Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8826854›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer1996

Anti-cancer drug characterisation using a human cell line panel representing defined types of drug resistance.

S Dhar, P Nygren, K Csoka, J Botling, K Nilsson, R Larsson

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S DharDepartment of Oncology, University Hospital, Uppsala University, Sweden.
P Nygren
K Csoka
J Botling
K Nilsson
R Larsson
Uppsala University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Differential drug response in a human cell line panel representing defined types of cytotoxic drug resistance was measured using the non-clonogenic fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA). In total 37 drugs were analysed; eight topoisomerase II inhibitors, eight anti-metabolites, eight alkylating agents, eight tubulin-active agents and five compounds with other or unknown mechanisms of action, including one topoisomerase I inhibitor. Correlation analysis of log IC50 values obtained from the panel showed a high degree of similarity among the drugs with a similar mechanism of action. The mean percentage of mechanistically similar drugs included among the ten highest correlations, when each drug was compared with the remaining data set, was 100%, 92%, 88% and 52% for the topoisomerase II inhibitors, alkylators, tubulinactive agents and anti-metabolites respectively. Classification of drugs into the four categories representing different mechanisms of action using a probabilistic neural network (PNN) analysis resulted in 29 (91%) correct predictions. The results indicate the feasibility of using a limited number of cell lines for prediction of mechanism of action of anti-cancer drugs. The present approach may be well suited for initial classification and evaluation of novel anti-cancer drugs and as a potential tool to guide lead compound optimisation.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsDrug ResistanceDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorHumansTopoisomerase II InhibitorsTumor Cells, CulturedAntineoplastic AgentsTopoisomerase II Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID8826854
PMCPMC2074735
OpenAlexW1964767673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.