Eli Lilly and Company

About: Eli Lilly and Company is a company organization based out in Indianapolis, Indiana, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Agonist. The organization has 17826 authors who have published 22835 publications receiving 946714 citations. The organization is also known as: Eli Lily.

Biological efficacy of a chimeric antibody to the epidermal growth factor receptor in a human tumor xenograft model.

Abstract: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a protein tyrosine kinase expressed on many types of tumor cells, including breast, ovarian, bladder, head and neck, and prostatic carcinoma. There seems to be an association between up-regulation of the EGFR and poor clinical prognosis for a number of human cancers. The 225 antibody is a highly specific murine monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the human EGFR with an affinity equal to its ligand, competes with the ligand for binding, and blocks activation of the receptor tyrosine kinase. In addition, 225 has been shown to inhibit the growth of human tumor xenografts in athymic nude mice. The 225 antibody has recently been chimerized with human IgG1 in its constant region to increase its clinical utility by decreasing the potential for generation of human antimouse antibodies in recipients. This report compares the biological effects of 225 and its chimeric counterpart (designated C225) against established A431 tumor xenografts in nude mice. The results of these experiments indicated that C225 was more effective than 225 in inhibiting tumor growth in this model. In addition, many of the animals treated with C225 were tumor free at the end of each treatment protocol. It was determined that the dissociation constant of C225 was about 5-fold lower than 225. This suggested that the increased capacity of C225 to compete with ligand for binding to the EGFR was responsible for its enhanced in vivo antitumor effect.

Mild cognitive impairment can be distinguished from Alzheimer disease and normal aging for clinical trials.

Abstract: Background Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents a transitional state between the cognitive changes of normal aging and very early dementia and is becoming increasingly recognized as a risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD). The Memory Impairment Study (MIS) is a multicenter clinical trial in patients with MCI designed to evaluate whether vitamin E or donepezil is effective at delaying the time to a clinical diagnosis of AD. Objective To describe the baseline characteristics of patients with MCI recruited for the MIS and compare them with those of elderly controls and patients with AD in another clinical trial. Design Descriptive and comparative study of patients with MCI participating in a multicenter clinical trial. Setting Memory disorder centers in the United States and Canada. Patients A total of 769 patients with MCI, 107 cognitively normal elderly controls, 122 patients with very mild AD (Clinical Dementia Rating [CDR] 0.5), and 183 patients with mild AD (CDR 1.0) were evaluated. Patients in the MIS met operational criteria for amnestic MCI. Controls were recruited in parallel with the MCI group, underwent the same assessments, and had a CDR of 0. Main Outcome Measures Clinical, neuropsychologic, functional, neuroimaging, and genetic measures. Results Mean ± SD Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale scores were 5.6 ± 3.3 for controls, 11.3 ± 4.4 for patients with MCI, 18.0 ± 6.2 for the AD CDR 0.5 group, and 25.2 ± 8.8 for the AD CDR 1.0 group. Compared with controls, patients with MCI were most impaired on memory tasks, with less severe impairments in other cognitive domains. Patients with MCI were more likely than controls but less likely than patients with AD to carry the apolipoprotein E ϵ4 allele. Patients with MCI had hippocampal volumes that were intermediate between those of controls and patients with AD. Conclusions Patients with MCI had a predominant memory impairment with relative sparing of other cognitive domains and were intermediate between clinically normal individuals and patients with AD on cognitive and functional ratings. These results demonstrate the successful implementation of operational criteria for this unique group of at-risk patients in a multicenter clinical trial.

Growth hormone and bone.

Abstract: It is well known that GH is important in the regulation of longitudinal bone growth. Its role in the regulation of bone metabolism in man has not been understood until recently. Several in vivo and in vitro studies have demonstrated that GH is important in the regulation of both bone formation and bone resorption. In Figure 9 a simplified model for the cellular effects of GH in the regulation of bone remodeling is presented (Fig. 9). GH increases bone formation in two ways: via a direct interaction with GHRs on osteoblasts and via an induction of endocrine and autocrine/paracrine IGF-I. It is difficult to say how much of the GH effect is mediated by IGFs and how much is IGF-independent. GH treatment also results in increased bone resorption. It is still unknown whether osteoclasts express functional GHRs, but recent in vitro studies indicate that GH regulates osteoclast formation in bone marrow cultures. Possible modulations of the GH/IGF axis by glucocorticoids and estrogens are also included in Fig. 9. GH deficiency results in a decreased bone mass in both man and experimental animals. Long-term treatment (> 18 months) of GHD patients with GH results in an increased bone mass. GH treatment also increases bone mass and the total mechanical strength of bones in rats with a normal GH secretion. Recent clinical studies demonstrate that GH treatment of patients with normal GH secretion increases biochemical markers for both bone formation and bone resorption. Because of the short duration of GH treatment in man with normal GH secretion, the effect on bone mass is still inconclusive. Interestingly, GH treatment to GHD adults initially results in increased bone resorption with an increased number of bone-remodeling units and more newly produced unmineralized bone, resulting in an apparent low or unchanged bone mass. However, GH treatment for more than 18 months gives increased bone formation and bone mineralization of newly produced bone and a concomitant increase in bone mass as determined with DEXA. Thus, the action of GH on bone metabolism in GHD adults is 2-fold: it stimulates both bone resorption and bone formation. We therefore propose "the biphasic model" of GH action in bone remodeling (Fig. 10). According to this model, GH initially increases bone resorption with a concomitant bone loss that is followed by a phase of increased bone formation. After the moment when bone formation is stimulated more than bone resorption (transition point), bone mass is increased. However, a net gain of bone mass caused by GH may take some time as the initial decrease in bone mass must first be replaced (Fig. 10). When all clinical studies of GH treatment of GHD adults are taken into account, it appears that the "transition point" occurs after approximately 6 months and that a net increase of bone mass will be seen after 12-18 months of GH treatment. It should be emphasized that the biphasic model of GH action in bone remodeling is based on findings in GHD adults. It remains to be clarified whether or not it is valid for subjects with normal GH secretion. A treatment intended to increase the effects of GH/IGF-I axis on bone metabolism might include: 1) GH, 2) IGF, 3) other hormones/factors increasing the local IGF-I production in bone, and 4) GH-releasing factors. Other hormones/growth factors increasing local IGF may be important but are not discussed in this article. IGF-I has been shown to increase bone mass in animal models and biochemical markers in humans. However, no effect on bone mass has yet been presented in humans. Because the financial cost for GH treatment is high it has been suggested that GH-releasing factors might be used to stimulate the GH/IGF-I axis. The advantage of GH-releasing factors over GH is that some of them can be administered orally and that they may induce a more physiological GH secretion. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Neutralizing antibodies against epidermal growth factor and ErbB-2/neu receptor tyrosine kinases down-regulate vascular endothelial growth factor production by tumor cells in vitro and in vivo: angiogenic implications for signal transduction therapy of solid tumors.

Abstract: The overexpression in tumor cells of (proto)-oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or ErbB2/neu (also known as HER-2) is generally thought to contribute to the development of solid tumors primarily through their effects on promoting uncontrolled cell proliferation. However, agents that antagonize the function of the protein products encoded by these (proto)-oncogenes are known to behave in vivo in a cytotoxic-like manner. This implies that such oncogenes may regulate critical cell survival functions, including angiogenesis. The latter could occur as a consequence of regulation of relevant growth factors by such oncogenes. We therefore sought to determine whether EGFR or ErbB2/neu may contribute to tumor angiogenesis by examining their effects on the expression of vascular endothelial cell growth factor (VEGF)/vascular permeability factor (VPF), one of the most important of all known inducers of tumor angiogenesis. We found that in vitro treatment of EGFR-positive A431 human epidermoid carcinoma cells, which are known to be heavily dependent on VEGF/VPF in vivo as an angiogenesis growth factor, with the C225 anti-EGFR neutralizing antibody caused a dose-dependent inhibition of VEGF protein expression. Prominent suppression of VEGF/VPF expression in vivo, as well as a significant reduction in tumor blood vessel counts, were also observed in established A431 tumors shortly after injection of the antibody as few as four times into nude mice. Transformation of NIH 3T3 fibroblasts with mutant ErbB2/neu, another EGFR-like oncogenic tyrosine kinase, resulted in a significant induction of VEGF/VPF, and the magnitude of this effect was further elevated by hypoxia. Moreover, treatment of ErbB2/neu-positive SKBR-3 human breast cancer cells in vitro with a specific neutralizing anti-ErbB2/neu monoclonal antibody (4D5) resulted in a dose-dependent reduction of VEGF/VPF protein expression. Taken together, the results suggest that oncogenic properties of EGFR and ErbB2/neu may, at least in part, be mediated by stimulation of tumor angiogenesis by up-regulating potent angiogenesis growth factors such as VEGF/VPF. These genetic changes may cooperate with epigenetic/environmental effects such as hypoxia to maximally stimulate VEGF/VPF expression. Therapeutic disruption of EGFR or ErbB2/neu protein function in vivo may therefore result in partial suppression of angiogenesis, a feature that could enhance the therapeutic index of such agents in vivo and endow them with anti-tumor effects, the magnitude of which may be out of proportion with their observed cytostatic effects in monolayer tissue culture.