Defining melanoma combination therapies that provide senolytic sensitivity in human melanoma cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Malignant Melanoma that resists immunotherapy remains the deadliest form of skin cancer owing to poor clinically lasting responses. Alternative like genotoxic or targeted chemotherapy trigger various cancer cell fates after treatment including cell death and senescence. Senescent cells can be eliminated using senolytic drugs and we hypothesize that the targeted elimination of therapy-induced senescent melanoma cells could complement both conventional and immunotherapies. We utilized a panel of cells representing diverse mutational background relevant to melanoma and found that they developed distinct senescence phenotypes in response to treatment. A genotoxic combination therapy of carboplatin-paclitaxel or irradiation triggered a mixed response of cell death and senescence, irrespective of BRAF mutation profiles. DNA damage-induced senescent cells exhibited morphological changes, residual DNA damage, and increased senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP). In contrast, dual targeted inhibition of Braf and Mek triggered a partially reversible senescence-like state without DNA damage or SASP. To assess the sensitivity to senolytics we employed a novel real-time imaging-based death assay and observed that Bcl-xl/Bcl-2 inhibitors and piperlongumine were effective in promoting death of carboplatin-paclitaxel and irradiation-induced senescent melanoma cells, while senescent-like cells resulting from Braf-Mek inhibition remained unresponsive. Interestingly, a direct synergy between Bcl-2/Bcl-xl inhibitors and Braf-Mek inhibitors was observed when used out the context of senescence. Overall, we highlight that the hallmarks of melanoma senescence and sensitivity to senolytics are context dependent and provide evidence of effective combinations of senotherapy drugs that could reduce treatment resistance while also discussing the limitations of this strategy in human melanoma cells.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".