ArticlePharmaceutics2021
Bi-Functional Peptides as a New Therapeutic Tool for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuropilins as potential biomarkers in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of basic and clinical implications.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2023Pooled it
- Brain Targeting Nanomedicines: Pitfalls and Promise.International journal of nanomedicine · 2024Review
- Targeting of Tomato Bushy Stunt Virus with a Genetically Fused C-End Rule Peptide.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Binding and Kinetic Analysis of Human Protein Phosphatase PP2A Interactions with Caspase 9 Protein and the Interfering Peptide C9h.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- The role of cell-penetrating peptides in potential anti-cancer therapy.Clinical and translational medicine · 2022Review
- Nanomedicine in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A New Frontier in Targeted Cancer Treatment.Pharmaceutics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe interfering peptides that block protein-protein interactions have been receiving increasing attention as potential therapeutic tools.
methodsWe measured the internalization and biological effect of four bi-functional tumor-penetrating and interfering peptides into primary hepatocytes isolated from three non-malignant and 11 hepatocellular carcinomas.
resultsThese peptides are internalized in malignant hepatocytes but not in non-malignant cells. Furthermore, the degree of peptide internalization correlated with receptor expression level and tumor aggressiveness levels. Importantly, penetration of the peptides iRGD-IP, LinTT1-IP, TT1-IP, and RPARPAR-IP induced apoptosis of the malignant hepatocytes without effect on non-malignant cells.
conclusionReceptor expression levels correlated with the level of peptide internalization and aggressiveness of the tumor. This study highlights the potential to exploit the expression of tumor-penetrating peptide receptors as a predictive marker of liver tumor aggressiveness. These bi-functional peptides could be developed for personalized tumor treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.