Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25892134›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of oncology2015

The DNA damage/repair cascade in glioblastoma cell lines after chemotherapeutic agent treatment.

Laura Annovazzi, Valentina Caldera, Marta Mellai, Chiara Riganti, Luigi Battaglia, Daniela Chirio, Antonio Melcarne, Davide Schiffer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Roles of circular RNAs in regulating the development of glioma.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laura AnnovazziNeuro-Bio-Oncology Center, Policlinico di Monza Foundation (Vercelli), I-13100 Vercelli, Italy.
Valentina CalderaNeuro-Bio-Oncology Center, Policlinico di Monza Foundation (Vercelli), I-13100 Vercelli, Italy.
Marta MellaiNeuro-Bio-Oncology Center, Policlinico di Monza Foundation (Vercelli), I-13100 Vercelli, Italy.
Chiara RigantiDepartment of Oncology, University of Turin, I-10126 Turin, Italy.
Luigi BattagliaDepartment of Drug Science and Technology, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy.
Daniela ChirioDepartment of Drug Science and Technology, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy.
Antonio MelcarneDepartment of Neurosurgery, CTO Hospital, Città della Salute e della Scienza, I-10126 Turin, Italy.
Davide SchifferNeuro-Bio-Oncology Center, Policlinico di Monza Foundation (Vercelli), I-13100 Vercelli, Italy.
University of Turin · ITCTO Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Therapeutic resistance in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) has been linked to a subpopulation of cells with stem cell-like properties, the glioma stem cells (GSCs), responsible for cancer progression and recurrence. This study investigated the in vitro cytotoxicity of three chemotherapeutics, temozolomide (TMZ), doxorubicin (Dox) and paclitaxel (PTX) on glioma cell lines, by analyzing the molecular mechanisms leading to DNA repair and cell resistance, or to cell death. The drugs were tested on 16 GBM cell lines, grown as neurospheres (NS) or adherent cells (AC), by studying DNA damage occurrence by Comet assay, the expression by immunofluorescence and western blotting of checkpoint/repair molecules and apoptosis. The three drugs were able to provoke a genotoxic injury and to inhibit dose- and time-dependently cell proliferation, more evidently in AC than in NS. The first cell response to DNA damage was the activation of the damage sensors (p-ATM, p-53BP1, γ-H2AX), followed by repair effectors; the expression of checkpoint/repair molecules appeared higher in NS than in AC. The non-homologous repair pathway (NHEJ) seemed more involved than the homologous one (HR). Apoptosis occurred after long treatment times, but only a small percentage of cells in NS underwent death, even at high drug concentration, whereas most cells survived in a quiescent state and resumed proliferation after drug removal. In tumor specimens, checkpoint/repair proteins were constitutively expressed in GBMs, but not in low-grade gliomas.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsApoptosisBrain NeoplasmsCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationDacarbazineDNA DamageDNA, NeoplasmDNA RepairDose-Response Relationship, DrugDoxorubicinDrug Resistance, NeoplasmGlioblastomaHumansPaclitaxelTemozolomideAntineoplastic AgentsDacarbazineDNA, NeoplasmDoxorubicinPaclitaxelTemozolomide

Identifiers

PMID25892134
PMCPMC4441296
OpenAlexW2079213216

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.