Page 166 - MI-2-4
P. 166

Microbes & Immunity                                                  A novel anti-EphA8 monoclonal antibody



               formation, function and plasticity.  Mol Cell Neurosci.      doi: 10.1002/dneu.22092
               2012;50(1):35-44.
                                                               16.  Park S, Frisén J, Barbacid M. Aberrant axonal projections in
               doi: 10.1016/j.mcn.2012.03.004                     mice lacking EphA8 (Eek) tyrosine protein kinase receptors.
                                                                  EMBO J. 1997;16(11):3106-3114.
            5.   Drescher  U.  The  Eph  family  in  the  patterning  of  neural
               development. Curr Biol. 1997;7(12):R799-R807.      doi: 10.1093/emboj/16.11.3106
               doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(06)00409-x              17.  Gu C, Shim S, Shin J,  et al. The EphA8 receptor induces
                                                                  sustained MAP kinase activation to promote neurite outgrowth
            6.   Yang D, Jin C, Ma H,  et  al. EphrinB2/EphB4 pathway   in neuronal cells. Oncogene. 2005;24(26):4243-4256.
               in postnatal angiogenesis: A  potential therapeutic
               target for ischemic cardiovascular disease.  Angiogenesis.      doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1208584
               2016;19(3):297-309.                             18.  Cui Z, Liu C, Wang X, Xiang Y. A pan-cancer analysis of

               doi: 10.1007/s10456-016-9514-9                     EphA family gene expression and its association with
                                                                  prognosis, tumor microenvironment, and therapeutic
            7.   Darling TK, Lamb TJ. Emerging roles for Eph receptors and   targets. Front Oncol. 2024;14:1378087.
               ephrin ligands in immunity. Front Immunol. 2019;10:1473.
                                                                  doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1378087
               doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01473
                                                               19.  Sahoo AR, Buck M. Structural and functional insights into
            8.   Herath NI, Boyd AW. The role of Eph receptors and ephrin   the transmembrane domain association of Eph receptors.
               ligands in colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer. 2010;126(9):2003-2011.  Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(16):8593.
               doi: 10.1002/ijc.25147
                                                                  doi: 10.3390/ijms22168593
            9.   Chan J, Watt VM. eek and erk, new members of the Eph   20.  Pergaris A, Danas E, Goutas D, Sykaras AG,
               subclass  of  receptor  protein-tyrosine  kinases.  Oncogene.   Soranidis A, Theocharis S. The clinical impact of the EPH/
               1991;6(6):1057-1061.                               ephrin system in cancer: Unwinding the thread. Int J Mol
            10.  Park S, Sánchez MP. The eek receptor, a member of the Eph   Sci. 2021;22(16):8412.
               family of tyrosine protein kinases, can be activated by three      doi: 10.3390/ijms22168412
               different Eph family ligands. Oncogene. 1997;14(5):533-542.
                                                               21.  Janes PW, Vail ME, Gan HK, Scott AM. Antibody targeting
               doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1200857                        of Eph receptors in cancer.  Pharmaceuticals (Basel).
            11.  Choi S, Park S. Phosphorylation at Tyr-838 in the kinase   2020;13(5):88.
               domain of EphA8 modulates Fyn binding to the Tyr-     doi: 10.3390/ph13050088
               615 site by enhancing tyrosine kinase activity.  Oncogene.
               1999;18(39):5413-5422.                          22.  Liu L, Wang X, Ge W. EphA8 is a prognostic factor for
                                                                  oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma.  Med  Sci  Monit.
               doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1202917                        2018;24:7213-7222.
            12.  Gu C, Park S. The EphA8 receptor regulates integrin activity      doi: 10.12659/msm.910909
               through p110gamma phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase in a
               tyrosine kinase activity-independent manner. Mol Cell Biol.   23.  Liu X, Xu Y, Jin Q, et al. EphA8 is a prognostic marker for
               2001;21(14):4579-4597.                             epithelial ovarian cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(15):20801-20809.
               doi: 10.1128/mcb.21.14.4579-4597.2001              doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.8018
            13.  Wang SD, Rath P, Lal B,  et al. EphB2 receptor controls   24.  Wang Y, Zhou N, Li P, et al. EphA8 acts as an oncogene and
               proliferation/migration  dichotomy  of  glioblastoma  contributes to poor prognosis in gastric cancer via regulation
               by interacting with focal adhesion kinase.  Oncogene.   of ADAM10. J Cell Physiol. 2019;234(11):20408-20419.
               2012;31(50):5132-5143.                             doi: 10.1002/jcp.28642
               doi: 10.1038/onc.2012.16                        25.  Wang GH, Ni K, Gu C, et al. EphA8 inhibits cell apoptosis
            14.  Bhatia S, Bukkapatnam S,  Van Court B,  et al. The effects   via AKT signaling and is associated with poor prognosis in
               of ephrinB2 signaling on proliferation and invasion in   breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2021;46(2):183.
               glioblastoma multiforme. Mol Carcinog. 2020;59(9):1064-1075.     doi: 10.3892/or.2021.8134
               doi: 10.1002/mc.23237                           26.  Lucero M, Thind J, Sandoval J, Senaati S, Jimenez B, Kandpal RP.
                                                                  Stem-like cells from invasive breast carcinoma cell line
            15.  Kim Y, Park E, Noh H, Park S. Expression of EphA8-Fc
               in transgenic mouse embryos induces apoptosis of neural   MDA-MB-231 express a distinct set of Eph receptors and ephrin
               epithelial cells during brain development.  Dev Neurobiol.   ligands. Cancer Genomics Proteomics. 2020;17(6):729-738.
               2013;73(9):702-712.                                doi: 10.21873/cgp.20227


            Volume 2 Issue 4 (2025)                        158                           doi: 10.36922/MI025060010
   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170