Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40130554›Full record

ArticleMolecular cancer therapeutics2025

Repurposing the DNA Labeling Agent EdU for Therapy against Heterogeneous Patient Glioblastoma.

Humeyra Kaanoglu, Adebimpe Adefolaju, Casey Fraley, Mariah Shobande, Rajaneekar Dasari, Breanna Mann, Noah Bell, Stephen T Keir, Dominique Higgins, David E Kram and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular cancer therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Combinatorial treatment of glioblastoma with temozolomide (TMZ) plus 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine (EdU).Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Humeyra Kaanoglu *Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-5569-3954
Adebimpe Adefolaju *Division of Pharmacoengineering and Molecular Pharmaceutics, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-6601-8305
Casey FraleyThe Preston Robert Tisch Brain Tumor Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.ORCID 0009-0000-3586-7040
Mariah ShobandeThe Preston Robert Tisch Brain Tumor Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-0335-3325
Rajaneekar DasariEshelman Innovation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-0962-1917
Breanna MannEshelman Innovation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-6486-3230
Noah BellEshelman Innovation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0009-0004-4134-5563
Stephen T KeirThe Preston Robert Tisch Brain Tumor Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-8630-3587
Dominique HigginsDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-8409-1373
David E KramDivision of Pediatric Hematology-Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-1928-001X
Shawn D HingtgenDivision of Pharmacoengineering and Molecular Pharmaceutics, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0003-4355-2377
Aziz SancarDepartment of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-6469-4900
Andrew B SatterleeDivision of Pharmacoengineering and Molecular Pharmaceutics, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-6952-5823

Funding

Molecular Mechanism of Mammalian DNA Excision Repair, DNA Damage Checkpoints and the Circadian ClockR35GM118102 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI AZIZ SANCAR · 2016 to 2026
$10.6M
CTSA K12 Program at UNCK12TR004416 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Michelle Hernandez, Jonathan J Juliano · 2023 to 2026
$6.5M
A consortium effort to translate therapies for neurological diseases via an ex vivo organotypic platformU01TR003715 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BALDWIN, ALBERT SIDNEY, FLORES, CATHERINE T · 2021 to 2024
$4.6M
DNA Adduct Detection and Repair in Mammalian CellsR01ES033414 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SANCAR, AZIZ · 2021 to 2025
$2.8M
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) K12TR004416National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) U01TR003715National Institutes of Health (NIH) ES033414National Institutes of Health (NIH) GM118102NCATS NIH HHS K12 TR004416NCATS NIH HHS U01 TR003715NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES033414NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM118102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common type of malignant central nervous system tumor, and more than 300,000 people are diagnosed with GBM worldwide annually. Based on its recognition as damage by nucleotide excision repair, we now repurpose the DNA labeling agent 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine (EdU) as a treatment for GBM. We tested the efficacy of EdU in several different model systems, including not only GBM cell lines in in vitro cell culture and in vivo orthotopic mouse models of GBM, but also against living, uncultured tumor tissues of patients with GBM grown within our organotypic brain slice culture (OBSC) ex vivo platform. When compared with the standard-of-care drug temozolomide (TMZ) in in vitro GBM cell survival assays, EdU displayed ED50 values orders of magnitude lower than those of TMZ in all five GBM tumor lines tested. Against two in vivo orthotopic brain tumor models, EdU significantly extended survival relative to controls. EdU efficacy against a panel of patient GBMs largely correlated with the clinical Ki-67 status of each tumor, save for one tumor that remained unresponsive to treatment with both EdU and TMZ. Overall, these data suggest that (i) EdU has potential to be repurposed as an anticancer therapeutic and is especially adept at killing rapidly proliferating cells with low off-target toxicity; (ii) the OBSC platform can measure nuanced differences in efficacy of experimental therapeutics on heterogeneous patient tumor tissues; and (iii) OBSCs can continue to help identify potential responders and nonresponders to EdU treatment via functional precision testing of patient tumors ex vivo.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsDeoxyuridineDrug RepositioningGlioblastomaAnimalsCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationFemaleHumansMiceTemozolomideXenograft Model Antitumor Assays5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridineDeoxyuridineTemozolomide

Identifiers

PMID40130554
PMCPMC12316568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.