ArticleInvestigational new drugs2015
The effect of paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel in combination with anti-angiogenic therapy in breast cancer cell lines.
Article in Investigational new drugs, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A phase I/II trial of weekly nab-paclitaxel for pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer patients without epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2019Trial
- A microfluidic model of human dental pulp angiogenesis for preclinical drug and biomaterial testing.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Inflammation Control and Tumor Growth Inhibition of Ovarian Cancer by Targeting Adhesion Molecules of E-Selectin.Cancers · 2023Article
- Knockdown of SERPINE1 reverses resistance of triple‑negative breast cancer to paclitaxel via suppression of VEGFA.Oncology reports · 2020Article
- The role of taxanes in triple-negative breast cancer: literature review.Drug design, development and therapy · 2015Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Taxanes represent a treatment of choice for metastatic breast cancer. Their combination with bevacizumab improved response rate and progression-free survival. We studied in vitro the effect on cell survival of the combination of either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel with bevacizumab and we investigated the biological factors involved in the response to treatments. We used two breast cancer cell lines, MCF7 (ER+/HER2-) and MDA-MB-231 (ER-/HER2-), co-cultured with or without HUVEC cells. We analysed cell survival by MTT test, VEGF secretion by ELISA and VEGFR, SPARC, MDR1 expression by western blot. Doses of both taxanes causing a 50 % growth inhibition were higher in MCF7 than MDA-MB-231, suggesting that taxanes are more effective in ER- cell lines. When both cell lines were grown as single culture, the combination bevacizumab+paclitaxel showed a similar anti-proliferative effect compared to paclitaxel alone. The association bevacizumab+nab-paclitaxel was more effective than nab-paclitaxel alone. An increased anti-proliferative effect of bevacizumab+paclitaxel was observed when MDA-MB-231 cells were cultured with HUVEC. We detected an induction of VEGF secretion when MDA-MB-231 cells were treated with either taxanes. Paclitaxel caused a reduction of VEGF in MCF7. SPARC resulted up-regulated in both cell lines treated with bevacizumab+nab-paclitaxel. Nab-paclitaxel seems to play an important role in inhibiting tumor proliferation through albumin-SPARC bound in association with bevacizumab compared to taxanes alone in both breast cancer cells. The addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel increased its activity only in ER- cells. This difference might be due to their ER status.
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.