Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24676409›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

The relevance of testing the efficacy of anti-angiogenesis treatments on cells derived from primary tumors: a new method for the personalized treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

Renaud Grépin, Damien Ambrosetti, Alexandre Marsaud, Lauris Gastaud, Jean Amiel, Florence Pedeutour, Gilles Pagès

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Renaud GrépinBiomedical Research Unit, Centre Scientifique of Monaco, Principality of Monaco.
Damien AmbrosettiInstitute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice (IRCAN) UMR/7284 U1081, Nice University Hospital, Central Laboratory of Pathology, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France.
Alexandre MarsaudInstitute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice (IRCAN) UMR/7284 U1081, Nice University Hospital, Department of Urology, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France.
Lauris GastaudDepartment of Medical Oncology, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France.
Jean AmielNice University Hospital, Department of Urology, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France.
Florence PedeutourInstitute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice (IRCAN) UMR/7284 U1081, Nice University Hospital, Laboratory of Solid Tumors Genetics, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France.
Gilles PagèsInstitute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice (IRCAN) UMR/7284 U1081, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France.
Institut de Recherche sur le Cancer et le Vieillissement de Nice · FRCentre Antoine Lacassagne · FRScientific Centre of Monaco · MCUniversité Côte d'Azur · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the numerous available drugs, the most appropriate treatments for patients affected by common or rare renal cell carcinomas (RCC), like those associated with the Xp11.2 translocation/transcription factor for immunoglobulin heavy-chain enhancer 3 (TFE3) gene fusion (TFE3 RCC), are not clearly defined. We aimed to make a parallel between the sensitivity to targeted therapies on living patients and on cells derived from the initial tumor. Three patients diagnosed with a metastatic RCC (one clear cell RCC [ccRCC], two TFE3 RCC) were treated with anti-angiogenesis drugs. The concentrations of the different drugs giving 50% inhibition of cell proliferation (IC50) were determined with the Thiazolyl Blue Tetrazolium Bromide (MTT) assay on cells from the primary tumors and a reference sensitive RCC cell line (786-O). We considered the cells to be sensitive if the IC50 was lower or equal to that in 786-O cells, and insensitive if the IC50 was higher to that in 786-O cells (IC 50 of 6 ± 1 µM for sunitinib, 10 ± 1 µM for everolimus and 6 ± 1 µM for sorafenib). Based on this standard, the response in patients and in cells was equivalent. The efficacy of anti-angiogenesis therapies was also tested in cells obtained from five patients with non-metastatic ccRCC, and untreated as recommended by clinical practice in order to determine the best treatment in case of progression toward a metastatic grade. In vitro experiments may represent a method for evaluating the best first-line treatment for personalized management of ccRCC during the period following surgery.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsBasic Helix-Loop-Helix Leucine Zipper Transcription FactorsCarcinoma, Renal CellDisease Models, AnimalDrug Resistance, NeoplasmFemaleGene ExpressionHumansIndolesKidney NeoplasmsMiceMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic AgentsBasic Helix-Loop-Helix Leucine Zipper Transcription FactorsIndolesNiacinamidePhenylurea CompoundsPyrrolesReceptor Protein-Tyrosine KinasesSorafenibSunitinibTFE3 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID24676409
PMCPMC3968004
OpenAlexW1966279287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.