A, Gheri RG, Libroia A, Lips CJ, Lom-
`bardi G, Mannelli M, Pacini F, Ponder BA,
`Raue F, Skogseid B, Tamburrano G, Thakker
`RV, Thompson NW, Tomassetti P, Tonelli F,
`Wells SA Jr, Marx SJ: Guidelines for diagnosis
`and therapy of MEN type 1 and type 2. J Clin
`EndocrinolMetab 2001;86:5658—5671.
`15 Ricke J, Klose KJ, Mignon M, Oberg K, Wie-
`denmann B: Standardisation of imaging in
`neuroendocrine tumours: Results of a Euro-
`pean delphi process. Eur J Radiol 2001;37:8-
`17.
`16 Zimmer T, Stolzel U, Bader M, Koppenhagen
`K, Hamm B, Buhr H, Riecken E0, Wieden-
`mann B: Endoscopic ultrasonography and so-
`matostatin receptor scintigraphy in the preop-
`erative localisation of insulinomas and gastri-
`nomas. Gut 1996;39:562-568.
`17 Breeman WA, de Jong M, Kwekkeboom DJ,
`Valkema R, Bakker WH, Kooij PP, Visser TJ,
`Krenning EP: Somatostatin receptor-mediated
`imaging and therapy: Basic science, current
`knowledge, limitations and future perspectives.
`EurJ Nucl Med 2001;28:1421-1429.
`18 Otte A, Mueller-Brand J, Dellas S, Nitzsche
`EU, Herrmann R, Maecke HR: Yttrium-90-
`labelled
`somatostatin-analogue
`for
`cancer
`treatment. Lancet 1998;35 1 :417-418.
`
`Basic and Clinical Research of GEP NETS
`in an International Context
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl 1):94-98
`
`97
`
`
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 004
`
`

`

`19
`
`20
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Kam BL, Teu-
`nissen JJ, Kooij PP, de Herder WW, Feelders
`RA, van Eijck CH, de Jong M, Srinivasan A,
`Erion JL, Krenning EP: Treatment of patients
`with gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) tumours
`with the novel radiolabelled somatostatin ana-
`logue [l77Lu-DOTA(0),Tyr3]octreotate. Eur J
`Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:417-422.
`Moertel CG, Lelkopoulo M, Lipsitz S, Hahn
`RG, Klaassen D: Streptozocin-doxorubicin,
`streptozocin-fluorouracil or chlorozotocin in
`the treatment of advanced islet-cell carcinoma.
`N Engl J Med 1992;326:519-523.
`Moertel CG, Kvols LK, O'Connell MJ, Rubin
`J: Treatment of neuroendocrine carcinomas
`with combined etoposide and cisplatin. Evi-
`dence of major therapeutic activity in the ana-
`plastic variants of these neoplasms. Cancer
`1991;68:227-232.
`Rougier P, Mitry E: Chemotherapy in the treat-
`ment of neuroendocrine malignant tumors. Di-
`gestion 2000;62(suppl 1):73—78.
`von Marschall Z, Scholz A, Cramer T, Schafer
`G, Schimer M, Oberg K, Wiedenmarm B,
`Hocker M, Rosewicz S: Effects of interferon
`alpha on vascular endothelial growth factor
`gene transcription and tumor angiogenesis. J
`Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:437-448.
`Wimmel A, Wiedenmann B, Rosewicz S: Auto-
`crine growth inhibition by transforming growth
`factor beta-1 (TGFbeta-l) in human neuroen-
`docrine tumour cells. Gut 2003;52:l308-
`1316.
`Folkman J: Fundamental concepts of the an-
`giogenic process. Curr Mol Med 2003;3:643-
`651.
`Chaudhry A, Papanicolaou V, Oberg K, Heldin
`CH, Funa K: Expression of platelet-derived
`growth factor and its receptors in ne11roendo-
`crine tumors of the digestive system. Cancer
`Res 1992;52:1006—1012.
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`32
`
`33
`
`34
`
`Chaudhry A, Funa K, Oberg K: Expression of
`growth factor peptides and their receptors in
`neuroendocrine tumors ofthe digestive system.
`Acta Oncol 1993;32:107-114.
`Nilsson O, Wangberg B, Kolby L, Schultz GS,
`Ahlman H: Expression of transforming growth
`factor alpha and its receptor in human neu-
`roendocrine tumours. Int J Cancer l995;60:
`645-6 5 1.
`Shimizu T, Tanaka S, Harurna K, Kitadai Y,
`Yoshihara M, Surnii K, Kajiyama G, Shima-
`moto F: Growth characteristics of rectal carci-
`noid tumors. Oncology 2000;59:229-237.
`Peghini PL, Iwarnoto M, Raffeld M, Chen YJ,
`Goebel SU, Serrano J, Jensen RT: 0verexpres-
`sion of epidennal growth factor and hepatocyte
`growth factor receptors in a proportion of gas-
`trinomas correlates with aggressive growth and
`lower curability. Clin Cancer Res 2002;8:
`2273-2285.
`Wulbrand U, Remmert G, Zofel P, Wied M,
`Arnold R, Fehmann HC: mRNA expression
`patterns of insulin-like growth factor system
`components in human neuroendocrine tu-
`mours. Eur J Clin Invest 2000;30:729-739.
`von Wichert G, Jehle PM, Hoeflich A, Kosch-
`nick S, Dralle H, Wolf E, Wiedenmarm B,
`Boehm BO, Adler G, Seufferlein T: Insulin-like
`growth factor-I is an autocrine regulator of
`chromogranin A secretion and growth in hu-
`man neuroendocrine tumor cells. Cancer Res
`2000;60:4573-4581.
`Krenning EP, Valkema R, Kooij PP, Breeman
`WA, Bakker WH, de Herder W, van Eijck
`CH, Kwekkeboom DJ, de Jong M, Jamar F,
`Pauwels S: The role ofradioactive somatostatin
`and its analogues in the control of tumor
`growth. Recent Results Cancer Res 2000;153:
`1-13.
`Schmid HA, Schoeflter P: Functional activity
`of the multiligand analog SOM230 at human
`recombinant somatostatin receptor subtypes
`supports its usefulness in neuroendocrine tu-
`mors. Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl 1):
`47-50.
`
`36
`
`37
`
`38
`
`39
`
`40
`
`Detjen KM, Welzel M, Farwig K, Brembeck
`FH, Kaiser A, Riecken EO, Wiedenmann B,
`Rosewicz S: Molecular mechanism of interfer-
`on-alfa-mediated growth inhibition in human
`neuroendocrine tumor cells. Gastroenterology
`2000;118:735-748.
`Detjen KM, Kehrberger JP, Drost A, Rabien A,
`Welzel M, Wiedenmann B, Rosewicz S: Inter-
`feron-gamma inhibits growth of human neu-
`roendocrine carcinoma cells via induction of
`apoptosis. Int J Oncol 2002;2 1 :1 133-1 140.
`Faiss S, Pape UF, Bohmig M, Dorlfel Y, Mans-
`rnaun U, Golder W, Riecken E0, Wiedenmann
`B; International Lanreotide and Interferon Alfa
`Study Group: Prospective, randomized, multi-
`center trial on the antiproliferative effect of
`lanreotide, interferon-alfa, and their combina-
`tion for therapy of metastatic neuroendocrine
`gastroenteropancreatic tumors. J Clin Oncol
`2003;21:2689—2696.
`Pape UF, Wiedenmann B: Adding interferon-
`alpha to octreotide slows tumour progression
`compared with octreotide alone but evidence is
`lacking for improved survival in people with
`disseminated midgut carcinoid tumours. Can-
`cer Treat Rev 2003;29:565-569.
`Mergler S, Wiedenmann B, Prada J: R-type
`Ca“ charmel activity is associated with chro-
`mogranin A secretion in human neuroendo-
`crine tumor BON cells. J Membr Biol 2003;
`194:177-186.
`Mergler S, Drost A, Bechstein W0, Neuhaus P,
`Wiedenmann B: Ca2+ channel properties in
`neuroendocrine tumor cell cultures investi-
`gated by whole-cell patch-clamp technique.
`Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004;1014:137-139.
`Detjen KM, Welzel M, Wiedenmann B, Rose-
`wicz S: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
`inhibit growth of human neuroendocrine tu-
`mor cells via G1 cell-cycle arrest. Int J Cancer
`2003;107:844-853.
`
`98
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl 1):94—98
`
`Wiedenmann/Pape
`
`
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 005
`
`

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