Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28624910›Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2017

Clinical pharmacology and clinical trials of ribonucleotide reductase inhibitors: is it a viable cancer therapy?

Mukundan Baskar Mannargudi, Subrata Deb

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Cancer interception by interceptor molecules: mechanistic, preclinical and human translational studies with chlorophylls.Genes and environment : the official journal of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society · 2021
    Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mukundan Baskar MannargudiClinical Pharmacology Program, Medical Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Subrata DebDepartment of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, Roosevelt University College of Pharmacy, 1400 N. Roosevelt Blvd., Schaumburg, IL, 60173, USA. sdeb@alumni.ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3836-7820
National Cancer Institute · USRoosevelt University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRibonucleotide reductase (RR) enzymes (RR1 and RR2) play an important role in the reduction of ribonucleotides to deoxyribonucleotides which is involved in DNA replication and repair. Augmented RR activity has been ascribed to uncontrolled cell growth and tumorigenic transformation.

methodsThis review mainly focuses on several biological and chemical RR inhibitors (e.g., siRNA, GTI-2040, GTI-2501, triapine, gemcitabine, and clofarabine) that have been evaluated in clinical trials with promising anticancer activity from 1960's till 2016. A summary on whether their monotherapy or combination is still effective for further use is discussed.

resultsAmong the RR2 inhibitors evaluated, GTI-2040, siRNA, gallium nitrate and didox were more efficacious as a monotherapy, whereas triapine was found to be more efficacious as combination agent. Hydroxyurea is currently used more in combination therapy, even though it is efficacious as a monotherapy. Gallium nitrate showed mixed results in combination therapy, while the combination activity of didox is yet to be evaluated. RR1 inhibitors that have long been used in chemotherapy such as gemcitabine, cladribine, fludarabine and clofarabine are currently used mostly as a combination therapy, but are equally efficacious as a monotherapy, except tezacitabine which did not progress beyond phase I trials.

conclusionsBased on the results of clinical trials, we conclude that RR inhibitors are viable treatment options, either as a monotherapy or as a combination in cancer chemotherapy. With the recent advances made in cancer biology, further development of RR inhibitors with improved efficacy and reduced toxicity is possible for treatment of variety of cancers.

Indexed as

CarcinogenesisCell ProliferationClinical Trials as TopicEnzyme InhibitorsHumansNeoplasmsOligodeoxyribonucleotidesPharmacology, ClinicalRibonucleotide ReductasesEnzyme InhibitorsGTI2040OligodeoxyribonucleotidesRibonucleotide ReductasesClinical trialEfficacyProgression-free survivalResponse rateRibonucleotide reductaseToxicity

Identifiers

PMID28624910
PMCPMC11819458
OpenAlexW2626073626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.