The levels of cleaved PARP protein and sub G1 phase propidium iodide conjugated DNA of tumor cell lines were taken as indicators of apoptosis. In general, levels of apoptosis were relatively low in all cell lines investigated and they were not further enhanced by bevacizumab treatment under hypoxic condi tions with Lonafarnib SCH66336 reduced FBS concentrations. Non small cell lung cancer cells, H522 and HOP62, interestingly showed a decrease in cleaved PARP and sub G1 cells when treated with bevacizumab, however beyond the criteria of signifi cance. In contrast A498 and HS 578 T exhibited a minor in crease in apoptosis according to both cleaved PARP and sub G1 levels. All other cell lines investigated did not show differences after bevacizumab treatment when compared to controls.

The magnitude of the effects observed was limited compared to control experiments where each cell line was treated with 150 nM staurosporine for 24 hours as a potent inducer of apoptosis, with a representative ex ample shown for cell line KM12 in Figure 3A. Effects of bevacizumab on tumor cell proliferation With at least one receptor present in the selected cell lines and with the Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries induction of VEGFA under hypoxic conditions, the system was challenged in an effort to re veal an autocrine paracrine function. Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries Proliferation rates were examined in reduced serum media under hypoxic conditions for up to 96 hours, however overall no Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries obvi ous change between treated and untreated cells was evident at any of the time points investigated. Most cell lines did not meet statistical significance according to the students 2 tailed t test, with the excep tion of HT 29.

To determine if an anti proliferative effect of bevaci zumab could Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries be seen in a wider range of cell lines, the analysis was further expanded to include a screen of 30 cell lines from the NCI 60 panel, using the main solid tumor types for which bevacizumab is approved, NSCLC, CRC, RCC and BC. With the exception of HT 29 and SW620, which showed minor, but opposing changes in proliferation after bevacizumab treatment, an decrease and increase respectively, bevacizumab did not appear to affect tumor cell proliferation. The HUVEC controls did show inhibition of proliferation as expected with bevacizumab. In parallel experiments, rhVEGF was added to FBS re duced media in an attempt to stimulate the VEGFA dependent pathways in tumor cells.

This was however unsuccessful in increasing proliferation rates, including those tumor cells that expressed the major VEGFA signaling receptor VEGFR2. As a control, HUVECs in con trast did show enhanced VEGF dependent proliferation. Tumor cell migration with bevacizumab treatment VEGFA has been described Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries as a chemo attractant and motility factor in endothelial cells, thus blockade of VEGFA by selleck chemical Cilengitide bevacizumab could also influence the migra tory potential of tumor cells.