Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34068775›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Permeabilizing Cell Membranes with Electric Fields.

Alondra A Aguilar, Michelle C Ho, Edwin Chang, Kristen W Carlson, Arutselvan Natarajan, Tal Marciano, Ze'ev Bomzon, Chirag B Patel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Smart nanoparticles for cancer therapy.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

Alondra A AguilarMolecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4411-5251
Michelle C HoMolecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1659-7991
Edwin ChangMolecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5672-0520
Kristen W CarlsonBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2101-3567
Arutselvan NatarajanMolecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9958-2623
Tal MarcianoNovocure, Ltd., 31905 Haifa, Israel.
Ze'ev BomzonNovocure, Ltd., 31905 Haifa, Israel.
Chirag B PatelMolecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The biological impact of exogenous, alternating electric fields (AEFs) and direct-current electric fields has a long history of study, ranging from effects on embryonic development to influences on wound healing. In this article, we focus on the application of electric fields for the treatment of cancers. In particular, we outline the clinical impact of tumor treating fields (TTFields), a form of AEFs, on the treatment of cancers such as glioblastoma and mesothelioma. We provide an overview of the standard mechanism of action of TTFields, namely, the capability for AEFs (e.g., TTFields) to disrupt the formation and segregation of the mitotic spindle in actively dividing cells. Though this standard mechanism explains a large part of TTFields' action, it is by no means complete. The standard theory does not account for exogenously applied AEFs' influence directly upon DNA nor upon their capacity to alter the functionality and permeability of cancer cell membranes. This review summarizes the current literature to provide a more comprehensive understanding of AEFs' actions on cell membranes. It gives an overview of three mechanistic models that may explain the more recent observations into AEFs' effects: the voltage-gated ion channel, bioelectrorheological, and electroporation models. Inconsistencies were noted in both effective frequency range and field strength between TTFields versus all three proposed models. We addressed these discrepancies through theoretical investigations into the inhomogeneities of electric fields on cellular membranes as a function of disease state, external microenvironment, and tissue or cellular organization. Lastly, future experimental strategies to validate these findings are outlined. Clinical benefits are inevitably forthcoming.

Indexed as

alternating electric fields (AEFs), bioelectrorheologycancercell membranecell modelingelectroporationglioblastomatumor treating fields (TTFields)voltage-gated ion channel

Identifiers

PMID34068775
PMCPMC8126200

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.