You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic. For video creation, please contact our Academic Video Service.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Sara Rezzola
 -- 2663 2022-04-22 17:10:06 |
2 format
Jason Zhu
 -34 word(s) 2629 2022-04-24 03:32:05 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Academic Video Service to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Rezzola, S.; Loda, A.; Turati, M.; Semeraro, F.; Ronca, R. Fibroblast Growth Factor/Receptor System in Ocular Tumors. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/22180 (accessed on 18 July 2025).
Rezzola S, Loda A, Turati M, Semeraro F, Ronca R. Fibroblast Growth Factor/Receptor System in Ocular Tumors. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/22180. Accessed July 18, 2025.
Rezzola, Sara, Alessandra Loda, Marta Turati, Francesco Semeraro, Roberto Ronca. "Fibroblast Growth Factor/Receptor System in Ocular Tumors" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/22180 (accessed July 18, 2025).
Rezzola, S., Loda, A., Turati, M., Semeraro, F., & Ronca, R. (2022, April 22). Fibroblast Growth Factor/Receptor System in Ocular Tumors. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/22180
Rezzola, Sara, et al. "Fibroblast Growth Factor/Receptor System in Ocular Tumors." Encyclopedia. Web. 22 April, 2022.
Fibroblast Growth Factor/Receptor System in Ocular Tumors
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/ijms23073835

Ocular tumors are a family of rare neoplasms that develop in the eye. Depending on the type of cancer, they mainly originate from cells localized within the retina, the uvea, or the vitreous. Even though current treatments (e.g., radiotherapy, transpupillary thermotherapy, cryotherapy, chemotherapy, local resection, or enucleation) achieve the control of the local tumor in the majority of treated cases, a significant percentage of patients develop metastatic disease. In recent years, new targeting therapies and immuno-therapeutic approaches have been evaluated. Nevertheless, the search for novel targets and players is eagerly required to prevent and control tumor growth and metastasis dissemination. The fibroblast growth factor (FGF)/FGF receptor (FGFR) system consists of a family of proteins involved in a variety of physiological and pathological processes, including cancer. Indeed, tumor and stroma activation of the FGF/FGFR system plays a relevant role in tumor growth, invasion, and resistance, as well as in angiogenesis and dissemination.

ocular tumors FGF FGFR

1. Introduction

The eye is a highly specialized sensory organ that allows the collection of external images through photoreception, a process by which light energy is detected by specialized neurons in the retina, i.e., the rods and cones. In turn, retinal neurons activate action potentials, which are subsequently transmitted through the optic nerve to the brain, where the information is processed as vision [1].
Structurally, the eye is a slightly asymmetrical globe located in the orbit, a compartment that is closed medially, laterally, and posteriorly. The eyeball is formed by three concentric layers of tissue. The outer protective layer is constituted by the fibrous coat, which includes the transparent cornea and the opaque sclera; it helps to maintain intraocular pressure and provides an attachment site for intraocular muscles. The anterior portion of the eye and the inner surface of the eyelids are covered by the conjunctiva, a protective mucous membrane [1][2]. The middle layer, i.e., the uvea, represents the vascular coat, which exerts nutritive functions to support ocular structures. It comprises the iris, the ciliary body, and the choroid. Finally, the retina constitutes the neural coat, an inner sensory layer which hosts several classes of neuronal cells involved in the visual process [2][3][4].

The globe is divided into two cavities, the anterior and the posterior segments. The anterior segment encompasses the space around the iris and is filled with the aqueous humor, a clear fluid actively secreted by the ciliary processes. The posterior segment is located behind the lens, and it contains the vitreous humor, which is mostly composed of collagen and hyaluronic acid; vitreous humor has a very slow turnover and it helps in maintaining the shape of the eye [1].

2. The Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF)/FGF Receptor (FGFR) System

In mice and humans, the Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF) family is composed of 22 polypeptides that act as secreted signaling proteins (FGF1-10, FGF16-23) or as receptor-independent intracellular factors (FGF11-14), with the latter being mainly involved in neuronal development and in regulating the electrical excitability of neurons [5][6]. Secreted FGFs are grouped into 6 subfamilies according to phylogenetic analysis and sequence homology. The subfamilies FGF1/2/5, FGF3/4/6, FGF7/10/22, FGF8/17/18, and FGF9/16/20 are known as canonical FGFs and act as local paracrine signaling molecules. The FGF19/21/23 subfamily comprises hormone-like FGFs acting as endocrine factors that control metabolic homeostasis [5][7][8]. Both canonical and hormone-like FGFs mediate their biological functions by activating cell surface tyrosine kinase (TK) receptors (FGFRs), which are encoded by four distinct genes (FGFR1-4) in mammals [5][7]. Structurally, FGFRs present an extracellular domain, a transmembrane domain, and a cytoplasmic TK tail, which is responsible for FGF-related signaling. The extracellular domain consists of three immunoglobulin (Ig)-like domains (I–III), with the Ig-like domain II and III being involved in ligand binding and in defining ligand specificity [7][9]. The functional interaction between canonical FGFs and their receptors requires the formation of two FGF-FGFR-heparan sulfate proteoglycan (HSPG) ternary complexes and their subsequent dimerization [7][10].
Besides their role as coreceptors in FGF/FGFR interaction, HSPGs protect canonical FGFs from extracellular protease-mediated degradation; moreover, they sequester FGF molecules, thus limiting their diffusion through the extracellular matrix and providing a reservoir of the ligands [9][11]. The formation of the FGF-FGFR-HSPG ternary complex triggers conformational changes, leading to trans-phosphorylation of the tyrosine residue within the intracellular TK domain and providing docking sites for intracellular receptor substrates, such as specific adaptor protein FGFR substrate 2 (FRS2) and phospholipase Cγ (PLCγ). Phosphorylation of FRS2 activates the RAS-MAPK pathway, resulting in proliferation, differentiation, or cell cycle arrest, depending on the different cellular context. Moreover, FRS2 phosphorylation may also activate the anti-apoptotic PI3K-AKT pathway. On the other hand, PLCγ leads to protein kinase C (PKC) activation and intracellular Ca2+ release, promoting cell migration [8][12].
By mediating such a wide range of cellular activities, the FGF/FGFR system assumes pivotal regulatory roles. Indeed, it is involved from the earliest phases of embryonic development by taking part in mesoderm patterning; moreover, by regulating mesenchymal-epithelial communications, the FGF/FGFR system is essential for organogenesis. Furthermore, FGFs/FGFRs exert homeostatic functions in adults, being involved in tissue repair and remodeling processes [5][8].
Given its ubiquitous and wide-ranging biological functions, the FGF/FGFR system requires tight regulation. Ligand-receptor binding specificity and spatio-temporal expression of FGFs, FGFRs, and HSPGs are necessary to avoid aberrant or unappropriated activation. Furthermore, negative feedback mechanisms occur in response to FGF/FGFR activation, including FGFR internalization and the recruitment of phosphatases and/or negative modulators (e.g., Sprouty proteins) [7][12]. FGFR signaling may also be modulated though the interaction with the non-canonical signaling partners of FGFRs, including extracellular matrix (ECM)-associated proteins, cell adhesion molecules (CAMs), or other transmembrane proteins and serine/threonine kinases [13].

2.1. The FGF/FGFR System in Cancer

The FGF/FGFR family has been described to play a relevant role in several pathological conditions, including cancer [7][8][14]. The aberrant activation of the FGF/FGFR system, both in the neoplastic and the stromal compartments, may occur both in a ligand-independent or a ligand-dependent manner, triggering tumor growth, invasion, angiogenesis, metastatic dissemination, and resistance to therapies [15][16][17]. Activating mutations in the extracellular or TK domains of the receptors are involved in the progression of various tumor types, including bladder and cervical cancers [18], multiple myeloma [19], and prostate cancer [20]. Moreover, chromosomal translocations may generate fusion proteins involving the TK domain of FGFR combined with a transcription factor domain, as, for example, ZNF198 in myeloproliferative syndrome [21] or ETV6 in peripheral T-cell lymphoma [22]. In these cases, the constitutive dimerization and activation of the fusion protein strongly promotes cell proliferation and tumor growth [21][22]. As reported for multiple myeloma, chromosomal translocations may also result in FGFR overexpression by bringing FGFR genes under the control of a highly active promoter [11][12][14][23]. Additionally, FGFR overexpression has been reported for breast [24], gastric [25], and squamous cell lung cancers [26] as a consequence of dysregulated gene transcription and amplification.
Ligand-dependent FGFR signaling activation plays an important role in the pathogenesis of cancer as well. Indeed, FGFs can be produced at high concentrations or “out of context” by cancer cells or by the surrounding stroma, thus causing the hyperactivation of the signaling and sustaining tumor growth through autocrine/paracrine mechanisms. Furthermore, altered gene splicing mechanisms may lead to the production of different splice variants of the receptors, able to bind a wider range of FGFs, resulting in an increased FGF/FGFR activation. Aberrant FGF/FGFR signaling may also result from the impairment of negative feedback mechanisms, including mutations that increase receptor stability or loss of negative feedback regulators [11][23].
Besides their pro-tumor activity exerted on cancer cells, tumor-derived FGFs also mediate tumor/stroma crosstalk, thus playing a relevant role in conditioning the surrounding stromal cells and favoring the onset of a pro-tumor microenvironment [27][28]. It is well documented that FGFs, in particular FGF1 and FGF2, promote tumor-associated angiogenesis and induce the formation of new vessels that provide oxygen and nutrients, and that facilitate cancer cell dissemination [23]. Furthermore, tumor-derived FGFs activate cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), and in turn CAF-produced FGFs sustain cancer progression [29]. FGFs are also involved in the recruitment of tumor-associated macrophages, which exert pro-tumor functions by negatively regulating immune responses to cancer cells. Finally, emerging evidence highlights a possible role of the FGF/FGFR system in the acquisition of resistance to drugs, despite their different molecular structure and mechanisms of action [23][30]. Thus, aberrant activation of FGF/FGFR signaling may have several effects on tumor biology, including the promotion of cell proliferation and survival, motility and invasiveness, metastatic dissemination, tumor escape from immune control, and resistance to therapy.

2.2. FGF/FGFR Inhibitors

Due to its crucial role in cancer progression, the FGF/FGFR system represents an attractive target for the development of anti-tumor drugs. FGFR inhibitors may act either at an extracellular level, by preventing ligand-receptor interaction, or at an intracellular level, by hampering signal transduction. Currently, FGFR inhibitors are classified as: (i) TK inhibitors (TKIs), (ii) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), and (iii) FGF traps [15][23].
First-generation TKIs are small molecules that inhibit the kinase activity of TK receptors (RTKs) by preventing the binding of ATP to the catalytic site in a non-selective manner. These compounds act on several RTKs, including FGFRs, due to the structural similarity of their TK domains [31]. Although simultaneous inhibition of multiple RTKs may represent a compelling therapeutic strategy, the application of non-selective TKIs in clinical practice is limited by the onset of local and systemic complications, together with the poor efficacy observed in FGFR-dependent tumors. Nevertheless, some of these compounds are currently under investigation in preclinical and clinical trials, whereas other non-selective TKIs have already been approved for the treatment of metastatic thyroid cancer (i.e., lenvatinib) and metastatic colorectal cancer (i.e., regorafenib) [15]. To overcome the off-target effects of first generation TKI drugs, selective FGFR TKIs have been developed and are now under evaluation (e.g., BGJ398 for non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and AZD4547 for non-small cell lung cancer) or already approved (e.g., pemigatinib for cholangiocarcinoma and JNJ-42756493 for urothelial carcinoma) [32][33][34] (www.clinicaltrials.gov, accessed on 17 February 2022).
While most of the compounds described above exert their activity on more than one FGFR, anti-FGFR mAbs have the advantage to target specific receptors or even isoforms. Moreover, they are associated with a reduced toxicity due to the absence of off-target effects. Nevertheless, to date, only two anti-FGFR mAbs have entered clinical trials, i.e., MGFR1877S for the treatment of advanced solid tumors and FPA144 for gastric cancer [31][32] (www.clinicaltrials.gov, accessed on 17 February 2022).
Finally, FGF-trap inhibitors may represent a compelling therapeutic strategy for tumors driven by an aberrant ligand-dependent activation of the FGF/FGFR system. These drugs can bind one or more FGFs and, by acting at the extracellular level, they can also affect the tumor microenvironment, hampering the tumor-stroma crosstalk [15][31]. The FGF-trap family comprises several compounds, including FP-1039, a soluble decoy receptor fusion protein, and NSC12, a small molecule that mimics the minimal FGF2-binding sequence of the long Pentraxin-3 [23][35]. Interestingly, the new class of small molecules has displayed a low toxicity profile when evaluated in experimental animal models [35].

3. The FGF/FGFR System in Eye Tumors

Even though the involvement of FGFs/FGFRs has been well documented in most solid and hematological tumors, to date, scattered pieces of literature show that they may also play a relevant role in eye tumors, particularly in uveal melanoma and retinoblastoma.
Clinical and experimental evidence suggests the presence of an FGF/FGFR autocrine activation loop in uveal melanoma. Indeed, data mining performed on the publicly available mRNA profiling dataset of 80 primary human uveal melanoma specimens, present in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), reports the overexpression of one or more FGFs or FGFRs in 60% and 21% of cases of uveal melanoma, respectively. Interestingly, among several FGFs and FGFRs that were found upregulated, FGF12 and FGFR1 were the most represented, reaching 26% and 11% of total cases. In addition, alterations in FGFs and FGFRs resulted in a poorer prognosis in terms of reduced overall survival in patients . Expression analysis in a set of 9 primary uveal melanomas reported that FGF1 and FGF2 were expressed in 77% of samples, with co-expression of FGF1/FGF2 in 55% of cases. Moreover, primary tumors also expressed all FGFRs, with FGFR1 being the most represented overall, while 33% of tumors expressed both FGF1/FGF2 ligands and all four receptors [36].
Clinically, high levels of FGF2 were detected in mixed/epithelioid specimens, associated with a poor prognosis, compared to spindle cell type tumor samples [37][38]. Accordingly, primary tumors expressing FGF2 were associated with an increased metastasis occurrence [37]. The elevated expression of FGF2 in uveal melanoma metastases further reinforces the hypothesis that FGFs play a non-redundant role in uveal melanoma progression and invasion. Indeed, it has been recently reported that FGF2, produced by liver stellate cells, can mediate FGFR activation in metastatic uveal melanoma cells; moreover, it is responsible for the resistance to the bromodomain and histone deacetylase inhibitors [39].
From the perspective of therapeutic applications, the blocking of endogenous FGF2 with monoclonal antibodies or antisense nucleotide reduced cell proliferation, clonogenic potential, and cell survival in uveal melanoma cell lines [36]. Indeed, similar results were obtained by targeting FGFR1 [36]. Accordingly, treatment with the pan FGF-trap NSC12 [35] prevented the activation of FGFRs and their downstream signaling mediators FRS2 and ERK1/2 in uveal melanoma cells [40]. Moreover, NSC12 treatment induced cell apoptosis through the activation of the pro-apoptotic caspase-3 protein as well as PARP cleavage [40]. These events were matched by the degradation of β-catenin, a key mediator of uveal melanoma metastasis [41][42][43], and resulted in a significant inhibition of cell proliferation and migration [40]. Notably, similar effects were obtained with the selective FGFR TK inhibitor BGJ398 [40].
Regarding other ocular neoplasms, scattered evidence obtained on human retinoblastoma cell lines showed the expression of all four FGFRs, with cell proliferation in response to stimulation with FGF1 and FGF2 [44][45]. In addition, analysis of aqueous humor from retinoblastoma patients revealed higher concentration of FGF2 compared to the control group, thus supporting the hypothesis that FGF may play a role in retinoblastoma progression [46]. Moreover, experimental evidence shows that treatment with exogenous FGF1 induces the activation and phosphorylation of FGFR1 in the human retinoblastoma Y-29 cell line, while the selective inhibition of FGFR1 resulted in decreased cell proliferation [45].
The activation of the angiogenic switch, which requires an imbalance between pro- and anti-angiogenic factors, is essential for tumor progression [47]. In uveal melanoma and retinoblastoma, an increased vascular density has been associated with larger and more invasive tumors as well as with a poorer prognosis in patients [48][49]. In this frame, high levels of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) have been reported in the ocular fluids of patients affected by both uveal melanoma or retinoblastoma [46][50][51]. Moreover, a significant reduction of tumor growth was observed following treatment with anti-VEGF bevacizumab, in both in vitro and in vivo experimental models, suggesting that anti-angiogenic strategies may be of significance for the clinical management of ocular tumors [52][53]. Given the role of FGF2 as a potent pro-angiogenic mediator, several studies have investigated its involvement in ocular tumor-associated angiogenesis. As mentioned above, high concentrations of FGF2 have been found in the aqueous humor of patients affected by either retinoblastoma or uveal melanoma [46][51]. Moreover, immunohistochemistry analysis of uveal melanomas showed that, even though FGF2 is mainly located in the cytoplasm of tumor cells, a positive signal is also detectable in the perivascular area [54]. Accordingly, in vitro experiments reported a significant impairment in the proliferation of endothelial cells co-cultured with primary human uveal melanoma cells following the selective inhibition of FGF2 [54], thus pointing to this pathway as a possible target to block neo-angiogenesis in uveal melanoma. Similar results were obtained in a transgenic mouse model of retinoblastoma, where a time-course analysis of FGF2 expression showed a peak of production during the early stages of tumorigenesis, localized in the perivascular area [44]. Accordingly, immunofluorescence analysis of human retinoblastoma tissues showed a positive staining for FGF2 located in both tumor and vascular cells [44]. Finally, Y-29 cells extracts induced proliferation of bovine brain-derived capillary endothelial cells, whereas their pro-angiogenic activity was prevented in the presence of neutralizing anti-FGF2 antibodies [55].

References

  1. Cholkar, K.; Dasari, S.R.; Pal, D.; Mitra, A.K. Eye: Anatomy, physiology and barriers to drug delivery. In Ocular Transporters and Receptors; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 1–36.
  2. Malhotra, A.; Minja, F.J.; Crum, A.; Burrowes, D. Ocular anatomy and cross-sectional imaging of the eye. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR 2011, 32, 2–13.
  3. Masland, R.H. The neuronal organization of the retina. Neuron 2012, 76, 266–280.
  4. Mafee, M.F.; Karimi, A.; Shah, J.D.; Rapoport, M.; Ansari, S.A. Anatomy and pathology of the eye: Role of mr imaging and ct. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 2006, 14, 249–270.
  5. Wiedlocha, A.; Haugsten, E.M.; Zakrzewska, M. Roles of the fgf-fgfr signaling system in cancer development and inflammation. Cells 2021, 10, 2231.
  6. Itoh, N.; Ornitz, D.M. Fibroblast growth factors: From molecular evolution to roles in development, metabolism and disease. J. Biochem. 2011, 149, 121–130.
  7. Xie, Y.; Su, N.; Yang, J.; Tan, Q.; Huang, S.; Jin, M.; Ni, Z.; Zhang, B.; Zhang, D.; Luo, F.; et al. Fgf/fgfr signaling in health and disease. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2020, 5, 181.
  8. Ornitz, D.M.; Itoh, N. The fibroblast growth factor signaling pathway. Wiley Interdiscip Rev. Dev. Biol. 2015, 4, 215–266.
  9. Beenken, A.; Mohammadi, M. The fgf family: Biology, pathophysiology and therapy. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2009, 8, 235–253.
  10. Plotnikov, A.N.; Schlessinger, J.; Hubbard, S.R.; Mohammadi, M. Structural basis for fgf receptor dimerization and activation. Cell 1999, 98, 641–650.
  11. Brooks, A.N.; Kilgour, E.; Smith, P.D. Molecular pathways: Fibroblast growth factor signaling: A new therapeutic opportunity in cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2012, 18, 1855–1862.
  12. Giacomini, A.; Chiodelli, P.; Matarazzo, S.; Rusnati, M.; Presta, M.; Ronca, R. Blocking the fgf/fgfr system as a “two-compartment” antiangiogenic/antitumor approach in cancer therapy. Pharmacol. Res. 2016, 107, 172–185.
  13. Ferguson, H.R.; Smith, M.P.; Francavilla, C. Fibroblast growth factor receptors (fgfrs) and noncanonical partners in cancer signaling. Cells 2021, 10, 1201.
  14. Turner, N.; Grose, R. Fibroblast growth factor signalling: From development to cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2010, 10, 116–129.
  15. Ghedini, G.C.; Ronca, R.; Presta, M.; Giacomini, A. Future applications of fgf/fgfr inhibitors in cancer. Expert. Rev. Anticancer Ther. 2018, 18, 861–872.
  16. Giacomini, A.; Grillo, E.; Rezzola, S.; Ribatti, D.; Rusnati, M.; Ronca, R.; Presta, M. The fgf/fgfr system in the physiopathology of the prostate gland. Physiol. Rev. 2021, 101, 569–610.
  17. Rezzola, S.; Sigmund, E.C.; Halin, C.; Ronca, R. The lymphatic vasculature: An active and dynamic player in cancer progression. Med. Res. Rev. 2022, 42, 576–614.
  18. Cappellen, D.; De Oliveira, C.; Ricol, D.; de Medina, S.; Bourdin, J.; Sastre-Garau, X.; Chopin, D.; Thiery, J.P.; Radvanyi, F. Frequent activating mutations of fgfr3 in human bladder and cervix carcinomas. Nat. Genet. 1999, 23, 18–20.
  19. Chesi, M.; Nardini, E.; Brents, L.A.; Schröck, E.; Ried, T.; Kuehl, W.M.; Bergsagel, P.L. Frequent translocation t(4;14)(p16.3;q32.3) in multiple myeloma is associated with increased expression and activating mutations of fibroblast growth factor receptor 3. Nat. Genet. 1997, 16, 260–264.
  20. Hernández, S.; de Muga, S.; Agell, L.; Juanpere, N.; Esgueva, R.; Lorente, J.A.; Mojal, S.; Serrano, S.; Lloreta, J. Fgfr3 mutations in prostate cancer: Association with low-grade tumors. Mod. Pathol. 2009, 22, 848–856.
  21. Jackson, C.C.; Medeiros, L.J.; Miranda, R.N. 8p11 myeloproliferative syndrome: A review. Hum. Pathol. 2010, 41, 461–476.
  22. Yagasaki, F.; Wakao, D.; Yokoyama, Y.; Uchida, Y.; Murohashi, I.; Kayano, H.; Taniwaki, M.; Matsuda, A.; Bessho, M. Fusion of etv6 to fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 in peripheral t-cell lymphoma with a t(4;12)(p16;p13) chromosomal translocation. Cancer Res. 2001, 61, 8371–8374.
  23. Presta, M.; Chiodelli, P.; Giacomini, A.; Rusnati, M.; Ronca, R. Fibroblast growth factors (fgfs) in cancer: Fgf traps as a new therapeutic approach. Pharmacol. Ther. 2017, 179, 171–187.
  24. Courjal, F.; Cuny, M.; Simony-Lafontaine, J.; Louason, G.; Speiser, P.; Zeillinger, R.; Rodriguez, C.; Theillet, C. Mapping of DNA amplifications at 15 chromosomal localizations in 1875 breast tumors: Definition of phenotypic groups. Cancer Res. 1997, 57, 4360–4367.
  25. Kunii, K.; Davis, L.; Gorenstein, J.; Hatch, H.; Yashiro, M.; Di Bacco, A.; Elbi, C.; Lutterbach, B. Fgfr2-amplified gastric cancer cell lines require fgfr2 and erbb3 signaling for growth and survival. Cancer Res. 2008, 68, 2340–2348.
  26. Heist, R.S.; Mino-Kenudson, M.; Sequist, L.V.; Tammireddy, S.; Morrissey, L.; Christiani, D.C.; Engelman, J.A.; Iafrate, A.J. Fgfr1 amplification in squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2012, 7, 1775–1780.
  27. McMillin, D.W.; Negri, J.M.; Mitsiades, C.S. The role of tumour-stromal interactions in modifying drug response: Challenges and opportunities. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2013, 12, 217–228.
  28. Bosisio, D.; Ronca, R.; Salvi, V.; Presta, M.; Sozzani, S. Dendritic cells in inflammatory angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2018, 53, 180–186.
  29. Ronca, R.; Van Ginderachter, J.A.; Turtoi, A. Paracrine interactions of cancer-associated fibroblasts, macrophages and endothelial cells: Tumor allies and foes. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 2018, 30, 45–53.
  30. Zhou, Y.; Wu, C.; Lu, G.; Hu, Z.; Chen, Q.; Du, X. Fgf/fgfr signaling pathway involved resistance in various cancer types. J. Cancer 2020, 11, 2000–2007.
  31. Touat, M.; Ileana, E.; Postel-Vinay, S.; André, F.; Soria, J.C. Targeting fgfr signaling in cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2015, 21, 2684–2694.
  32. Porta, R.; Borea, R.; Coelho, A.; Khan, S.; Araújo, A.; Reclusa, P.; Franchina, T.; Van Der Steen, N.; Van Dam, P.; Ferri, J.; et al. Fgfr a promising druggable target in cancer: Molecular biology and new drugs. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 2017, 113, 256–267.
  33. Merz, V.; Zecchetto, C.; Melisi, D. Pemigatinib, a potent inhibitor of fgfrs for the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma. Future Oncol. 2021, 17, 389–402.
  34. Weaver, A.; Bossaer, J.B. Fibroblast growth factor receptor (fgfr) inhibitors: A review of a novel therapeutic class. J. Oncol. Pharm. Pract. 2021, 27, 702–710.
  35. Ronca, R.; Giacomini, A.; Di Salle, E.; Coltrini, D.; Pagano, K.; Ragona, L.; Matarazzo, S.; Rezzola, S.; Maiolo, D.; Torrella, R.; et al. Long-pentraxin 3 derivative as a small-molecule fgf trap for cancer therapy. Cancer Cell 2015, 28, 225–239.
  36. Lefèvre, G.; Babchia, N.; Calipel, A.; Mouriaux, F.; Faussat, A.M.; Mrzyk, S.; Mascarelli, F. Activation of the fgf2/fgfr1 autocrine loop for cell proliferation and survival in uveal melanoma cells. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009, 50, 1047–1057.
  37. Wang, Y.; Bao, X.; Zhang, Z.; Sun, Y.; Zhou, X. Fgf2 promotes metastasis of uveal melanoma cells via store-operated calcium entry. Oncol. Targets Ther. 2017, 10, 5317–5328.
  38. Kaliki, S.; Shields, C.L.; Shields, J.A. Uveal melanoma: Estimating prognosis. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 2015, 63, 93–102.
  39. Chua, V.; Orloff, M.; Teh, J.L.; Sugase, T.; Liao, C.; Purwin, T.J.; Lam, B.Q.; Terai, M.; Ambrosini, G.; Carvajal, R.D.; et al. Stromal fibroblast growth factor 2 reduces the efficacy of bromodomain inhibitors in uveal melanoma. EMBO Mol. Med. 2019, 11, e9081.
  40. Rezzola, S.; Ronca, R.; Loda, A.; Nawaz, M.I.; Tobia, C.; Paganini, G.; Maccarinelli, F.; Giacomini, A.; Semeraro, F.; Mor, M.; et al. The autocrine fgf/fgfr system in both skin and uveal melanoma: Fgf trapping as a possible therapeutic approach. Cancers 2019, 11, 1305.
  41. Zheng, L.; Pan, J. The anti-malarial drug artesunate blocks wnt/beta-catenin pathway and inhibits growth, migration and invasion of uveal melanoma cells. Curr. Cancer Drug Targets 2018, 18, 988–998.
  42. Chang, S.H.; Worley, L.A.; Onken, M.D.; Harbour, J.W. Prognostic biomarkers in uveal melanoma: Evidence for a stem cell-like phenotype associated with metastasis. Melanoma Res. 2008, 18, 191–200.
  43. Zuidervaart, W.; Pavey, S.; van Nieuwpoort, F.A.; Packer, L.; Out, C.; Maat, W.; Jager, M.J.; Gruis, N.A.; Hayward, N.K. Expression of wnt5a and its downstream effector beta-catenin in uveal melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2007, 17, 380–386.
  44. Cebulla, C.M.; Jockovich, M.E.; Piña, Y.; Boutrid, H.; Alegret, A.; Kulak, A.; Hackam, A.S.; Bhattacharya, S.K.; Feuer, W.J.; Murray, T.G. Basic fibroblast growth factor impact on retinoblastoma progression and survival. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008, 49, 5215–5221.
  45. Siffroi-Fernandez, S.; Cinaroglu, A.; Fuhrmann-Panfalone, V.; Normand, G.; Bugra, K.; Sahel, J.; Hicks, D. Acidic fibroblast growth factor (fgf-1) and fgf receptor 1 signaling in human y79 retinoblastoma. Arch. Ophthalmol. 2005, 123, 368–376.
  46. Cheng, Y.; Zheng, S.; Pan, C.T.; Yuan, M.; Chang, L.; Yao, Y.; Zhao, M.; Liang, J. Analysis of aqueous humor concentrations of cytokines in retinoblastoma. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0177337.
  47. Ronca, R.; Benkheil, M.; Mitola, S.; Struyf, S.; Liekens, S. Tumor angiogenesis revisited: Regulators and clinical implications. Med. Res. Rev. 2017, 37, 1231–1274.
  48. Mäkitie, T.; Summanen, P.; Tarkkanen, A.; Kivelä, T. Microvascular density in predicting survival of patients with choroidal and ciliary body melanoma. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1999, 40, 2471–2480.
  49. Jockovich, M.E.; Piña, Y.; Alegret, A.; Cebulla, C.; Feuer, W.; Murray, T.G. Heterogeneous tumor vasculature in retinoblastoma: Implications for vessel targeting therapy. Retina 2008, 28, S81–S86.
  50. Boyd, S.R.; Tan, D.; Bunce, C.; Gittos, A.; Neale, M.H.; Hungerford, J.L.; Charnock-Jones, S.; Cree, I.A. Vascular endothelial growth factor is elevated in ocular fluids of eyes harbouring uveal melanoma: Identification of a potential therapeutic window. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2002, 86, 448–452.
  51. Cheng, Y.; Feng, J.; Zhu, X.; Liang, J. Cytokines concentrations in aqueous humor of eyes with uveal melanoma. Medicine 2019, 98, e14030.
  52. Yang, H.; Jager, M.J.; Grossniklaus, H.E. Bevacizumab suppression of establishment of micrometastases in experimental ocular melanoma. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010, 51, 2835–2842.
  53. Lee, S.Y.; Kim, D.K.; Cho, J.H.; Koh, J.Y.; Yoon, Y.H. Inhibitory effect of bevacizumab on the angiogenesis and growth of retinoblastoma. Arch. Ophthalmol. 2008, 126, 953–958.
  54. Boyd, S.R.; Tan, D.S.; de Souza, L.; Neale, M.H.; Myatt, N.E.; Alexander, R.A.; Robb, M.; Hungerford, J.L.; Cree, I.A. Uveal melanomas express vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor and support endothelial cell growth. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2002, 86, 440–447.
  55. Schweigerer, L.; Neufeld, G.; Gospodarowicz, D. Basic fibroblast growth factor is present in cultured human retinoblastoma cells. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1987, 28, 1838–1843.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Pathology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Sara Rezzola
,
Alessandra Loda
,
Marta Turati
,
Francesco Semeraro
,
Roberto Ronca
View Times: 558
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 24 Apr 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Academic Video Service
    Feedback