MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preclinical study of MEK1/2 inhibitor AZD6244 combined with gemcitabine for treatment of biliary cancer.

2012· article· en· W2591556663 on OpenAlexaff
Junyao Xu, Jennifer J. Knox, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Eric Xueyu Chen, Pinjiang Cao, Sue Chow, Stefano Serra, David W. Hedley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGemcitabineClonogenic assayCancer researchIn vivoCancerMedicineCell cycleCancer cellCell growthPharmacologyInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

240 Background: MEK1/2 is an integral component of the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK signaling pathway, implicated in uncontrolled cell proliferation and cell survival, a key hallmark of cancer. AZD6244, a novel inhibitor of MEK1/2, is currently completing Phase II clinical trials in biliary cancer, with modest antitumor activity observed as monotherapy. Gemcitabine is a cytotoxic drug commonly used in biliary cancer therapy but many patients showed early resistance. In this preclinical study, we investigated the sequence-dependent antitumor effects of AZD6244 combined with gemcitabine in biliary cancer models. Methods: Two biliary cancer cell lines (EGI-1 and TFK-1) were used. In vitro the effects of single drug or three combination protocols(concurrently; AZD6244 followed by GEM or Gem followed by AZD6244) on cell proliferation, DNA synthesis, and cell cycle distribution were evaluated by MTS, clonogenic assay, EdU uptake and flow cytometry. Drug interactions were analyzed by Chou-Talaly method. In vivo, 4 tumor models subcutaneously xenografted in SCID mice from the two cell lines and 2 human patients were set up to compare the therapeutic effects of different sequence-scheduled combinations. Results: AZD6244 caused G1-S cell cycle arrest in biliary cancer cells in vitro and in vivo, and this effect is correlated with the MEK/ERK signaling pathway blocking. Synchronized progression of the population through S phase were observed in 15h after removal of AZD6244 in cell culture or 48h after final dose of acute AZD6244 treatment in vivo. Antagonistic or additive effects was observed in vitro when combination were given as concurrently(CI=2.03~2.46) or Gem followed by AZD6244(CI=1.34~1.78). In contrast, a synergistic antiproliferative activity was obtained when AZD6244 was given first followed by a drug-free interval before Gem treatment (CI=0.53~0.69). In vivo, the best therapeutic effects were obtained with the sequence of AZD6244 followed by Gem, compared with concurrent or reverse sequence. Conclusions: This study provides a sound rationale for a Phase II trial of a potentially synergistic sequence of MEK inhibitor AZD6244 followed by gemcitabine in patients with advanced biliary cancer.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207