Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21193989›Full record

ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2011

The slow cell death response when screening chemotherapeutic agents.

Joseph Blois, Adam Smith, Lee Josephson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. PEG-b-PLA micelles and PLGA-b-PEG-b-PLGA sol-gels for drug delivery.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2016
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph BloisThe Center for Translational Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA 02129, USA.
Adam Smith
Lee Josephson
Harvard University · USVanderbilt University · US

Funding

StatisticsP50CA086355 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI WEISSLEDER, MD, PHD, RALPH · 2000 to 2015
$27.8M
Reagents for the Design of Targeted Multifunctional NanomaterialsR01EB009691 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI JOSEPHSON, LEE · 2009 to 2012
$1.5M
Imaging of Pharmacotherapy Induced ApoptosisR01EB004472 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI JOSEPHSON, LEE · 2005 to 2008
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA086355NCI NIH HHS P50CA086355NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB004472NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB009691
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the correlation between cell death and a common surrogate of death used in screening assays, we compared cell death responses to those obtained with the sulforhodamine B (SRB) cell protein-based "cytotoxicity" assay.

methodWith the SRB assay, the Hill equation was used to obtain an IC50 and final cell mass, or cell mass present at infinite agent concentrations, with eight adherent cell lines and four agents (32 agent/cell combinations). Cells were treated with high agent concentrations (well above the SRB IC50) and the death response determined as the time-dependent decrease in cells failing to bind both annexin V and vital fluorochromes by flow cytometry.

resultsDeath kinetics were categorized as fast (5/32) (similar to the reference nonadherent Jurkat line), slow (17/32), or none (10/32), despite positive responses in the SRB assay in all cases. With slow cell death, a single exposure to a chemotherapeutic agent caused a slow, progressive increase in dead (necrotic) and dying (apoptotic) cells for at least 72 h.

conclusionsCell death (defined by annexin and/or fluorochrome binding) did not correlate with the standard SRB "cytotoxicity" assay. With the slow cell death response, a single exposure to an agent caused a slow conversion from vital to apoptotic and necrotic cells over at least 72 h (the longest time point examined). Here, increasing the time of exposure to agent concentrations modestly above the SRB IC50 provides a method of maximizing cell kill. If tumors respond similarly, sustained low doses of chemotherapeutic agents, rather than a log-kill, maximum tolerated dose strategy may be an optimal strategy of maximizing tumor cell death.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnnexin A5Antineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicApoptosisCamptothecinCell DeathCell Line, TumorDrug Resistance, NeoplasmDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorFlow CytometryFluorescent DyesFluorouracilHumansKineticsAnnexin A5Antineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicCamptothecinFluorescent DyesFluorouracillissamine rhodamine BPaclitaxelRhodaminesVinblastine

Identifiers

PMID21193989
PMCPMC3210817
OpenAlexW2093995491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.