MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243831931 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2011-2592

Abstract 2592: Therapeutic testing of a novel inhibitor GAP-107B8 on ovarian cancer cells

2011· article· en· W4243831931 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fu Yan, Kenneth Garson, Jaclyn M. Chabot, Barbara C. Vanderhyden

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMicropharma (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian cancerCancer researchMedicineCancerCell cycleApoptosisOncogeneCell growthKinaseCancer cellOncologyInternal medicineBiologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Ovarian cancer is the most fatal gynaecologic disease in the western world. In 2010 in the United States, an estimated 21,880 women will develop ovarian cancer and an estimated 13,850 women will succumb to this disease. Current treatments are limited to surgery and chemotherapy, but the disease often recurs highlighting the need for novel cancer therapeutics. We are currently evaluating the efficacy of a novel therapeutic, GAP-107B8 (PharmaGap Inc, Ottawa) using in vitro and in vivo models. GAP-107B8 was designed as a protein kinase C (PKC) inhibitor. The PKC family of serine/threonine kinases are involved in cellular proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis and cell polarity. One PKC isoform, PKC iota, has recently been identified as a human oncogene and has been shown to be overexpressed in epithelial ovarian cancers and is thus a potential therapeutic target for ovarian cancer. Objectives: 1) To test the novel inhibitor GAP-107B8 on ovarian cancer cell lines to determine its effects on cell proliferation, cell cycle progression and apoptosis; and 2) To determine the therapeutic potential of GAP-107B8 in xenograft models of two different ovarian cancer cell lines. Methods: Three ovarian cancer cell lines were treated with three different concentrations of GAP-107B8 and screened using high throughput assays to measure the proliferation of cells in adherent cultures. Apoptosis was measured by TUNEL staining, PARP cleavage and cell cycle analysis. Tumor burden was assessed in mice receiving subcutaneous implants of two ovarian cancer cell lines, followed by daily intra-tumoral injections of GAP-107B8. Results: GAP-107B8 caused a significant reduction in cell proliferation in 3 ovarian cancer cell lines tested (86% to 95%; p<0.001), including a cell line resistant to standard chemotherapy. In vivo, intra-tumoral treatment with GAP-107B8 resulted in a 45% reduction in average tumor size in the A2780cp-derived tumours (n=6/group, p<0.01) and 75% in the HEY-derived tumors (n=3/group, p<0.001). Cell killing may be mediated by apoptosis based on the observation of TUNEL staining 30 hours after treatment of cells in vitro with GAP-107B8. Apoptosis was confirmed by flow cytometry and PARP cleavage. GAP-107B8 also inhibited progression of cells through the cell cycle by blocking or delaying progression of cells through G2/M into the G1 phase. Conclusion: The novel inhibitor GAP-107B8 displays good efficacy in vitro in suppressing the proliferation of ovarian cancer cell lines. Cytotoxicity may be manifested in perturbations of the cell cyle and induction of apoptosis. Finally, GAP-107B8 showed therapeutic efficacy in ovarian cancer xenograft models. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2592. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-2592

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207