Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26351772›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of oncology2015

Effectiveness of plasma treatment on pancreatic cancer cells.

Norifumi Hattori, Suguru Yamada, Koji Torii, Shigeomi Takeda, Kae Nakamura, Hiromasa Tanaka, Hiroaki Kajiyama, Mitsuro Kanda, Tsutomu Fujii, Goro Nakayama and 7 more

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 55 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Gas plasma-oxidized sodium chloride acts via hydrogen peroxide in a model of peritoneal carcinomatosis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Norifumi HattoriDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Suguru YamadaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Koji ToriiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Shigeomi TakedaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Kae NakamuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Hiromasa TanakaCenter for Advanced Medicine and Clinical Research, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Hiroaki KajiyamaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Mitsuro KandaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Tsutomu FujiiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Goro NakayamaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Hiroyuki SugimotoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Masahiko KoikeDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Shuji NomotoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Michitaka FujiwaraDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Masaaki MizunoCenter for Advanced Medicine and Clinical Research, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Masaru HoriPlasma Nanotechnology Research Center, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8603, Japan.
Yasuhiro KoderaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Nagoya University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-equilibrium atmospheric pressure plasma (NEAPP) has attracted attention in cancer therapy. We explored the indirect effect of NEAPP through plasma-activated medium (PAM) on pancreatic cancer cells in vitro and in vivo. In this study, four pancreatic cancer cell lines were used and the antitumor effects of PAM treatment were evaluated using a cell proliferation assay. To explore functional mechanisms, morphological change and caspase-3/7 activation in cells were also assessed. Furthermore, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation in cells was examined and N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), an intracellular ROS scavenger, was tested. Finally, the antitumor effect of local injection of PAM was investigated in a mouse xenograft model. We found that PAM treatment had lethal effect on pancreatic cancer cells. Typical morphological findings suggestive of apoptosis such as vacuolization of cell membranes, small and round cells and aggregation of cell nuclei, were observed in the PAM treated cells. Caspase-3/7 activation was detected in accordance with the observed morphological changes. Additionally, ROS uptake was observed in all cell lines tested, while the antitumor effects of PAM were completely inhibited with NAC. In the mouse xenograft model, the calculated tumor volume on day 28 in the PAM treatment group was significantly smaller compared with the control group [28 ± 22 vs. 89 ± 38 (mm(3) ± SD), p=0.0031]. These results show that PAM treatment of pancreatic cancer might be a promising therapeutic strategy.

Indexed as

AnimalsApoptosisCell Line, TumorCell NucleusCell ProliferationHumansMicePancreatic NeoplasmsPlasma GasesReactive Oxygen SpeciesXenograft Model Antitumor AssaysPlasma GasesReactive Oxygen Species

Identifiers

PMID26351772
PMCPMC4599185
OpenAlexW1856916676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.