Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34049239›Full record

ArticleEBioMedicine2021

Quantifying cell cycle-dependent drug sensitivities in cancer using a high throughput synchronisation and screening approach.

Timothy I Johnson, Christopher J Minteer, Daniel Kottmann, Charles R Dunlop, Sandra Bernaldo de Quirós Fernández, Larissa S Carnevalli, Yann Wallez, Alan Lau, Frances M Richards, Duncan I Jodrell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EBioMedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy I JohnsonCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: Isaac.Johnson@cantab.net.
Christopher J MinteerCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Daniel KottmannCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Charles R DunlopCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Sandra Bernaldo de Quirós FernándezCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Larissa S CarnevalliBioscience, Early Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Yann WallezBioscience, Early Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Alan LauBioscience, Early Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Frances M RichardsCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Duncan I JodrellCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: dij21@cam.ac.uk.
University of Cambridge · GBAstraZeneca (United Kingdom) · GBCancer Research UK · GBCancer Research UK Cambridge Center · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15678Cancer Research UK 27338Pancreatic Cancer UK FLF2015_03_CAMBRIDGE
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChemotherapy and targeted agent anti-cancer efficacy is largely dependent on the proliferative state of tumours, as exemplified by agents that target DNA synthesis/replication or mitosis. As a result, cell cycle specificities of a number of cancer drugs are well known. However, they are yet to be described in a quantifiable manner.

methodsA scalable cell synchronisation protocol used to screen a library of 235 anti-cancer compounds exposed over six hours in G1 or S/G2 accumulated AsPC-1 cells to generate a cell cycle specificity (CCS) score.

findingsThe synchronisation method was associated with reduced method-related cytotoxicity compared to nocodazole, delivering sufficient cell cycle purity and cell numbers to run high-throughput drug library screens. Compounds were identified with G1 and S/G2-associated specificities that, overall, functionally matched with a compound's target/mechanism of action. This annotation was used to describe a synergistic schedule using the CDK4/6 inhibitor, palbociclib, prior to gemcitabine/AZD6738 as well as describe the correlation between the CCS score and published synergistic/antagonistic drug schedules.

interpretationThis is the first highly quantitative description of cell cycle-dependent drug sensitivities that utilised a tractable and tolerated method with potential uses outside the present study. Drug treatments such as those shown to be G1 or S/G2 associated may benefit from scheduling considerations such as after CDK4/6 inhibitors and being first in drug sequences respectively.

fundingCancer Research UK (CRUK) Institute core grants C14303/A17197 and C9545/A29580. The Li Ka Shing Centre where this work was performed was generously funded by CK Hutchison Holdings Limited, the University of Cambridge, CRUK, The Atlantic Philanthropies and others.

Indexed as

Cell Culture TechniquesCell CycleCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationCell SurvivalDeoxycytidineDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorDrug SynergismGemcitabineHeLa CellsHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysHumansMCF-7 CellsNeoplasmsNocodazolePiperazinesDeoxycytidineGemcitabineNocodazolepalbociclibPiperazinesPyridinesSmall Molecule LibrariesTubulin ModulatorsCancercell cyclecombination treatmenthigh throughput screeningsynchronisation

Identifiers

PMID34049239
PMCPMC8170111
OpenAlexW3165515309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.