MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588538733

Preferential potentiation of paclitaxel and doxorubicin cytotoxicity in drug-resistant breast tumor cells by tesmilifene.

2006· article· en· W1588538733 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stacey L. Hembruff, David J. Villeneuve, Amadeo M. Parissenti

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsSudbury Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaclitaxelDoxorubicinClonogenic assayCytotoxicityAnthracyclineMedicineChemotherapyBreast cancerPharmacologyCancer researchInternal medicineCancerOncologyIn vitroChemistryBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5421 A phase III study of anthracycline-naive women with metastatic breast cancer by the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (MA.19) revealed that treatment of patients with doxorubicin in combination with N,N-Diethyl-2-[4-(Penylmethyl)Phenoxy]Ethanamine (tesmilifene) was superior to doxorubicin alone in terms of overall survival (P=0.021), with no difference seen in response rate or progression free survival (J. Clin. Oncol. 22: 269-276, 2004). One possible explanation for this observation may be that tesmilifene specifically increases the cytotoxicity of chemotherapy drugs only in rare drug-resistant cells, thus inhibiting the development of drug-resistant tumors over time. To assess this hypothesis, we examined in a clonogenic assay the effect of tesmilifene (at concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 6 μM) on the ability of doxorubicin or paclitaxel to kill wildtype MCF-7 breast tumor cells and isogenic MCF-7 cells resistant to doxorubicin or paclitaxel (MCF-7 DOX and MCF-7 TAX cells, respectively). Consistent with the above hypothesis, tesmilifene decreased the concentration at which 50% of MCF-7 TAX cells were killed by paclitaxel (the IC 50 ) in a dose-dependent manner by as much as 4-fold (at 6 μM tesmilifene), while having little effect or increasing the IC 50 for paclitaxel in wildtype MCF-7 cells, even at the highest concentration of tesmilifene. Cross resistance to doxorubicin in MCF-7 TAX cells was also reduced in a dose-dependent manner by as much as 4-fold by tesmilifene, while only slightly increasing the IC 50 for doxorubicin in wildtype MCF-7 cells at the highest concentration of tesmilifene. The IC 50 for doxorubicin was decreased by as much as 2.5-fold upon the addition of tesmilifene to MCF-7 DOX cells (also in a dose-dependent manner), with little change in the IC 50 for doxorubicin in wildtype cells. Since our MCF-7 TAX cell line overexpresses P-glycoprotein (P-gp), while our MCF-7 DOX cell line does not, it would appear that the effect of DPPE on the cytotoxicity of chemotherapy drugs in drug-resistant cells is not P-gp-specific, although this may be enhanced in P-gp-expressing cell lines. While accumulation of paclitaxel or doxorubicin was reduced in MCF-7 TAX and MCF-7 DOX cells, respectively, tesmilifene (at a 3 μM concentration) had no effect on the uptake of paclitaxel or doxorubicin into MCF-7, MCF-7 TAX , and MCF-7 DOX cells. Taken together, our data demonstrate that tesmilifene augments the cytotoxicity of paclitaxel and doxorubicin but only in drug-resistant cells through a mechanism unrelated to drug accumulation defects inherent in these cell lines.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207