This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) 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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fulton, A. M. Articles by Kundu, N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fulton, A. M. Articles by Kundu, N. Related Collections Tumor Biology: Invasion and Metastasis Therapeutics and Targets Therapeutics and Targets: Identification, Validation, and Markers

Targeting Prostaglandin E EP Receptors to Inhibit Metastasis

Department of Pathology and Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland

Requests for reprints: Amy M. Fulton, Department of Pathology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 10 South Pine Street, Baltimore, MD 21201. Phone: 410-706-6479; Fax: 410-706-8414; E-mail: afulton{at}umaryland.edu.

	Abstract

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

 
It is well established that high cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression contributes to the aggressive behavior of breast and other malignancies. Due to concerns regarding the safety of long-term use of COX-2 inhibitors as well as a desire to seek more effective alternatives to prevent and treat metastatic disease, we tested the hypothesis that inhibition of downstream signaling by the COX-2 product prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂) would be as effective as inhibiting global prostaglandin synthesis. PGE₂ acts through four G-protein–coupled receptors designated EP1-4. Here, we summarize data from many laboratories regarding the role of individual E-series of prostaglandin (EP) receptors on cancer behavior and we discuss our own recent findings that antagonists of the PGE receptor subtype 4, EP4, inhibit experimental metastasis in a murine model of hormone-resistant, metastatic breast cancer. These initial results indicate that selective targeting of individual EP receptors should be investigated as an approach to exploit the high COX-2 activity in many epithelial malignancies. (Cancer Res 2006; 66(20): 9794-7)

	Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly Expressed in Breast Cancer

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

 
Many tumors and tumor cell lines, including breast, express elevated cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) protein levels that contribute to their malignant behavior (1). Epidemiologic studies indicate that chronic use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs that inhibit Cox-mediated production of prostaglandins is associated with lower incidence of a number of tumor types, including breast cancers (2). In spite of recent advances in the treatment of hormone receptor–positive breast cancers, effective therapies are lacking for hormone-resistant and metastatic disease. Human breast cancers frequently have high PGE₂ levels and breast tumors with high COX-2 protein levels are more likely to metastasize (1).

Protective effects of COX inhibitors both in preventing tumor induction and inhibiting growth of transplanted tumors are well established (3–5). Several mechanisms underlie these therapeutic effects. Direct effects of COX inhibitors on tumor cells have been shown, including inhibition of cancer cell proliferation and induction of apoptosis (6). Other studies support an indirect effect of COX inhibitors on tumor angiogenesis (4). COX inhibitors are also effective at limiting metastatic disease (3, 5). The antimetastatic effect depends on activation of natural killer (NK) cells (3, 7).

	The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin E2 Acts through E-Series of Prostaglandin Receptors

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

 
In tumors, the principal COX-2 product is prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂). Cellular effects of PGE₂ are mediated through a family of G-protein–coupled receptors designated EP1,2,3 and EP4 (8). Despite structural and sequence similarities among the four E-series of prostaglandin (EP) receptors, they are coupled to different intracellular signaling pathways. Ligand binding of EP1 is associated with phospholipase C activation and elevations in intracellular calcium, whereas EP2 and EP4 are coupled to protein kinase A/adenyl cyclase and mediate elevations in intracellular cyclic AMP (cAMP; Fig. 1 ). In addition to protein kinase A–coupled signaling, the EP4 receptor has also been shown to activate extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) 1 and ERK2 by way of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (9). EP3 typically mediates decreases in intracellular cAMP, but cAMP-activating properties have also been ascribed to splice variants of this receptor subtype (10).

View larger version (43K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Tumor cells express one or more EP receptor, designated EP1-4. EP2 and EP4 are coupled to adenyl cyclase and cAMP induction. EP3 activation can result in inhibition or (rarely) elevation in cAMP levels. EP1 is coupled to calcium mobilization. High COX-1 and/or COX-2 protein in malignant cells converts arachidonate to PGE2, which can act in an autocrine or paracrine manner to activate tumor cell EPs. By inhibiting PGE2 synthesis with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or EP4 signaling with selective EP antagonists, tumor metastasis is inhibited. In breast cancer, the antimetastatic effect of EP4 antagonists depends on NK cells.

	EP Expression and Function in Cancer Is Complex

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

Apc716

The role of each EP receptor in skin carcinogenesis seems similarly complex. Considerable evidence exists from several laboratories that EP1 contributes to both UVB-induced and chemically induced skin cancers. UVB-induced squamous cell carcinomas display higher detectable EP1 expression than uninvolved skin (17). Consistent with these conclusions is that topical application of a selective EP1 antagonist protects against UVB-induced tumors (18). EP2 is also important to skin carcinogenesis. EP2–/– mice are less susceptible to 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene/12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate–induced malignancies (19). Tumors arising in EP2–/– mice contain fewer CD31⁺ cells and more evidence of apoptosis, suggesting that PGE₂-mediated signaling through EP2 drives tumor angiogenesis and apoptosis resistance. In direct contrast, however, loss of EP2 in immortalized keratinocytes was associated with increased invasiveness (20). Also unresolved is the role of EP3. Skin carcinogenesis is associated with loss of EP3 expression in a photocarcinogenesis model (17), whereas no change in EP3 expression was identified in a chemical model of skin cancer (19); evidence for a tumor-promoting role has also been reported (21). In the latter study, skin tumor latency was increased in EP3–/– versus wild-type mice, and only benign keratoacanthomas developed in the absence of EP3 expression. A different role for EP receptors in each model is undoubtedly reflective of the different mechanisms of carcinogenesis. The role of EP4 has not been interrogated in skin cancer.

Limited information is available regarding the role of EP receptors in breast cancer. The aromatase enzyme, which catalyzes estrogen biosynthesis, is positively regulated by PGE₂ through EP1 and EP2 expressed on stromal cells (22). Conversely, EP3 receptor activation inhibits aromatase expression. In comparison with normal mammary gland, murine mammary tumors have increased expression of EP1, EP2, and EP4, but decreased expression of EP3 (23). These studies suggest that EP3 is protective against breast cancer. Mammary hyperplasia, driven by COX-2 expression, is mediated by EP2 (24). Chemically induced breast cancers are inhibited by the selective EP1 antagonist, ONO-8711 (25).

Little clinical information regarding EP receptors is available; however, a recent study reports that coexpression of COX-2 and EP4 is associated with poor prognosis in upper urinary tract tumors (26). No association of EP1-3 with clinical outcome was observed (27). Like urinary tract tumors, EP4 expression is increased during colon cancer progression (28). EP2 and EP4 mRNA expression are higher in cervical carcinoma compared with normal cervix (29).

Taken together, these studies implicate individual EP subtypes as determinants of carcinogenesis. The majority of studies indicate that EP1, EP2, or EP4 promote early carcinogenesis, whereas EP3 either does not contribute to tumor behavior or actually plays a protective role. No consensus exists regarding why specific receptor subtypes seem to play an organ-specific role. These complexities are undoubtedly a function of the different histologic tumor types, mechanisms of tumor induction, whether inflammation plays a role in carcinogenesis, and other factors. In addition to differences regarding which EP subtype is important, many of these studies cannot distinguish which of the multiple EP-expressing cell types are mechanistically important. Growth of transplanted MC26 or Lewis lung carcinoma cells was inhibited in EP2 mutant mice, and this was attributed to protection of dendritic cells from PGE₂-mediated suppression (30). When inflammation contributes to carcinogenesis, as in some skin cancer models, it is likely that EP receptors on inflammatory cells are critical. In contrast, EP expression on the precursor malignant cell, the vasculature, or other cells may be the more important target in other models. Angiogenesis is regulated directly or indirectly by EP receptor functions. Tumor-induced angiogenesis in the Apc716 model of colon carcinogenesis is mediated by EP2, but not other EP receptors (31), whereas EP3 regulates angiogenesis in a murine sarcoma model (32).

Even less is known about the role of EP receptors in late-stage tumor progression. Several laboratories have shown that EPs mediate migration of tumor cells in vitro (33, 34), suggesting that EP receptors could contribute to metastatic behavior. We sought to determine the functional role of EP receptors in vivo using a murine model of metastatic breast cancer.

	Targeting EP Receptors to Inhibit Metastasis

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

 
We have shown that high COX-2 expression and activity is directly correlated with increased tumorigenic and metastatic capacity (5). Nonselective or selective COX-2 inhibitors limit local mammary tumor growth and spontaneous metastasis. Recent concerns regarding the safety of conventional COX-2 inhibitors (35), as well as the need to identify more effective agents, led us to examine the potential of targeting the EP receptor family. We reasoned that by blocking only PGE₂ signaling, rather than global prostaglandin synthesis, we might avoid some of the potential side effects of inhibiting other cardioprotective prostaglandins and might also improve overall therapy.

EP receptors had been described on a range of tumor cells and tumor tissues, often at the mRNA level. We characterized EP receptor expression in several murine breast cancer cells, murine colon carcinoma cells, and on a panel of human breast cancer cell lines (36).¹ All EP isoforms were detected by reverse transcription-PCR and immunoblotting in each murine and human cancer cell line. By flow cytometry, only EP2,EP3 and EP4 were readily detected. Surface expression was apparent on each cell; however, significantly more of each receptor was detected on permeabilized cells, suggesting that intracellular receptor pools exist.

On normal cells, EP2 and EP4 are coupled to adenyl cyclase and cAMP activation. Treatment of mammary tumor cells with PGE₂, an agonist of all EP isoforms, induces elevations in cAMP. Likewise, the selective EP2 agonist, butaprost, or the EP4 agonist, PGE₁-OH, induce cAMP. The EP4 antagonists AH23848 or ONO-AE3-208 or the EP1/EP2 antagonist AH6809 block cAMP elevations induced by PGE₂ or PGE₁-OH. In contrast, antagonists of EP1 or EP3 did not affect the cAMP response. Taken together, these results are consistent with EP2 and EP4 receptors coupling to adenyl cyclase in mammary carcinoma cells as described on many other cells (8).

Migration of tumor cells in vitro in modified Boyden chambers can serve as a surrogate of metastasis in vivo. Other laboratories have shown that breast and colon cancer cells migrate in response to PGE₂ (33, 34). EP4 function was particularly important to migration of breast tumor cells. Likewise, in colon cells, PGE₂-mediated migration occurs via EP4/ß-arrestin 1/c-Src signaling that transactivates and phosphorylates the epidermal growth factor receptor (37). We confirmed that the murine mammary tumor cells used for these studies also migrate in response to PGE₂ in a dose-dependent manner. EP2 or EP4 antagonists blocked this response.

Taken together, several laboratories provide evidence from studies in vitro that EP receptors, particularly EP4, might contribute to metastatic behavior. We tested this hypothesis directly by determining the effect of selective antagonists of EP4 and EP3 on experimental metastasis. We also considered the possibility that EP3 might play a protective role and that antagonism of this receptor would increase metastatic potential. To distinguish effects of antagonism of tumor EP from effects on host EP function, we pretreated tumor cells in vitro with the EP3 antagonist ONO-AE3-240 or one of two EP4 antagonists, AH23848 or ONO-AE3-208. Cells were washed free of antagonist and immediately injected into the tail vein of syngeneic mice. Three weeks later, pulmonary tumor colonies were quantified. EP antagonist efficacy was compared with pretreatment with indomethacin, which we had previously shown to inhibit metastasis in this model (5). We confirmed the antimetastatic activity of indomethacin and showed that both of the EP4 antagonists significantly inhibited metastasis. The EP4 antagonist, AH23848, was as effective as indomethacin in this regard. In contrast, the EP3 antagonist had no effect on lung tumor colonization. These findings suggest that selective targeting of EP4 may be an effective alternative to inhibiting the entire COX-2 pathway. Although our initial results indicate that EP3 targeting will not affect tumor metastasis, the role of other EP receptors in controlling metastasis may be more complex. We reported in 1991 that pharmacologic antagonism of EP1 and EP2 actually increased lung colonization (38). These findings reinforce the conclusions reached by other laboratories that each receptor may have a unique function in tumor behavior. Thus, it will be critical that receptor-specific antagonists be used based on the precise mechanisms relevant to the effect of each receptor on metastasis.

	How Does EP4 Antagonism Inhibit Metastasis?

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

 
Intracellular signaling via EP receptors is coupled to many cellular functions. In murine breast cancer cells, COX-2 is constitutively active, producing high levels of PGE₂, so an autocrine loop in which tumor-produced PGE₂ directs cell behavior by occupying EP receptors is probable (Fig. 1). In some cells, PGE₂ directly supports proliferation; however, in our hands, COX inhibitors and EP4 antagonists only modestly affect proliferation of mammary tumor cells at concentrations that effectively block PGE₂ synthesis and intracellular signaling. Inhibition of tumor cell migration in vitro by receptor antagonists also indicates that direct effects on cell motility and invasion may be relevant. Host EP expression on immune cells, endothelial cells, and other targets clearly also plays a role in determining tumor behavior (30–32). Our studies examined only the role of the tumor-expressed receptor; however, studies are in progress to determine if antagonism of host EPs can also affect behavior of either the locally growing tumor or metastatic disease. Whether effects of EP4 antagonism on tumor metastasis are directly linked to EP4-mediated signaling or indirectly affect other pathways also remains to be determined. Buchanan et al. (37) have proposed a model in which EP4 occupation causes ß-arrestin 1 to translocate to the plasma membrane, associate with c-Src, and ultimately transactivate epidermal growth factor receptor and AKT. The ß-arrestin response was critical to the observed changes in tumor migration, invasion and metastasis.

The ability of COX inhibitors to limit metastasis depends on functioning NK cells (7). We showed that COX inhibitors alter intrinsic properties of tumor cells, rendering them more sensitive to killing by NK cells. Preliminary data suggest that a similar mechanism is relevant to the protective effects of EP4 antagonists.² That is, antimetastatic activity of EP4 antagonists also depends on functioning NK cells.

Although the role of each EP receptor in cancer biology remains complex, evidence is building that EP4 is a critical determinant of cancer cell behavior both in early colon carcinogenesis and in late-stage colon and breast cancer (12, 13, 26, 33, 34, 37). We are currently examining expression of EP receptors in human breast tumors to determine if EP4 or other receptors are relevant therapeutic targets. Using microarrays, we have found that mRNA levels of COX-2 and each EP receptor are positively correlated. Because COX-2 is an indicator of poor prognosis (1), our findings are consistent with a contribution of EP receptors to aggressive disease. Taken together, these studies indicate that antagonists of EP4 and of other EP receptors may be used to exploit the high COX-2 activity common to many epithelial malignancies, and that strategies using more selective targeting of individual receptors may avoid some of the less desirable side effects of COX-2 inhibitors.

	Acknowledgments

 
Grant support: U.S. Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human Services.

We thank Ono Pharmaceutical Co. for the generous provision of selective EP agonists and antagonists.

Due to editorial restrictions, we were not able to cite the work of many colleagues.

	Footnotes

 
¹ Unpublished data.

² M. Kundu, X. Ma, T. Walser, and A.M. Fulton, unpublished data.

Received 6/ 6/06. Accepted 7/26/06.

	References

Top Abstract Cyclooxygenase-2 Is Highly... The COX-2 Product Prostaglandin... EP Expression and Function... Targeting EP Receptors to... How Does EP4 Antagonism... References

 

1. Ristimaki A, Sivula A, Lundin M, et al. Prognostic significance of elevated cyclooxygenase-2 expression in breast cancer. Cancer Res 2002;62:632–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Harris RE, Chlebowski RT, Jackson RD, et al. Breast cancer and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: prospective results from the Women's Health Initiative. Cancer Res 2003;63:6096–101.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Lala PK, Parhar RS, Singh P. Indomethacin therapy abrogates the prostaglandin-mediated suppression of natural killer activity in tumor-bearing mice and prevents tumor metastasis. Cell Immunol 1986;99:108–18.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Masferrer JL, Leahy KM, Koki AT, et al. Antiangiogenic and antitumor activities of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Cancer Res 2000;60:1306–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Kundu N, Fulton AM. Selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 or COX-2 inhibitors control metastatic disease in a murine model of breast cancer. Cancer Res 2002;62:2343–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Sheng H, Shao J, Morrow JD, Beauchamp RD, DuBois RN. Modulation of apoptosis and Bcl-2 expression by prostaglandin E₂ in human colon cancer cells. Cancer Res 1998;58:362–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Kundu N, Walser TC, Ma X, Fulton AM. Cyclooxygenase inhibitors modulate NK activities that control metastatic disease. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2005;54:981–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Narumiya S, Sugimoto Y, Ushikubi F. Prostanoid receptors: structures properties and functions. Physiol Rev 1999;79:1193–226.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Fujino H, Regan JW. Prostanoid receptors and phosphatidyl 3-kinase: a pathway to cancer? Trends Pharmacol Sci 2003;24:335–40.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Namba T, Sugimoto Y, Negishi M, et al. Alternative splicing of c-terminal tail of prostaglandin E receptor subtype EP3 determines G-protein specificity. Nature 1993;365:166–70.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Watanabe T, Satoh H, Togoh M, Taniguchi S, Hashimoto Y, Kurokawa K. Positive and negative regulation of cell proliferation through prostaglandin receptors in NIH-3T3 cells. J Cell Physiol 1996;69:401–9.
12. Mutoh M, Watanabe K, Kitamura T, et al. Involvement of prostaglandin E receptor subtype EP4 in colon carcinogenesis. Cancer Res 2002;62:28–32.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Pozzi A, Yan X, Macias-Perez I, et al. Colon carcinoma cell growth is associated with prostaglandin E₂/EP4 receptor-evoked ERK activation. J Biol Chem 2004;279:29797–804.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Sonoshita M, Takaku K, Sasaki N, et al. Acceleration of intestinal polyposis through prostaglandin receptor EP2 in Apc(716) knockout mice. Nat Med 2001;9:1048–51.
15. Watanabe K, Kawamori T, Nakatsugi S, et al. Role of the prostaglandin E receptor subtype EP1 in colon carcinogenesis. Cancer Res 1999;59:5093–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Shoji Y, Takahashi M, Kitamura T. Downregulation of prostaglandin E receptor subtype EP3 during colon cancer development. Gut 2004;53:1151–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Lee JL, Kim A, Kopelovich L, Bickers DR, Athar M. Differential expression of E prostanoid receptors in murine and human non-melanoma skin cancer. J Invest Dermatol 2005;125:818–25.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Tober KL, Wilgus TA, Kusewitt DF, Thomas-Ahner JM, Maruyama T, Oberyszyn TM. Importance of the EP1 receptor in cutaneous UVB-induced inflammation and tumor development. J Invest Dermatol 2006;126:205–11.[CrossRef]
19. Sung YM, He G, Fischer SM. Lack of expression of the EP2 but not EP3 receptor for prostaglandin E₂ results in suppression of skin tumor development. Cancer Res 2005;65:9304–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Konger RL, Scott GA, Landt Y, Ladenson JH, Pentland AP. Loss of EP2 prostaglandin E2 receptor in immortalized human keratinocytes results in increased invasiveness and decreased paxillin expression. Am J Pathol 2002;161:2065–78.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Shoji Y, Takahashi M, Takasuka N, et al. Prostaglandin E receptor EP3 deficiency modified tumor outcome in mouse two-stage skin carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis 2005;26:2116–22.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Richards JA, Brueggemeier RW. Prostaglandin E₂ regulates aromatase activity and expression in human adipose stromal cells via two distinct receptor subtypes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2003;88:2810–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Chang S-H, Liu CH, Conway R, et al. Role of prostaglandin E₂-dependent angiogenic switch in cyclooxygenase-2-induced breast cancer progression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004;101:591–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Chang S-H, Ai Y, Breyer RM, Lane TF, Hla T. The prostaglandin E₂ receptor EP2 is required for cyclooxygenase-2-mediated mammary hyperplasia. Cancer Res 2005;65:4496–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Kawamori T, Uchiya N, Nakatsugi S, et al. Chemopreventive effects of ONO-8711, a selective prostaglandin E receptor EP1 antagonist, on breast cancer development. Carcinogenesis 2001;22:2001–4.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Miyata Y, Shigeru K, Nomata K, Eguchi J, Kanetake H. Expression of cyclooxygenase-2 and EP4 receptor in transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract. J Urol 2005;173:56–60.[Medline]
27. Miyata Y, Ohba K, Kanda S, et al. Pathological function of prostaglandin E2 receptors in transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract. Virchows Arch 2006;448:822–9.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Chell SD, Witherden IR, Dobson RR, et al. Increased EP4 receptor expression in colorectal cancer progression promotes cell growth and anchorage independence. Cancer Res 2006;66:3106–13.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Sales JJ, Katz AA, Davis M, et al. Cyclooxygenase-2 expression and prostaglandin E₂ synthesis are up-regulated in carcinomas of the cervix: a possible autocrine/paracrine regulation of neoplastic cell function via EP2/EP4 receptors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001;86:2243–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Yang L, Yamagata N, Yadav R, et al. Cancer-associated immunodeficiency and dendritic cell abnormalities mediated by the prostaglandin EP2 receptor. J Clin Invest 2003;111:727–35.[CrossRef][Medline]
31. Seno H, Oshima M, Ishikawa T, et al. Cyclooxygenase 2 and prostaglandin E2 receptor EP2-dependent angiogenesis in Apc716 mouse intestinal polyps. Cancer Res 2002;62:506–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Amano H, Hayashi I, Endo H, et al. Host prostaglandin E₂-EP3 signaling regulates tumor-associated angiogenesis and tumor growth. J Exp Med 2003;197:221–32.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Timoshenko AV, Xu G, Chakrabarti S, Lala PK, Chakraborty C. Role of prostaglandin E₂ receptors in migration of murine and human breast cancer cells. Exp Cell Res 2003;289:265–74.[CrossRef][Medline]
34. Buchanan FG, Wang D, Bargiacchi F, DuBois RN. Prostaglandin E₂ regulates cell migration via the intracellular activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor. J Biol Chem 2003;278:35451–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Wang D, Wang M, Cheng Y, Fitzgerald GA. Cardiovascular hazard and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Curr Opin Pharmacol 2005;2:204–10.
36. Ma X, Kundu N, Rifat S, Walser T, Fulton AM. Prostaglandin E receptor EP4 antagonism inhibits breast cancer metastasis. Cancer Res 2006;66:2923–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Buchanan FG, Gorden DL, Matta P, Shi Q, Matrisian LM, DuBois RN. Role of ß-arrestin 1 in the metastatic progression of colorectal cancer. Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A 2006;103:1492–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
38. Fulton AM, Zhang S-Z, Chong YC. Role of the prostaglandin E₂ receptor in mammary tumor metastasis. Cancer Res 1991;51:2047–50.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. G. Backlund, J. M. Amann, and D. H. Johnson Novel Strategies for the Treatment of Lung Cancer: Modulation of Eicosanoids J. Clin. Oncol., February 20, 2008; 26(6): 825 - 827. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Torres, C. Paget, J. Fontaine, T. Mallevaey, T. Matsuoka, T. Maruyama, S. Narumiya, M. Capron, P. Gosset, C. Faveeuw, et al. Prostaglandin D2 Inhibits the Production of IFN-{gamma} by Invariant NK T Cells: Consequences in the Control of B16 Melanoma J. Immunol., January 15, 2008; 180(2): 783 - 792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Meisdalen, O. F. Dajani, T. Christoffersen, and D. Sandnes Prostaglandins Enhance Epidermal Growth Factor-Induced DNA Synthesis in Hepatocytes by Stimulation of E Prostanoid 3 and F Prostanoid Receptors J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., September 1, 2007; 322(3): 1044 - 1050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) 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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fulton, A. M. Articles by Kundu, N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fulton, A. M. Articles by Kundu, N. Related Collections Tumor Biology: Invasion and Metastasis Therapeutics and Targets Therapeutics and Targets: Identification, Validation, and Markers