This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2004-0226OCv1 32/3/211    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Qin, M. Articles by Batra, R. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Qin, M. Articles by Batra, R. K.

Gene Transfer Mediated by Native versus Fibroblast Growth Factor–Retargeted Adenoviral Vectors into Lung Cancer Cells

Department of Medicine and The Lung Cancer Research Program, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California at Los Angeles; and Veterans Administration Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Raj K. Batra, M.D., David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Veterans Administration Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, 111Q, 11301 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90073. E-mail: rbatra{at}ucla.edu

We compared native Adenoviral (Ad) vectors to a basic Fibroblast Growth Factor–retargeted Adenovirus (FGF2-Ad) for gene delivery into a diverse panel of lung cancer cells in vitro and xenografts in vivo. Cells were first evaluated for vector-specific receptor expression. Marked variations of surface coxsackie-adenovirus receptor (CAR), but relatively similar levels of v integrin and FGF receptor expression were evident. Transduction efficiency by Ad directly correlated (R = 0.77, 95% CI 0.28–0.94, P = 0.0085) with CAR, but not with v integrin expression. Transduction efficiency by FGF2-Ad did not correlate with the measured FGF receptor expression. Blocking studies indicated that gene transfer by FGF2-Ad occurred by a CAR-independent pathway, and could be inhibited by free FGF in a dose-dependent manner. Ad-antiserum inhibited FGF2-Ad gene transfer, suggesting that the Ad-component was needed for post-entry DNA-delivery. Soluble heparin sulfate proteoglycans (HSPG) or v integrin blockers marginally decreased FGF2-Ad transduction. Both Ad and FGF2-Ad equally transduced CAR-positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) cells. By contrast, FGF2-Ad had a distinct transduction advantage in CAR-deficient NSCLC cells. This improvement in transduction of CAR-deficient cells by FGF2-Ad persisted in vivo. These data justify the need for an improved FGF2-Ad vector for clinical use in CAR-deficient lung cancer.

Key Words: CAR • FGF2 • gene therapy • lung cancer • molecular conjugates