MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Jadomycin B Acts Synergistically with NSAIDs to Produce Cytotoxic Effects in Human Breast Cancer Cells <i>in vitro</i>

2022· article· en· W4225387529 on OpenAlexafffund
Brendan T. McKeown, Kerry B. Goralski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research InstituteDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIn vitroCytotoxic T cellCancerHuman breastPharmacologyCancer researchBreast cancerChemistryMedicineInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in North American women. Jadomycin B is a novel compound that is effective in killing triple negative human breast cancer cells that have become resistant to anthracycline and taxane chemotherapies. The mechanism through which jadomycin B exerts its cytotoxic effect remains to be fully characterized. A quantitative PCR (qPCR) array of cancer drug targets identified cyclooxygenase‐2 ( COX‐2 ) as a gene of interest in jadomycin B resistant breast cancer cells. Objective To explore the effects of COX‐2 signalling on jadomycin B cytotoxicity in MDA‐MB‐231 cells as a model of invasive triple‐negative, human breast cancer requiring more effective treatments. Methods and Results Control MDA‐MB‐231 (231‐CON) cells exposed to increasing concentrations of jadomycin B (0‐2.2 µM) over 7 months developed a 3‐fold resistance to jadomycin B as determined using methyl‐tetrazolium (MTT) cell viability assays. By qPCR, there was a significant increase in COX‐2 (40 fold, p < 0.05) but not cyclooxygenase‐1 ( COX‐1 ) ( 0.17 fold, p < 0.05 ), mRNA expression in jadomycin resistant (231‐JB) versus 231‐CON cells. A similar increase in COX‐ 2 was not observed in mitoxantrone resistant MDA‐MB‐231 cells (231‐MITX). We therefore hypothesized that inhibition of COX‐2 signalling would increase the susceptibility of breast cancer cells to jadomycin B. The 231‐CON and 231‐JB cells were treated with jadomycin B with or without the COX‐2 selective inhibitor celecoxib (CXB), or COX‐1/2 inhibitors ibuprofen (IBU) or Naproxen (NAP). The SynergyFinder 2.0 web application was used to analyze the cytotoxicity (MTT assays) of these combinations and calculate synergy scores using the Bliss model. IBU and NAP were found to act synergistically with jadomycin B in both control and jadomycin resistant cells, while CXB acted additively (Table 1). Conclusions Jadomycin B acts additively or synergistically with inhibitors of COX‐2 in vitro , resulting in increased cytotoxic effect. These results justify further investigation into the COX‐2 signaling pathway as a means to elucidate the mechanism of action of jadomycin B. Additionally, our research has the potential to contribute to an improved understanding of breast cancer relevant COX‐2 signalling, facilitating the use of COX‐2 inhibitors as chemosensitizers.

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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207