Ursolic Acid and Its Nanoparticles Are Potentiators of Oncolytic Measles Virotherapy against Breast Cancer Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oncolytic viruses (OVs) and phytochemical ursolic acid (UA) are two efficacious therapeutic candidates in development against breast cancer, the deadliest women's cancer worldwide. However, as single agents, OVs and UA have limited clinical efficacies. As a common strategy of enhancing monotherapeutic anticancer efficacy, we explored the combinatorial chemovirotherapeutic approach of combining oncolytic measles virus (MV), which targets the breast tumor marker Nectin-4, and the anticancer UA against breast adenocarcinoma. Our findings revealed that in vitro co-treatment with UA synergistically potentiated the killing of human breast cancer cells by oncolytic MV, without UA interfering the various steps of the viral infection. Mechanistic studies revealed that the synergistic outcome from the combined treatment was mediated through UA's potentiation of apoptotic killing by MV. To circumvent UA's poor solubility and bioavailability and strengthen its clinical applicability, we further developed UA nanoparticles (UA-NP) by nanoemulsification. Compared to the non-formulated UA, UA-NP exhibited improved drug dissolution property and similarly synergized with oncolytic MV in inducing apoptotic breast cancer cell death. This oncolytic potentiation was partly attributed to the enhanced autophagic flux induced by the UA-NP and MV combined treatment. Finally, the synergistic effect from the UA-NP and MV combination was also observed in BT-474 and MDA-MB-468 breast cancer cells. Our study thus highlights the potential value of oncolytic MV and UA-based chemovirotherapy for further development as a treatment strategy against breast cancer, and the feasibility of employing nanoformulation to enhance UA's applicability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".