ArticleRSC advances2023
Is acriflavine an efficient co-drug in chemotherapy?
Article in RSC advances, 2023. 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.
- Pathway-specific mechanisms, therapeutic applications, and toxicodynamic profile of acriflavine in cancer: a comprehensive review.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Synthesis and antifungal and antitumor activities of acridine-containing tetrahydronaphthalene spiroisoxazoline derivatives.Molecular diversity · 2026Article
- From proteome-wide Mendelian randomization and multi-omics integration to functional validation: TGFB3 as a prioritized candidate in gastric adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Dual Inhibition of HIF-1α and HIF-2α as a Promising Treatment for VHL-Associated Hemangioblastomas: A Pilot Study Using Patient-Derived Primary Cell Cultures.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Hypoxia-inducible transcription factors: architects of tumorigenesis and targets for anticancer drug discovery.Transcription · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer is a global health problem being the second worldwide cause of deaths right after cardiovascular diseases. The main methods of cancer treatment involve surgery, radiation and chemotherapy with an emphasis on the latter. Thus development of nanochemistry and nanomedicine in a search for more effective and safer cancer treatment is an important area of current research. Below, we present interaction of doxorubicin and acriflavine and the cytotoxicity of these drug nano-complexes towards cervical cancer (HeLa) cells. Experimental results obtained from NMR measurements and fluorescence spectroscopy show that the drugs' interaction was due to van der Waals forces, formation of hydrogen bonds and π-π stacking. Quantum molecular simulations confirmed the experimental results with regard to existing π-π stacking. Additionally it was shown that, at the level of theory applied (DFT, triple zeta basis set), the stacking interactions comprise the most preferable interactions (the lowest Δ
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.