ArticlePharmaceutical research1998
Proliferation indices as molecular pharmacodynamic endpoints in evaluation of anticancer drug effect in human solid tumors.
Article in Pharmaceutical research, 1998. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe present study compared proliferative indices, i.e. incorporation of DNA precursor (i.e. thymidine or TdR, and bromodeoxyuridine or BrdU) and expression of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), as molecular pharmacodynamic endpoints in evaluation of anticancer drug effect in human solid tumors.
methodsTumor specimens obtained from patients were grown as histocultures. After treatment with doxorubicin, mitomycin C, and/or paclitaxel, cells labeled by [3H]TdR were identified using autoradiography, and cells labeled by BrdU and PCNA were identified using immunohistochemical techniques. Drug effect was measured as reduction of DNA precursor-labeled cells or PCNA-expressing cells.
resultsThe results indicate that (a) the two DNA precursors, TdR and BrdU, labeled the same cells and resulted in identical pharmacodynamics, (b) the pharmacodynamics established using inhibition of DNA precursor incorporation were qualitatively and quantitatively different from the pharmacodynamics established using inhibition of PCNA expression, (c) the inhibition of PCNA expression was erratic in some tumors, and (d) the differences in pharmacodynamics established using the two end points are drug-specific, with greater differences for paclitaxel than for mitomycin C.
conclusionsThe erratic results measured by the PCNA labeling method suggest that this method may be less reliable than the conventional DNA precursor labeling method. The finding of identical pharmacodynamics of doxorubicin and paclitaxel established using BrdU and [3H]TdR indicates that the two precursors are interchangeable. Because the methodology for detecting BrdU incorporation requires less time and does not require the use of radioactivity, we conclude that inhibition of BrdU incorporation represents a useful endpoint for evaluating the antiproliferative activity of anticancer drugs in human solid tumors.
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.