Chemistry: molecular biology and microbiology – Measuring or testing process involving enzymes or... – Involving antigen-antibody binding – specific binding protein...
Reexamination Certificate
2000-10-30
2003-05-20
Huff, Sheela (Department: 1642)
Chemistry: molecular biology and microbiology
Measuring or testing process involving enzymes or...
Involving antigen-antibody binding, specific binding protein...
C435S007200, C435S007230, C530S350000, C530S387100, C530S388850, C530S389100
Reexamination Certificate
active
06566078
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The invention described herein relates to a gene and its encoded tumor antigen, termed 36P6D5, and to diagnostic and therapeutic methods and compositions useful in the management of various cancers that express 36P6D5 gene products.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Cancer is the second leading cause of human death next to coronary disease. Worldwide, millions of people die from cancer every year. In the United States alone, cancer causes the death of well over a half-million people each year, with some 1.4 million new cases diagnosed per year. While deaths from heart disease have been declining significantly, those resulting from cancer generally are on the rise. In the early part of the next century, cancer is predicted to become the leading cause of death.
Worldwide, several cancers stand out as the leading killers. In particular, carcinomas of the lung, prostate, breast, colon, pancreas, and ovary represent the primary causes of cancer death. These and virtually all other carcinomas share a common lethal feature. With very few exceptions, metastatic disease from a carcinoma is fatal. Moreover, even for those cancer patients who initially survive their primary cancers, common experience has shown that their lives are dramatically altered. Many cancer patients experience strong anxieties driven by the awareness of the potential for recurrence or treatment failure. Many cancer patients experience physical debilitations following treatment. Many cancer patients experience a recurrence.
Generally speaking, the fundamental problem in the management of the deadliest cancers is the lack of effective and non-toxic systemic therapies. Molecular medicine, still very much in its infancy, promises to redefine the ways in which these cancers are managed. Unquestionably, there is an intensive worldwide effort aimed at the development of novel molecular approaches to cancer diagnosis and treatment. For example, there is a great interest in identifying truly tumor-specific genes and proteins that could be used as diagnostic and prognostic markers and/or therapeutic targets or agents. Research efforts in these areas are encouraging, and the increasing availability of useful molecular technologies has accelerated the acquisition of meaningful knowledge about cancer. Nevertheless, progress is slow and generally uneven.
As discussed below, the management of prostate cancer serves as a good example of the limited extent to which molecular biology has translated into real progress in the clinic. With limited exceptions, the situation is more or less the same for the other major carcinomas mentioned above.
Worldwide, prostate cancer is the fourth most prevalent cancer in men. In North America and Northern Europe, it is by far the most common male cancer and is the second leading cause of cancer death in men. In the United States alone, well over 40,000 men die annually of this disease—second only to lung cancer. Despite the magnitude of these figures, there is still no effective treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. Surgical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, hormone ablation therapy, and chemotherapy remain fixed as the main treatment modalities. Unfortunately, these treatments are ineffective for many and are often associated with significant undesirable consequences.
On the diagnostic front, the lack of a prostate tumor marker that can accurately detect early-stage, localized tumors remains a significant limitation in the management of this disease. Although the serum PSA assay has been a very useful tool, its specificity and general utility is widely regarded as lacking in several important respects, as further discussed below. Most prostate cancers initially occur in the peripheral zone of the prostate gland, away from the urethra. Tumors within this zone may not produce any symptoms and, as a result, most men with early-stage prostate cancer will not present clinical symptoms of the disease until significant progression has occurred. Tumor progression into the transition zone of the prostate may lead to urethral obstruction, thus producing the first symptoms of the disease. However, these clinical symptoms are indistinguishable from the common non-malignant condition of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Early detection and diagnosis of prostate cancer currently relics on digital rectal examinations (DRE), prostate specific antigen (PSA) measurements, transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), and transrectal needle biopsy (TRNB). At present, serum PSA measurement in combination with DRE represent the leading tool used to detect and diagnose prostate cancer. Both have major limitations which have fueled intensive research into finding better diagnostic markers of this disease.
Similarly, there is no available marker that can predict the emergence of the typically fatal metastatic stage of prostate cancer. Diagnosis of metastatic stage is presendy achieved by open surgical or laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy, whole body radionuclide scans, skeletal radiography, and/or bone lesion biopsy analysis. Clearly, better imaging and other less invasive diagnostic methods offer the promise of easing the difficulty those procedures place on a patient, as well as improving diagnostic accuracy and opening therapeutic options. A similar problem is the lack of an effective prognostic marker for determining which cancers are indolent and which ones are or will be aggressive. PSA, for example, fails to discriminate accurately between indolent and aggressive cancers. Until there are prostate tumor markers capable of reliably identifying early-stage disease, predicting susceptibility to metastasis, and precisely imaging tumors, the management of prostate cancer will continue to be extremely difficult.
PSA is the most widely used tumor marker for screening, diagnosis, and monitoring prostate cancer today. In particular, several immunoassays for the detection of serum PSA are in widespread clinical use. Recently, a reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for PSA mRNA in serum has been developed. However, PSA is not a disease-specific marker, as elevated levels of PSA are detectable in a large percentage of patients with BPH and prostatitis (25-86%)(Gao et al., 1997, Prostate 31: 264-281), as well as in other nonmalignant disorders and in some normal men, a factor which significantly limits the diagnostic specificity of this marker. For example, elevations in serum PSA of between 4 to 10 ng/ml are observed in BPH, and even higher values are observed in prostatitis, particularly acute prostatitis. BPH is an extremely common condition in men. Further confusing the situation is the fact that serum PSA elevations may be observed without any indication of disease from DRE, and visa-versa. Moreover, it is now recognized that PSA is not prostate-specific (Gao et al., supra, for review).
Various methods designed to improve the specificity of PSA-based detection have been described, such as measuring PSA density and the ratio of free vs. complexed PSA. However, none of these methodologies have been able to reproducibly distinguish benign from malignant prostate disease. In addition, PSA diagnostics have sensitivities of between 57-79% (Cupp & Osterling, 1993, Mayo Clin Proc 68:297-306), and thus miss identifying prostate cancer in a significant population of men with the disease.
There are some known markers which are expressed predominantly in prostate, such as prostate specific membrane antigen (PSM), a hydrolase with 85% identity to a rat neuropeptidase (Carter et al., 1996, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93: 749; Bzdega et al., 1997, J. Neurochem. 69: 2270). However, the expression of PSM in small intestine and brain (Israeli et al., 1994, Cancer Res. 54: 1807), as well its potential role in neuropeptide catabolism in brain, raises concern of potential neurotoxicity with anti-PSM therapies. Preliminary results using an Indium-111 labeled, anti-PSM monoclonal antibody to image recurrent prostate cancer show some promise (Sodee et al., 1996, Clin Nuc Med 21: 759-766). More recently i
Afar Daniel E. H.
Faris Mary
Hubert Rene S.
Jakobovits Aya
Mitchell Steve Chappell
Agensys, Inc.
Helms Larry R.
Huff Sheela
LandOfFree
36P6D5: secreted tumor antigen does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with 36P6D5: secreted tumor antigen, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and 36P6D5: secreted tumor antigen will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3012507