ArticleCancers2025
Evaluation of Mithramycin in Combination with Chemotherapeutic Agents Against Ewing Sarcoma Cell Lines.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Ewing Sarcoma (ES) is a rare, malignant bone neoplasm that is primarily diagnosed in childhood and adolescence. The aggressive nature of this neoplasm requires the use of surgery, radiation and a rigorous chemotherapy regimen. Metastatic ES carries a poor prognosis, which necessitates the development of new therapeutic agents. Mithramycin was tested in targeted therapy due to its specific inhibitory effects on the EWS-FLI1 fusion protein which is present in >85% of ES tumors. We tested the combination of Mithramycin with chemotherapeutic agents vincristine (VCR) and Etoposide (Eto) for inducing higher cytotoxicity against ES cells, CHLA10 and TC205. Cardiomyocyte cell line, H9C2 was used to test the effect on non-malignant cells. Cell viability was measured using the CellTiter-Glo kit, and the combination index was evaluated to determine the type of combination response (antagonistic, additive, or synergistic). Apoptotic cells were measured post-treatment with vehicle (DMSO, control), monotherapy (mithramycin or etoposide), or combination therapy (mithramycin + etoposide) using BD LSRII flow cytometer and analyzed utilizing FlowJo software V8.0. The apoptotic protein marker c-PARP in both treatment and control groups was analyzed using Western blot analysis. The results showed higher cytotoxicity for combination treatment when compared to individual agents, and the combination index confirmed the response as synergistic. H9C2 cells did not demonstrate significant decreases in cell viability when treated with combination therapy, highlighting the specificity of the treatment toward its target tissue. Flow cytometry confirmed the underlying mechanism as upregulation of apoptosis which is further supported by an increase in effector caspases 3/7 and elevated expression of c-PARP. These in vitro assays using ES cells provide preliminary evidence for the benefit of chemotherapy and mithramycin combination.
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.