ArticleCancer cell international2014
Enhanced breast cancer therapy with nsPEFs and low concentrations of gemcitabine.
Article in Cancer cell international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Cellular Doxorubicin Uptake via Delayed Exposure Following Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Field Treatment: An In Vitro Study.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Gemcitabine‑fucoxanthin combination in human pancreatic cancer cells.Biomedical reports · 2023Article
- 10 ns PEFs induce a histological response linked to cell death and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes in an immunocompetent mouse model of peritoneal metastasis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021Article
- Synthesis, characterization, DNA binding, topoisomerase inhibition, and apoptosis induction studies of a novel cobalt(III) complex with a thiosemicarbazone ligand.Journal of inorganic biochemistry · 2020Article
- Dual-function of Baicalin in nsPEFs-treated Hepatocytes and Hepatocellular Carcinoma cells for Different Death Pathway and Mitochondrial Response.International journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
- Activation of Anti-tumor Immune Response by Ablation of HCC with Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Field.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2018Review
- Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Fields Enhance the Anti-tumour Effects of the mTOR Inhibitor Everolimus against Melanoma.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Necroptosis in tumorigenesis, activation of anti-tumor immunity, and cancer therapy.Oncotarget · 2016Review
- Nanosecond pulsed electric field inhibits proliferation and induces apoptosis in human osteosarcoma.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChemotherapy either before or after surgery is a common breast cancer treatment. Long-term, high dose treatments with chemotherapeutic drugs often result in undesirable side effects, frequent recurrences and resistances to therapy.
methodsThe anti-cancer drug, gemcitabine (GEM) was used in combination with pulse power technology with nanosecond pulsed electric fields (nsPEFs) for treatment of human breast cancer cells in vitro. Two strategies include sensitizing mammary tumor cells with GEM before nsPEF treatment or sensitizing cells with nsPEFs before GEM treatment. Breast cancer cell lines MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 were treated with 250 65 ns-duration pulses and electric fields of 15, 20 or 25 kV/cm before or after treatment with 0.38 μM GEM.
resultsBoth cell lines exhibited robust synergism for loss of cell viability 24 h and 48 h after treatment; treatment with GEM before nsPEFs was the preferred order. In clonogenic assays, only MDA-MB-231 cells showed synergism; again GEM before nsPEFs was the preferred order. In apoptosis/necrosis assays with Annexin-V-FITC/propidium iodide 2 h after treatment, both cell lines exhibited apoptosis as a major cell death mechanism, but only MDA-MB-231 cells exhibited modest synergism. However, unlike viability assays, nsPEF treatment before GEM was preferred. MDA-MB-231 cells exhibited much greater levels of necrosis then in MCF-7 cells, which were very low. Synergy was robust and greater when nsPEF treatment was before GEM.
conclusionsCombination treatments with low GEM concentrations and modest nsPEFs provide enhanced cytotoxicity in two breast cancer cell lines. The treatment order is flexible, although long-term survival and short-term cell death analyses indicated different treatment order preferences. Based on synergism, apoptosis mechanisms for both agents were more similar in MCF-7 than in MDA-MB-231 cells. In contrast, necrosis mechanisms for the two agents were distinctly different in MDA-MB-231, but too low to reliably evaluate in MCF-7 cells. While disease mechanisms in the two cell lines are different based on the differential synergistic response to treatments, combination treatment with GEM and nsPEFs should provide an advantageous therapy for breast cancer ablation in vivo.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.