ArticlePharmaceutics2022
Numerical Investigation on the Anti-Angiogenic Therapy-Induced Normalization in Solid Tumors.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A mechanical reprogramming: synergistic tumor microenvironment normalization improves nano-immunotherapy delivery in prostate cancer via multiphysics modeling.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026Article
- Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor Accumulation in Culture Medium Masks the Direct Antitumor Effect of Anti-VEGF Agent Bevacizumab.Doklady. Biochemistry and biophysics · 2024Article
- Multi-Scale and Multi-Physics Models of the Transport of Therapeutic/Diagnostic Cancer Agents.Cancers · 2023Article
- Computational Multi-Scale Modeling of Drug Delivery into an Anti-Angiogenic Therapy-Treated Tumor.Cancers · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study numerically analyzes the fluid flow and solute transport in a solid tumor to comprehensively examine the consequence of normalization induced by anti-angiogenic therapy on drug delivery. The current study leads to a more accurate model in comparison to previous research, as it incorporates a non-homogeneous real-human solid tumor including necrotic, semi-necrotic, and well-vascularized regions. Additionally, the model considers the effects of concurrently chemotherapeutic agents (three macromolecules of IgG, F(ab')2, and F(ab')) and different normalization intensities in various tumor sizes. Examining the long-term influence of normalization on the quality of drug uptake by necrotic area is another contribution of the present study. Results show that normalization decreases the interstitial fluid pressure (IFP) and spreads the pressure gradient and non-zero interstitial fluid velocity (IFV) into inner areas. Subsequently, wash-out of the drug from the tumor periphery is decreased. It is also demonstrated that normalization can improve the distribution of solute concentration in the interstitium. The efficiency of normalization is introduced as a function of the time course of perfusion, which depends on the tumor size, drug type, as well as normalization intensity, and consequently on the dominant mechanism of drug delivery. It is suggested to accompany anti-angiogenic therapy by F(ab') in large tumor size (Req=2.79 cm) to improve reservoir behavior benefit from normalization. However, IgG is proposed as the better option in the small tumor (Req=0.46 cm), in which normalization finds the opportunity of enhancing uniformity of IgG average exposure by 22%. This study could provide a perspective for preclinical and clinical trials on how to take advantage of normalization, as an adjuvant treatment, in improving drug delivery into a non-homogeneous solid tumor.
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.