ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2019
The Evaluation of Glioblastoma Cell Dissociation and Its Influence on Its Behavior.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Validated UPLC-MS/MS Method for Monitoring Temozolomide and Perillyl Alcohol Metabolites in Biological Matrices: Insights From a Preclinical Pharmacokinetic Study.Biomedical chromatography : BMC · 2025Article
- Expression of STAT3 and hypoxia markers in long-term surviving malignant glioma patients.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Role of Circular RNA in Brain Tumor Development.Cells · 2022Review
- Glioblastoma and MiRNAs.Cancers · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePrimary cell lines are a valuable tool for evaluation of tumor behavior or sensitivity to anticancer treatment and appropriate dissociation of cells could preserve genomic profile of the original tissue. The main aim of our study was to compare the influence of two methods of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) cell derivation (mechanic-MD; enzymatic-ED) on basic biological properties of thus derived cells and correlate them to the ones obtained from stabilized GBM cell line A-172.
methodsCell proliferation and migration (xCELLigence Real-Time Cell Analysis), expression of microRNAs and protein markers (RT-PCR and Western blotting), morphology (phase contrast and fluorescent microscopy), and accumulation of temozolomide (TMZ) and its metabolite 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide (AIC) inside the cells (LC-MS analysis) were carried out in five different samples of GBM (GBM1, GBM2, GBM32, GBM33, GBM34), with each of them processed by MD and ED types of isolations. The same analyses were done in the A-172 cell line too.
resultsPrimary GBM cells obtained by ED or MD approaches significantly differ in biological behavior and properties of these cells. Unlike in primary MD GBM cells, higher proliferation, as well as migration, was observed in primary ED GBM cells, which were also associated with the acquired mesenchymal phenotype and higher sensitivity to TMZ. Finally, the same analyses of stabilized GBM cell line A-172 revealed several important differences in measured parameters.
conclusionsGBM cells obtained by MD and ED dissociation show considerable heterogeneity, but based on our results, MD approach should be the preferred method of primary GBM cell isolation.
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.