Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31993584›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of pharmaceutics: X2019

LC-MS metabolomics comparisons of cancer cell and macrophage responses to methotrexate and polymer-encapsulated methotrexate.

Mohammad Ahmad Al-Natour, Ali Alazzo, Amir M Ghaemmaghami, Dong-Hyun Kim, Cameron Alexander

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of pharmaceutics: X, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Mohammad Ahmad Al-NatourSchool of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG72RD, UK.
Ali AlazzoSchool of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG72RD, UK.
Amir M GhaemmaghamiSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG72RD, UK.
Dong-Hyun KimSchool of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG72RD, UK.
Cameron AlexanderSchool of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG72RD, UK.
University of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Mosul · IQ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methotrexate (MTX) is a folate analogue antimetabolite widely used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and cancer. A number of studies have shown that MTX delivered via nanoparticle carriers is more potent against cancer cells than free MTX, a phenomenon attributed to higher cellular uptake of the particles compared to the saturable folate receptor pathway. In this study, a cell-based global metabolic profiling approach was applied to study the effects of MTX in both free drug form and when encapsulated in -poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) nanoparticles on a cancer cell line, A549, and also on human-like THP-1 macrophages. The results showed that MTX loaded nanoparticles had less impact on the macrophages than free MTX, and the effects on macrophages were limited to changes in nucleotide metabolism and suppression of the tricarboxylic acid cycle, whereas free MTX also led to a drop in glycolytic activity and impairment in redox homeostasis. In contrast, MTX loaded nanoparticles showed a greater impact on A549 cells than the free drug, which was in accord with studies in other cell lines in prior literature with MTX-carrier nanoparticles.

Indexed as

Cancer nanotechnologyDrug deliveryMetabolomicsMethotrexatePolymer nanoparticles

Identifiers

PMID31993584
PMCPMC6977166
OpenAlexW2988872094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.