throbber
Neuro
`-endocrinology
`
`
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl 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
`
`Departmentof 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 for the 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 @ 2004 S. Karger AG,Basel
`
`Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs)originate in different
`organs and sites [1, 2]. Based on their diverse primary
`tumorlocalizations, NETs of the gastroenteropancreatic
`(GEP) system encompassa family of distinct or even indi-
`vidual tumors, which haveto be considered as distinct as
`adenocarcinomas of the stomach, rectum and pancreas
`[3]. NETcells 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, NETslocated in the rectum (also called
`rectal carcinoids) practically never secrete hormones or
`biogenic amines to cause hypersecretion-related symp-
`toms and syndromes. Theyusually 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
`aminesis 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
`
`KARG E R
`Fax + 41 61 306 12 34
`E-Mail karger@karger.ch
`www.karger.com
`
`© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
`0028-3835/04/0807-0094$21.00/0
`
`Accessible online at:
`www. karger.com/nen
`
`Bertram Wiedenmann, Departmentof Internal Medicine, Division ofHepatology and
`Gastroenterology, Interdisciplinary Center ofMetabolism and Endocrinology
`Charité, Campus Virchow Hospital, University Medicine Berlin
`AugustenburgerPlatz 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
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 001
`
`

`

`rarely biogenic amines (e.g. serotonin and catechol-
`amines)[5, 9].
`This clinical and tumorbiological phenomenonis con-
`trasted by NETsofthe ileum, which often secrete biogenic
`amines but rarely hormones(the only exception being
`tachykinins). Similar for both NETsof 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,
`NETshave been diagnosed and treated as separate dis-
`eases, i.e. according to their primary location,state of dif-
`ferentiation and stage [10, 11].
`NET patients often represent a difficult diagnostic
`challengeat 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 knownto be genetically affected by a menin mutation
`[12, 13]; however, in the early tumorstage, 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 provocationtests, 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
`somecases, 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 tumorlesion
`be detected. Therefore, more sensitive diagnostic proce-
`dures are required allowing the consistent earlier detec-
`tion of tumorlesions smaller than 5 or even 2 mm.This
`would also imply the hope that tumorsconsisting of less
`than, for example, 1 million tumorcells (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 tumorcell, for example in lymph nodesorin
`bone marrow. Thus, improvementof our current in vivo
`imaging standards is required to comeclose to the well-
`established in vitro imaging conditions.
`Similarly, endoscopic ultrasound, the continuously im-
`proving MRItechnology as well as somatostatin receptor
`
`scintigraphy represent moves in the right direction in
`order to comecloser to the ideal in the possible detection
`of the first and only tumorcell [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 remainsto be deter-
`minedif this approach will substitute for the conventional
`‘open’ approach. Considering, for example, that we can
`evaluate the lymph nodestatus in ileal NETjust as well by
`laparoscopyas by ‘open surgery’ is very promising.
`Furthermore, local ablative procedures have increas-
`ingly been used by now in NETdisease. 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 [17-19]. So far, how-
`ever, only one prospective multicenter trial with radiola-
`beled octreotate coupled to yttrium 90 via a chemical
`DOTATOCbridge (Octreother) has been performed. Fi-
`nalresults 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 thefirst 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
`someresponses [21]. However, these responseslast only a
`few months. Based on these limited effects of presently
`used chemotherapeutic agents, new chemotherapeutics
`may be worth testing such as oxaliplatin- or taxol-based
`regimensin 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 numberofclinical ques-
`tions have to be answered in prospective pan-European or
`even global trials.
`The major issues and questions to be answeredare:
`(1) development of a staging, grading and subsequent
`TNMclassification as an objective measure for prognosis
`in NETpatients; (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(supp! 1):94-98
`
`95
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 002
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 002
`
`

`

`Table 1. Overexpression of growth factors and their cognate recep-
`tors in GEP NETs
`
`Growth factor
`
`Receptor
`
`PDGF
`bFGF
`TGF-a
`TGFE-B
`HGF
`IGF
`VEGF
`
`PDGF-a-R
`FGF-RI, FGF-RII
`EGF-R
`TGF-B-RI, TGF-B-RII
`HGF-R
`IGF-R
`KDR,Fit-1
`
`Reference
`
`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 thermalablation, la-
`ser-induced thermotherapy and others) in comparison
`with medical therapy underthe aspects of both, control of
`symptoms as well as tumor growth; (6) evaluation of
`embolization vs. chemoembolization in a prospectiveset-
`ting; (7) determination of the antiproliferative effect of
`biotherapeuticsin 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
`tumorbiological phenomenasuch as anoikis, angiogene-
`sis and cell cycle activity in differentiated and undifferen-
`tiated NETcells 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 NETcell
`crosstalk is concerned, aside from NETcells, 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 andcellular 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 NETcells but
`may also include immunocytes and other non-NETcells.
`Among the most promising new therapeutic ap-
`proachesin 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 hyperpermeabili-
`ty and matrix permeation, followed in turn by the induc-
`tion of endothelial proliferation, migration, lumen forma-
`tion andstabilization ofpericytes, this growth factor fami-
`ly warrants further detailed studies in NETs. This ap-
`proachis further supported by the fact that NET diseaseis
`characterized by hypervascularization within the tumor
`tissue [25].
`Growth factor signalling in GEP NETshasso 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 NETcelllines. Details and references on the
`signalling pathways of PDGF, bFGF, EGF, HGF, IGF
`and VEGFin GEP NETare 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 symptomsin
`NETs. However,in order to improvethe potencyofthese
`pharmacological agents, more detailed studies are re-
`quired analyzing the crosstalk of somatostatin analogues
`with phosphatases and calcium channels. In addition, a
`variety of mechanismsofinterferon-o action on NETcells
`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
`Mergleret 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 1):94-98
`
`Wiedenmann/Pape
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 003
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 003
`
`

`

`The antiproliferative action of COX-2/NSAIDs in NET
`cells has recently been demonstrated in vitro for thefirst
`time [41]. Clearly, COX-2 inhibitors represent an inter-
`esting new therapeutic approach for NETsbased 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 numerousclini-
`cal, oncological trials for non-NET indications. These
`include targeted therapeutics such as gefinitib (Iressa®)
`interfering with EGFreceptor signalling; imatinib inter-
`fering with PDGFc-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-Fmssignalling;
`Medi-522 andcilengitide interfering with integrin-a,B3
`signalling; flavopyridol and rapamycin interfering with
`nuclear replication and membranetransport/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 orderto gen-
`erate better evidence-based medicine levels than those
`that have been obtained so far. Clearly, this also implies
`the performance ofstudies 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 hopeespecially in the fields of angiogene-
`sis, nuclear replication, cellular adhesion andsignal trans-
`duction.
`
`Acknowledgments
`
`The authors are indebted to M. Szott-Emusand E. Zach, Berlin,
`Germany,fortheir excellent editorial support.
`
`References
`
`Modlin IM, Lye KD, Kidd M:A 5-decadeanal-
`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 neuroendocrinecell system and
`its tumors: The WHOclassification, Ann N Y
`AcadSci 2004;1014:13-27.
`Wiedenmann B, John M, Ahnert-Hilger G,
`Riecken EO: 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.
`Bernick PE, Klimstra DS, Shia J, Minsky B,
`Saltz L, Shi W, Thaler H, Guillem J, Paty P,
`Cohen AM, Wong WD: Neuroendocrinecarci-
`nomasofthe colon and rectum. Dis Colon Rec-
`tum 2004;47:163-169.
`Lamberts SW, Hofland LJ, Nobels FR: Neu-
`roendocrine tumor markers. Front Neuroendo-
`crinol 2001;22:309-339.
`
`w
`
`ws
`
`oo
`
`9
`
`10
`
`1 _
`
`12
`
`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, Berndt 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,
`Wiedenmann B, Jensen RT, Mignon M, Mod-
`lin CI, Skogseid B, Doherty G, Oberg K: Preop-
`erative diagnosis and surgical managementof
`tu-
`neuroendocrine
` gastroenteropancreatic
`mors: General recommendations by a consen-
`sus workshop. World J Surg 1998;22:309-318.
`LemmensI, 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 8S, Teh BT, Farnebo F,
`Thakker RV:Identification of the multiple en-
`docrine neoplasia type 1 (MENI1) gene. The
`European Consortium on MEN1. 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,
`RaueF, 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 | and type 2. J Clin
`Endocrinol Metab 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 ZimmerT, Stolzel U, Bader M, Koppenhagen
`K, Hamm B, Buhr H, Riecken EO, 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.
`Eur J 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;351:417-418.
`
`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
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 004
`
`

`

`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`32
`
`33
`
`34
`
`Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Kam BL, Teu-
`Detjen KM, Welzel M, Farwig K, Brembeck
`Chaudhry A, Funa K, Oberg K: Expression of
`FH, Kaiser A, Riecken EO, Wiedenmann B,
`growth factor peptides and their receptors in
`nissen JJ, Kooij PP, de Herder WW,Feelders
`Rosewicz S: Molecular mechanism ofinterfer-
`neuroendocrine tumors ofthe digestive system.
`RA, van Eijck CH, de Jong M, Srinivasan A,
`Acta Oncol 1993;32:107-114.
`Erion JL, Krenning EP: Treatmentof patients
`on-alfa-mediated growth inhibition in human
`neuroendocrine tumorcells. Gastroenterology
`Nilsson O, Wangberg B, Kolby L, Schultz GS,
`with gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) tumours
`with the novel radiolabelled somatostatin ana-
`2000; 118:735-748.
`Ahlman H: Expression of transforming growth
`factor alpha and its receptor in human neu-
`logue [177Lu-DOTA(0),Tyr3]octreotate. Eur J
`Detjen KM,Kehrberger JP, Drost A, Rabien A,
`Welzel M, WiedenmannB, Rosewicz S: Inter-
`roendocrine tumours. Int J Cancer 1995;60:
`Nucl Med MolImaging 2003;30:417-422.
`645-651.
`Moertel CG, Lefkopoulo M, Lipsitz S, Hahn
`feron-gamma inhibits growth of human neu-
`roendocrine carcinoma cells via induction of
`Shimizu T, Tanaka S, HarumaK, Kitadai Y,
`RG, Klaassen D: Streptozocin-doxorubicin,
`apoptosis, Int J Oncol 2002;21:1133-1140.
`streptozocin-fluorouracil or chlorozotocin in
`Yoshihara M, Sumii K, Kajiyama G, Shima-
`moto F: Growth characteristics of rectal carci-
`the treatment of advancedislet-cell carcinoma.
`Faiss S, Pape UF, Bohmig M,Dorffel Y, Mans-
`mann U, Golder W, Riecken EO, Wiedenmann
`N Engl J Med 1992;326:519-523.
`noid tumors. Oncology 2000;59:229-237.
`B;International Lanreotide and Interferon Alfa
`Moertel CG, Kvols LK, O’Connell MJ, Rubin
`Peghini PL, Iwamoto M,Raffeld M, Chen YJ,
`J: Treatment of neuroendocrine carcinomas
`Study Group: Prospective, randomized, multi-
`Goebel SU, Serrano J, Jensen RT: Overexpres-
`center trial on the antiproliferative effect of
`sion of epidermal growth factor and hepatocyte
`with combined etoposide and cisplatin. Evi-
`lanreotide, interferon-alfa, and their combina-
`dence of major therapeutic activity in the ana-
`growth factor receptors in a proportion of gas-
`plastic variants of these neoplasms. Cancer
`tion for therapy of metastatic neuroendocrine
`trinomascorrelates with aggressive growth and
`lower curability. Clin Cancer Res 2002;8:
`1991;68:227-232.
`gastroenteropancreatic tumors. J Clin Oncol
`2273-2285.
`2003;2 1:2689-2696.
`Rougier P, Mitry E: Chemotherapyin the treat-
`Wulbrand U, Remmert G, Zofel P, Wied M,
`Pape UF, WiedenmannB: Adding interferon-
`mentof neuroendocrine malignant tumors. Di-
`alpha to octreotide slows tumour progression
`Arnold R, Fehmann HC: mRNAexpression
`gestion 2000;62(suppl 1):73-78.
`compared with octreotide alone but evidenceis
`von Marschall Z, Scholz A, Cramer T, Schafer
`patterns of insulin-like growth factor system
`lacking for improved survival in people with
`components in human neuroendocrine tu-
`G, Schirner M, Oberg K, Wiedenmann B,
`mours. Eur J Clin Invest 2000;30:729-739.
`Hocker M, Rosewicz S: Effects of interferon
`disseminated midgut carcinoid tumours. Can-
`cer Treat Rev 2003;29:565-569.
`von Wichert G, Jehle PM, Hoeflich A, Kosch-
`alpha on vascular endothelial growth factor
`nick S, Dralle H, Wolf E, Wiedenmann B,
`Mergler $8, Wiedenmann B, Prada J: R-type
`gene transcription and tumor angiogenesis. J
`Natl CancerInst 2003;95:437-448.
`Boehm EO,Adler G,Seufferlein T: Insulin-like
`Ca?* channel activity is associated with chro-
`mogranin A secretion in human neuroendo-
`Wimmel A, WiedenmannB, Rosewicz S: Auto-
`growth factor-I is an autocrine regulator of
`crine tumor BON cells. J Membr Biol 2003;
`chromogranin A secretion and growth in hu-
`crine growth inhibition by transforming growth
`194:177-186.
`man neuroendocrine tumorcells. Cancer Res
`factor beta-1 (TGFbeta-1) in human neuroen-
`2000;60:4573-4581.
`Mergler S, Drost A, Bechstein WO, NeuhausP,
`docrine tumour cells. Gut 2003:52:1308-
`1316.
`Wiedenmann B: Ca2* channel properties in
`Krenning EP, Valkema R, Kooij PP, Breeman
`neuroendocrine tumor cell cultures investi-
`Folkman J: Fundamental concepts of the an-
`WA, Bakker WH, de Herder WW,van Eijck
`gated by whole-cell patch-clamp technique.
`giogenic process. Curr Mol Med 2003;3:643-
`CH, Kwekkeboom DJ, de Jong M, Jamar F,
`651.
`Pauwels S: Therole ofradioactive somatostatin
`Ann NYAcadSci 2004;1014:137-139.
`41
`26
`Chaudhry A, Papanicolaou V, Oberg K, Heldin
`and its analogues in the control of tumor
`Detjen KM, Welzel M, WiedenmannB,Rose-
`CH, Funa K: Expression of platelet-derived
`wicz S: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
`growth. Recent Results Cancer Res 2000;153:
`1-13.
`growth factor and its receptors in neuroendo-
`inhibit growth of human neuroendocrine tu-
`crine tumors of the digestive system. Cancer
`Schmid HA, Schoeffter P: Functional activity
`morcells via G1 cell-cycle arrest. Int J Cancer
`2003; 107:844-853.
`Res 1992;52:1006-1012.
`of the multiligand analog SOM230 at human
`recombinant somatostatin receptor subtypes
`supports its usefulness in neuroendocrine tu-
`mors. Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(suppl1):
`47-50.
`
`36
`
`37
`
`38
`
`39
`
`40
`
`98
`
`Neuroendocrinology 2004;80(supp! 1):94-98
`
`Wiedenmann/Pape
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`
`Exhibit 1052
`Page 005
`
`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