ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Secretome profiling of
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nano-Based Technology in Glioblastoma.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- In Vitro Evaluation, Chemical Profiling, and In Silico ADMET Prediction of the Pharmacological Activities ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Applications of polymeric nanoparticles in drug delivery for glioblastoma.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Methods: The present study employed nano LC-MS/MS to identify differences in secretory protein expression associated with the treatment of breast cancer cell lines (MCF-7; MDA-MB-231) by NVA-AA NPs for the determination of affected pathways and easily accessible therapeutic targets. Different bioinformatics tools were used to identify signature differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) using survival analysis by GENT2 and correlation analysis between their mRNA expressions and sensitivity toward small-molecule drugs as well as immune cell infiltration by GSCA. Results: Analysis by GENT2 revealed 22 signature DEPs with the most significant change in their expression regulation, namely, gelsolin, alpha-fetoprotein, complement component C3, C7, histone H2B type 1-K, histone H2A.Z, H2AX, heat shock cognate 71 kDa protein, heat shock 70 kDa protein 1-like, cytochrome c somatic, GTP-binding nuclear protein Ran, tubulin beta chain, tubulin alpha-1B chain, tubulin alpha-1C chain, phosphoglycerate mutase 1, kininogen 1, carboxypeptidase N catalytic chain, fibulin-1, peroxiredoxins 4, lactate dehydrogenase C, SPARC, and SPARC-like protein 1. Correlation analysis between their mRNA expressions versus immune cell infiltrates showed a positive correlation with antitumor immune response elicited by these NPs as well as a correlation with drug response shown by the GDSC and CTRP drugs in different cancer cells. Discussion: Our results suggest that NVA-AA NPs were able to invade the tumor microenvironment; transformed the communication network between the cancer cells; affected potential drivers of microtubular integrity, nucleosome assembly, and cell cycle; and eventually caused cell death.
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.