ArticleBiology2020
A Model In Vitro Study Using Hypericin: Tumor-Versus Necrosis-Targeting Property and Possible Mechanisms.
Article in Biology, 2020. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hyaluronic acid-modified polymeric nanoplatform deliveringJournal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2026Article
- Article
- Pitfalls in methods to study colocalization of nanoparticles in mouse macrophage lysosomes.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2022Article
- Towards updated understanding of brain metastasis.American journal of cancer research · 2022Review
- Biodegradable Hypericin-Containing Nanoparticles for Necrosis Targeting and Fluorescence Imaging.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Hypericin (Hyp) had been explored as a tumor-seeking agent for years; however, more recent studies showed its necrosis-avidity rather than cancer-seeking property. To further look into this discrepancy, we conducted an in vitro study on Hyp retention in vital and dead cancerous HepG2 and normal LO2 cell lines by measuring the fluorescence intensity and concentration of Hyp in cells. To question the DNA binding theory for its necrosis-avidity, the subcellular distribution of Hyp was also investigated to explore the possible mechanisms of the necrosis avidity. The fluorescence intensity and concentration are significantly higher in dead cells than those in vital cells, and this difference did not differ between HepG2 and LO2 cell lines. Hyp was taken up in vital cells in the early phase and excreted within hours, whereas it was retained in dead cells for more than two days. Confocal microscopy showed that Hyp selectively accumulated in lysosomes rather than cell membrane or nuclei. Hyp showed a necrosis-avid property rather than cancer-targetability. The long-lasting retention of Hyp in dead cells may be associated with halted energy metabolism and/or binding with certain degraded cellular substrates. Necrosis-avidity of Hyp was confirmed, which may be associated with halted energy metabolism in dead LO2 or HepG2 cells.
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.