Human epidermal growth factor (EGF) is a functionally versatile polypeptide comprising 53 amino acids (aa). Due to the ability of EGF to stimulate epidermal growth and proliferation, numerous research studies have been conducted to explore its potential applications in cosmetic, skin care and medication. The emergence of recombinant DNA technology has facilitated the production of a great variety of recombinant EGF (rEGF) isoforms. However, increasing evidence supports that rEGF isoforms exhibit different levels of stability and potency. This review discusses how the less bioactive rEGF isoforms may mystify the identity and even the functional properties of authentic rEGF, which shares the same primary structure as native EGF. The identity crisis, the time- consuming, costly and labor-intensive patenting and drug regulatory processes act together to result in underrating the functional applications of authentic rEGF, which have been shown to be effective and safe in promoting treatments of a variety of skin disorders such as diabetic foot ulcers (DFU).

Keywords EGF, Authentic, Hard-to-heal wounds, Topical medication, Derivatives, Recombinant, Murine, Eruption, Treatments, Physiological, Chronic wounds, Healing,
Degradation

EGF, human epidermal growth factor; rEGF, recombinant human epidermal growth factor; aa, amino acid(s); dfu: diabetic foot ulcers

Human epidermal growth factor (EGF) was first found to be present in a pregnant woman’s urine sample in the mid-1970s.¹ Prior to this discovery, mouse EGF was first isolated and shown to promote incisor eruption and eyelid opening in murine neonates in 1962.² Since then EGF was shown to exhibit a variety of physiological functions in animals such as healing of epidermal wounds,³ corneal injuries⁴ and burns.⁵ Recently, with human subjects, EGF has been shown to be effective in promoting treatments of both acute and chronic wounds, including scalds, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, diabetic foot ulcers and bedsores.⁶ Moreover, EGF has also been exploited for enhancing skin tone and texture in cosmetic industry in the last two decades.⁷

The functional versatility and high marketing prices of EGF, averaging US$ 2,000permg,^8-10 have provided investors with a strong incentive to bring forth new protocols, hoping to produce EGF cost-effectively. The emergence of recombinant DNA technology has facilitated the evolvement of a wide variety of strategies and expression systems, among which many have been employed for recombinant EGF (rEGF) expression.

Due to the concern that the small (53 aa long) EGF polypeptide might be susceptible to proteolytic degradation, strategies involving the use of fusion protein partners have been commonly exploited for use in expressing rEGF (Table 1). A major drawback of the fusion approach is the formation of rEGF as variants possessing different peptide lengths (Table 1).^11-22 Moreover, the EGF derivatives were commonly shown to exhibit lower levels of bioactivity and stability.^17,22-24 Later on, pragmatic approaches were developed for the production of not only bioactive and stable rEGF, but also a product available at a much reduced price.^11-12

Table 1 Authentic EGF and its structural derivatives
^aDifferent EGF isoforms include authentic EGF comprising 53 aa, its truncated (less than 53 aa) and extended (more than 53 aa) derivatives, and mutants (with different aa compositions).
^bSchematic representations of various EGF isoforms .

Disparities in Performance among Different rEGF Isoforms

The rEGF products available from various expression activities were analyzed for their efficacies in promoting treatments of skin diseases, including hard-to-heal wounds such as diabetic foot ulcers,^25-28 bedsores,²⁹ scalds³⁰ and Stevens-Johnson syndrome,³¹ of which the last disorder results usually from a severe allergic reaction to a medication.^32-33 Despite the positive outcomes shown in these studies, the efficacies of EGF as an active ingredient in skin care or medical applications have been controversial, in particular in studies conducted in earlier times.³⁴

One possible reason for the inconsistent results is the use of structurally different EGF molecules, notwithstanding that all samples involved are indiscriminately designated “EGF” and very often, the quality and exact identity of EGF concerned were not revealed in these studies, thus restricting the audience to assume that an active EGF product was employed in the work.^35-38 However, more and more findings support that authentic EGF (of which the primary sequence, comprising 53 aa, is the same as that of native EGF), is much more potent and stable than its unauthentic counterparts.

The variability of efficiencies exhibited between authentic EGF and its structural analogs in functional performance is likely, on the one hand, attributable to the unstable nature of the derivatives, which have been reported to be susceptible to proteolytic degradation.¹⁷ On the other hand, the exact structural composition and purity of a recombinant product could also affect its performance. Research findings strongly support that authentic rEGF with high purity is remarkably stable, despite its maintenance and usage in the absence of protein stabilizers.¹² In addition, among the great variety of rEGF isoforms reported in the literature, so far, only the authentic form has been shown to exhibit high efficacies, despite through simply topical administration, in promoting wound healing.³⁰ The shorter derivatives comprising 51 and 52 a residues have been shown to be less active and their application to treatments of DFU has to be done through intralesional administration.³⁹ These discrepancies in performance among different rEGF isoforms, which are all collectively called “rEGF”, have confused the outcomes of the mentioned studies.

More controversial issues concerning rEGF applications

Taking advantage of the lenient approval and monitoring activities in cosmetic and skin care industries, rEGF isoforms have been applied commercially to result in a wide collection of marketable end products, irrespective of the absence of documentation of their origins and structural properties.^40-41 Obviously and understandably, the feedbacks received from the customers or end users, have been highly controversial.

Since EGF is responsible for growth of the epidermis, there is often some speculation as to whether EGF is carcinogenic. Recently, there have been numerous publications reporting the expression and applications of rEGF. Despite the rapid gathering of evidence supporting the wide application of rEGF to skin care and treatments of a wide range of skin problems,^6,30 interestingly, there has not been any concrete evidence to support that the polypeptide could trigger carcinogenesis.⁴² Apparently, authentic rEGF is highly safe, at least, for use in topical administration. In fact, the harmless nature of EGF has been well documented by Dr. Cohen in his pioneering work with murine EGF in the early 1960s.^2,43 However, the concern regarding whether unauthentic rEGF molecules are as safe as authentic rEGF upon administration requires further study to clarify.

Additional Hurdles for rEGF to Overcome on its Path to Medicine

Given the demonstration that authentic rEGF is effective in treating a variety of human wounds through topical administration,^6,26,30-31 and that the protocol employed is simple and safe,^6,26 if a license is sought for rEGF to be applied as a drug in a country, a lengthy and expensive process, which includes:

1. Successful attainment of the national patent concerned,⁴⁴
2. Accomplishment of rEGF production under current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations and lastly,
3. Fulfilment of FDA clinical trial requirements, is necessary.⁴⁵

The total time required to complete all these three undertakings can easily be exceeding 10 years.

The application of rEGF in enhancing treatment of DFU employing simply a topical approach has been well documented in many separate and independent studies.^26,29 Presumably, quality authentic rEGF was employed in these studies; the success rate of complete healing of DFU increased from less than 50% found in placebo controls, wherein only debridement was administered,²⁶ to as high as 95% observed in patients treated with both debridement and rEGF.²⁶ This facile and effective treatment protocol,²⁶ although it is not yet officially approved for medical applications, has been employed successfully to treat thousands of DFU (unpublished data). Intriguingly and obviously, the protocol is very safe as there has not been a single incident of side effect observed in individuals treated by the topical method described.

Years of devoted research have resulted in cost-effective protocols for authentic rEGF production, and substantial evidence to support the effectiveness of the simple and safe topical protocol in enhancing treatments of DFU.²⁶ Paradoxically then, the long durations taken for patent application and FDA clearance and approval processes, which are meant to benefit the inventors/investors and patients, respectively, deprive the opportunities of millions of DFU patients from enjoying the prompt healing effect of rEGF simply through topical treatment, and more importantly, from avoiding amputation, which will result in devastating consequences. Moreover, the potential beneficial effects of the topical medication protocol on the treatments of DFU and other kinds of hard-to-heal wounds, e.g. bedsores²⁹ and surgical injuries,⁶ are expected to help substantially reduce the enormous medical expenses incurred for treatments of these skin problems.

Recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rEGF) possessing the native 53 aa primary structure has been shown to be effective and safe in enhancing treatments of various kinds of skin problems including hard-to-heal wounds such as diabetic foot ulcers and bedsores, simply through topical administration. However, the availability of varieties of rEGF derivatives, which are also commonly called “rEGF or EGF”, has mystified the identity and functional properties of authentic rEGF. The confusions have imposed a negative impact on the credibility and applicability of authentic rEGF. Moreover, its potential for drug applications is further weakened by the time-consuming, costly and labor-intensive patenting and drug regulatory processes.

This study was partially funded by RGC project: GRF16101515 awarded to W.K.R. Wong.

The authors do not have any personal or financial interests.

None.

1. Cohen S, Carpenter G. Human epidermal growth factor: isolation and chemical and biological properties. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1975;72(4):1317–1321.
2. Cohen S. Isolation of a mouse submaxillary gland protein accelerating incisor eruption and eyelid opening in the new– born animal. J Biol Chem. 1962;237(5):1555–1562.
3. Sullivan TP, Eaglstein WH, Davis SC, et al. The pig as a model for human wound healing. Wound Repair Regen. 2001;9(2):66– 76.
4. Arturson G. Epidermal growth factor in the healing of corneal wounds, epidermal wounds and partial– thickness scalds: a controlled animal study. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1984;18(1):33–37.
5. Alemdaroğlu C, Değim Z, Çelebi N, et.al. An investigation on burn wound healing in rats with chitosan gel formulation containing epidermal growth factor. Burns. 2006;32(3): 319–327.
6. Wong WKR. Effective Treatment of an unhealed incision of a diabetic patient with recombinant human epidermal growth factor. Modern Chemistry & Applications. 2015.
7. Schouest JM, Luu TK, Moy RL. Improved texture and appearance of human facial skin after daily topical application of barley produced, synthetic, human– like epidermal growth factor (EGF) serum. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012;11(5): 613–620.
8. http://www.emdmillipore.com/US/en/product/Epidermal– growth– factor– %28EGF%29%2C– Human– recombinant,MM_NF– 01– 107
9. http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/sigma/e9644
10. https://www.peprotech.com/en– US/Pages/Product/Animal– Free_Recombinant_Human_EGF/AF– 100–15
11. Sivakesava S, Xu ZN, Chen YH, et al. Production of excreted human epidermal growth factor (hEGF) by an efficient recombinant Escherichia coli system. Process biochemistry. 1999;34(9):893– 900.
12. Huang RC, Lam E, Chen YH, et.al. Human epidermal growth factor excreted by recombinant Escherichia coli K– 12 has the correct N– terminus and is fully bioactive. Process biochemistry. 1999;35(1):1– 5.
13. Oka T, Sakamoto S, Miyoshi KL, et al. Synthesis and secretion of human epidermal growth factor by Escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1985;82(21): 7212– 7216.
14. Yamagata H, Nakahama K, Suzuki Y, et al. Use of Bacillus brevis for efficient synthesis and secretion of human epidermal growth factor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1989;86(10): 3589– 3593.
15. Heo JH, Won HS, Kang HA, et al. Purification of recombinant human epidermal growth factor secreted from the methylotrophic yeast Hansenula polymorpha. Protein Expr Purif. 2002;24(1):117–122.
16. Panosa C, Fonge H, Batallé FM, et al. A comparison of non– biologically active truncated EGF (EGFt) and full– length hEGF for delivery of Auger electron– emitting 111 In to EGFR– positive breast cancer cells and tumor xenografts in athymic mice. Nucl Med Biol, 2015;42(12):931–938.
17. Senderoff RI, Wootton SC, Boctor AM, et al. Aqueous stability of human epidermal growth factor 1– 48. Pharm Res. 1994;11(12):1712–1720.
18. Ma Y, Yu J, Lin J, et al. High Efficient Expression, Purification, and Functional Characterization of Native Human Epidermal Growth Factor in Escherichia coli. BioMed Research International. 2016;p. 1–7.
19. Razis AFA, Ismail EN, Hambali Z, et al. Expression of recombinant human epidermal growth factor in Escherichia coli and characterization of its biological activity. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2008;144(3): 249–261.
20. Brake AJ, Merryweather JP, Coit DG, et al.. Alpha– factor– directed synthesis and secretion of mature foreign proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1984;81(15):4642–4646.
21. Bae JH, Sung BH, Seo JW, et al. A novel fusion partner for enhanced secretion of recombinant proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2016;100(24):10453–10461.
22. Mullenbach GT, Blaney JM & Rosenberg S. US Patent No. 5,547,935. 1996.
23. Calnan DP, Fagbemi A, Acosta BJ, et al. Potency and stability of C terminal truncated human epidermal growth factor. Gut. 2000;47(5):622–627.
24. Gregory H, Thomas E, Young JA, et al. The contribution of the C– terminal undecapeptide sequence of urogastrone– epidermal growth factor to its biological action. Regul Pept. 1988;22(3):217–226.
25. Singla S, Singla S, Kumar A, et al. Role of epidermal growth factor in healing of diabetic foot ulcers. Indian Journal of surgery. 2012;74(6): 451–455.
26. Tsang MW, Wong WKR, Hung CS, et.al, Human epidermal growth factor enhances healing of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes care. 2003;26(6):1856–1861.
27. Montequín FJI, Silva VCM, Díaz OG, et al. Intra‐lesional injections of recombinant human epidermal growth factor promote granulation and healing in advanced diabetic foot ulcers: multicenter, randomised, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study. Int Wound J. 2009;6(6):432–443.
28. Tuyet HL, Quynh N, Tran T, et al. The efficacy and safety of epidermal growth factor in treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: the preliminary results. Int Wound J. 2009;6(2):159–166.
29. Wong WKR, Lam KH, Tsang MW. Method and composition for treating skin wounds with epidermal growth factor. US Patent: 751752814. 2009
30. WKR W, Kwong KWY, KL NG. Application of Recombinant Human Epidermal Growth Factor to Effective Treatment of Scalds. J Anal Pharm Res. 2016;3(1): 00045.
31. Tsang MW, Tsang KY, Wong WKR. The use of recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF) in a gentleman with drug– induced Steven Johnson syndrome. Dermatol Online J. 2004;10(1):25.
32. Avinash A, Amberkar VM, Kunder SK, et al. Carbamazepine–induced Life– threatening Stevens– Johnson Syndrome and Agranulocytosis: The Maiden Case. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(12): FD01–FD03.
33. Karaman M, İlhan AE. Stevens– Johnson Syndrome. Medscape. 2010;18(2): 47–50.
34. Falanga V, Eaglstein WH, Bucalo B, et al. Topical Use of Human Recombinant Epidermal Growth Factor (h‐EGF) in Venous Ulcers. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992;18(7):604–606.
35. Abdull Razis AF, Ismail EN, Hambali Z,  et al. Expression of recombinant human epidermal growth factor in Escherichia coli and characterization of its biological activity. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2006;144(3):249–261.
36. Razis AF, Ismail EN, Hambali Z, et al. The Periplasmic Expression of Recombinant Human Epidermal Growth Factor (hEGF) in Escherichia coli. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2006;14(2):41–45.
37. Liu YL, Huang LM, Lin WP, et al. Secretion of biologically active human epidermal growth factor from Escherichia coli using Yersinia pestis Caf1 signal peptide. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2006;39(5):366–371.
38. Zheng X, Wu X, Fu X, et al. Expression and purification of human epidermal growth factor (hEGF) fused with GB1. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment. 2016;30(4): 813–818.
39. Ferna ́ndez– Montequı ́n JI, Betancourt BY, Leyva– Gonzalez G, et al. Intralesional administration of epidermal growth factor– based formulation (Heberprot– P) in chronic diabetic foot ulcer: treatment up to complete wound closure. Int Wound J. 2009;6(1):67–72.
40. Pouranvari S, Ebrahimi F, Javadi G,et al. Cloning, Expression, and Cost Effective Purification of Authentic Human Epidermal Growth Factor With High Activity. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2016;18(3):e24966.
41. Su Z, Huang Y, Zhou Q, et al. High– level expression and purification of human epidermal growth factor with SUMO fusion in Escherichia coli. Protein Pept Lett. 2006;13(8):785–792.
42. Acosta BJ, Cowley GJ, Saura LP, et al. Epidermal growth factor in clinical practice–a review of its biological actions, clinical indications and safety implications. Int Wound J. 2009;6(5):331–346.
43. Cohen S. The stimulation of epidermal proliferation by a specific protein (EGF). Developmental biology. 1965;12(3):394–407.
44. Dunn MK. Timing of patent filing and market exclusivity. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2011;10:487–488.
45. Kaitin KI. Deconstructing the drug development process: the new face of innovation. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;87(3):356–361.