Transcriptome Analysis of Cisplatin, Cannabidiol, and Intermittent Serum Starvation Alone and in Various Combinations on Colorectal Cancer Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Platinum-derived chemotherapy medications are often combined with other conventional therapies for treating different tumors, including colorectal cancer. However, the development of drug resistance and multiple adverse effects remain common in clinical settings. Thus, there is a necessity to find novel treatments and drug combinations that could effectively target colorectal cancer cells and lower the probability of disease relapse. To find potential synergistic interaction, we designed multiple different combinations between cisplatin, cannabidiol, and intermittent serum starvation on colorectal cancer cell lines. Based on the cell viability assay, we found that combinations between cannabidiol and intermittent serum starvation, cisplatin and intermittent serum starvation, as well as cisplatin, cannabidiol, and intermittent serum starvation can work in a synergistic fashion on different colorectal cancer cell lines. Furthermore, we analyzed differentially expressed genes and affected pathways in colorectal cancer cell lines to understand further the potential molecular mechanisms behind the treatments and their interactions. We found that synergistic interaction between cannabidiol and intermittent serum starvation can be related to changes in the transcription of genes responsible for cell metabolism and cancer's stress pathways. Moreover, when we added cisplatin to the treatments, there was a strong enrichment of genes taking part in G2/M cell cycle arrest and apoptosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".