Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32709149›Full record

ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Comparison of Chemotherapeutic Activities of Rhodamine-Based GUMBOS and NanoGUMBOS.

Nimisha Bhattarai, Mi Chen, Rocío L Pérez, Sudhir Ravula, Robert M Strongin, Karen McDonough, Isiah M Warner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Fluoroquinolone-Based Organic Salts (GUMBOS) with Antibacterial Potential.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  6. A COPharmaceutics · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nimisha BhattaraiDepartment of Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.
Mi ChenDepartment of Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.
Rocío L PérezDepartment of Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.
Sudhir RavulaDepartment of Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3457-7102
Robert M StronginDepartment of Chemistry, Portland State University, Portland, OR 97207, USA.
Karen McDonoughAgCenter Biotechnology Labs, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.
Isiah M WarnerDepartment of Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5336-7653
Louisiana State University · USPortland State University · US

Funding

National Science Foundation CHE-1905105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rhodamine derivatives have been widely investigated for their mitochondrial targeting and chemotherapeutic properties that result from their lipophilic cationic structures. In previous research, we have found that conversion of Rhodamine 6G into nanoGUMBOS, i.e., nanomaterials derived from a group of uniform materials based on organic salts (GUMBOS), led to selective chemotherapeutic toxicity for cancer cells over normal cells. Herein, we investigate the chemotherapeutic activity of GUMBOS derived from four different rhodamine derivatives, two bearing an ester group, i.e., Rhodamine 123 (R123) and SNAFR-5, and two bearing a carboxylic acid group, i.e., rhodamine 110 (R110) and rhodamine B (RB). In this study, we evaluate (1) relative hydrophobicity via octanol-water partition coefficients, (2) cytotoxicity, and (3) cellular uptake in order to evaluate possible structure-activity relationships between these different compounds. Intriguingly, we found that while GUMBOS derived from R123 and SNAFR-5 formed nanoGUMBOS in aqueous medium, no distinct nanoparticles are observed for RB and R110 GUMBOS. Further investigation revealed that the relatively high water solubility of R110 and RB GUMBOS hinders nanoparticle formation. Subsequently, while R123 and SNAFR-5 displayed selective chemotherapeutic toxicity similar to that of previously investigated R6G nanoGUMBOS, the R110 and RB GUMBOS were lacking in this property. Additionally, the chemotherapeutic toxicities of R123 and SNAFR-5 nanoGUMBOS were also significantly greater than R110 and RB GUMBOS. Observed results were consistent with decreased cellular uptake of R110 and RB as compared to R123 and SNAFR-5 compounds. Moreover, these results are also consistent with previous observations that suggest that nanoparticle formation is critical to the observed selective chemotherapeutic properties as well as the chemotherapeutic efficacy of rhodamine nanoGUMBOS.

Indexed as

Cell Line, TumorHumansHydrophobic and Hydrophilic InteractionsNanoparticlesNeoplasmsOrganic ChemicalsRhodamine 123RhodaminesSolubilityWaterOrganic Chemicalsrhodamine 110Rhodamine 123rhodamine 6Grhodamine BRhodaminesWaterchemotherapeutic activitynanoGUMBOSrhodamine dyes

Identifiers

PMID32709149
PMCPMC7397155
OpenAlexW3042506671

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.