ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Nano-pulse stimulation™ therapy (NPS™) is superior to cryoablation in clearing murine melanoma tumors.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synergistic Sensitization of Pancreatic Cancer Cells by Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Fields and Cold Atmospheric Plasma via Amplifying ROS and Apoptotic Signaling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Pulsed electric fields: a sharp sword in the battle against cancers.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Nano-Pulse Stimulation Therapy in Oncology.Bioelectricity · 2024Review
- Effects of Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Field (nsPEF) on a Multicellular Spheroid Tumor Model: Influence of Pulse Duration, Pulse Repetition Rate, Absorbed Energy, and Temperature.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Ultra-Low Intensity Post-Pulse Affects Cellular Responses Caused by Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Fields.Bioengineering (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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nano-Pulse Stimulation™ Therapy (NPS™) is a new, bioelectric modality that applies ultrashort pulses of electric energy to trigger regulated cell death in treated tissues. Instead of initiating necrosis by heating or freezing, NPS therapy permeabilizes intracellular organelles to activate the cell's own self-destruct pathway of programmed or regulated cell death. Unlike cryotherapies that can both damage structural tissues and diffuse into the periphery beyond the margins of the lesion, NPS only affects cells within the treated zone leaving surrounding tissue and acellular components unaffected. Methods: We generated melanoma tumors in mice by injecting B16-F10 cells intradermally and compared the efficacy and resulting skin damage from Nano-Pulse Stimulation Therapy with that of cryoablation in clearing these tumors. Results: The results of the study demonstrate that NPS is superior at clearing B16-F10 melanoma lesions. NPS permanently eliminated up to 91% of all tumor lesions with a single treatment compared to cryoablation that only eliminated up to 66%. Importantly, NPS permanently eliminated these lesions with no recurrence and with minimal dermal fibrosis, underlying muscle atrophy, permanent hair follicle loss or other markers of permanent skin damage. Conclusions: These findings suggest that NPS is a promising new modality for the clearance of melanoma tumors and is a more efficacious, less damaging approach than cryoablative methods for the treatment of aggressive malignant tumors.
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.