Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32064236›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2019

Pharmacometabolomics Identifies 3-Hydroxyadipic Acid, d-Galactose, Lysophosphatidylcholine (P-16:0), and Tetradecenoyl-l-Carnitine as Potential Predictive Indicators of Gemcitabine Efficacy in Pancreatic Cancer Patients.

Dongyuan Wu, Xinyuan Li, Xiaohan Zhang, Fang Han, Xin Lu, Lei Liu, Junsheng Zhang, Mei Dong, Huanjie Yang, Hui Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Traceability Research onFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Lysophosphatidylcholine: Potential Target for the Treatment of Chronic Pain.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  5. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dongyuan WuDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Basic Medical Science College, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Xinyuan LiSchool of Life Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China.
Xiaohan ZhangSchool of Life Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China.
Fang HanSchool of Life Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China.
Xin LuSchool of Life Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China.
Lei LiuCollege of Bioinformatics Science and Technology, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Junsheng ZhangCollege of Basic Medicine, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Mei DongDepartment of Pharmacy, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China.
Huanjie YangSchool of Life Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China.
Hui LiDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Basic Medical Science College, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Harbin Institute of Technology · CNHarbin Medical University · CNThird Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gemcitabine (GEM)-based chemotherapy is the standard regimen for the treatment of pancreatic cancer (PC). However, chemoresistance is a major challenge in PC treatment. Reliable biomarkers are urgently needed to predict the response to GEM-based therapies. GEM-sensitive (GEM-S) and GEM-resistant (GEM-R) pancreatic carcinoma xenograft models were established, and GEM monotherapy and GEM plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PTX) doublet therapy were administered to GEM-S/R tumor-bearing mice. Metabolomic mass spectrometry (MS) analysis of serum, liver, and tumor samples was performed using an ultraperformance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer. The results showed that both GEM monotherapy and combination therapy significantly inhibited the tumor growth in GEM-S subgroup. However, in the GEM-R subgroup, tumor growth was not significantly inhibited by GEM monotherapy, but was significantly suppressed by GEM combination therapy. Metabolic profiling analysis by hierarchical cluster analysis and partial least squares discriminant analysis showed that the differences in metabolites were most significant in serum of three types of samples in the GEM-S/R subgroups, regardless of the administration of GEM monotherapy or combination therapy. The differential metabolite analysis of serum samples revealed 38 and 26 differential metabolites between the GEM-R and GEM-S subgroups treated with GEM monotherapy or combination therapy, and four common discriminating metabolites were investigated: 3-hydroxyadipic acid, d-galactose, lysophosphatidylcholine (LysoPC) (P-16:0), and tetradecenoyl-l-carnitine. The relative amounts of the four metabolites changed significantly and consistently after GEM monotherapy or combination therapy. The levels of these four metabolites were significantly different in the GEM-S and GEM-R pancreatic carcinoma xenograft models; thus, these metabolites could be effective predictive indicators of the efficacy of chemotherapy in PC patients, regardless of the administration of GEM alone or GEM plus nab-PTX.

Indexed as

chemotherapygemcitabinemetabonomicspancreatic carcinomapredictive indicator

Identifiers

PMID32064236
PMCPMC7000527
OpenAlexW3003429659

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.