ArticlePharmaceutics2022
Optimization of the Solvent and In Vivo Administration Route of Auranofin in a Syngeneic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Glioblastoma Mouse Model.
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.
- Oxidative stress in cancer: from tumor and microenvironment remodeling to therapeutic frontiers.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
- Inhibition of Thioredoxin-Reductase by Auranofin as a Pro-Oxidant Anticancer Strategy for Glioblastoma: In Vitro and In Vivo Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Auranofin repurposing for lung and pancreatic cancer: low CA12 expression as a marker of sensitivity in patient-derived organoids, with potentiated efficacy by AKT inhibition.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2024Article
- Auranofin Synergizes with the PARP Inhibitor Olaparib to Induce ROS-Mediated Cell Death in Mutant p53 Cancers.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The antineoplastic activity of the thioredoxin reductase 1 (TrxR) inhibitor, auranofin (AF), has already been investigated in various cancer mouse models as a single drug, or in combination with other molecules. However, there are inconsistencies in the literature on the solvent, dose and administration route of AF treatment in vivo. Therefore, we investigated the solvent and administration route of AF in a syngeneic SB28 glioblastoma (GBM) C57BL/6J and a 344SQ non-small cell lung cancer 129S2/SvPasCrl (129) mouse model. Compared to daily intraperitoneal injections and subcutaneous delivery of AF via osmotic minipumps, oral gavage for 14 days was the most suitable administration route for high doses of AF (10-15 mg/kg) in both mouse models, showing no measurable weight loss or signs of toxicity. A solvent comprising 50% DMSO, 40% PEG300 and 10% ethanol improved the solubility of AF for oral administration in mice. In addition, we confirmed that AF was a potent TrxR inhibitor in SB28 GBM tumors at high doses. Taken together, our results and results in the literature indicate the therapeutic value of AF in several in vivo cancer models, and provide relevant information about AF's optimal administration route and solvent in two syngeneic cancer mouse models.
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.