| Title |
Synergistic inhibition of tumor growth by combination treatment with drugs against different subpopulations of glioblastoma cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-017-3924-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chia-Hsin Chang, Wei-Ting Liu, Hui-Chi Hung, Chia-Yu Gean, Hong-Ming Tsai, Chun-Lin Su, Po-Wu Gean |
| Abstract |
Glioma stem cells (GSCs) contribute to tumor recurrence and drug resistance. This study characterizes the tumorigenesis of CD133+ cells and their sensitivity to pharmacological inhibition. GSCs from human U87 and rat C6 glioblastoma cell lines were isolated via magnetic cell sorting using CD133 as a cancer stem cell marker. Cell proliferation was determined using the WST-1 assay. An intracranial mouse model and bioluminescence imaging were used to assess the effects of drugs on tumor growth in vivo. CD133+ cells expressed stem cell markers and exhibited self-renewal and enhanced tumor formation. Minocycline (Mino) was more effective in reducing the survival rate of CD133+ cells, whereas CD133- cells were more sensitive to inhibition by the signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) inhibitor. Inhibition of STAT3 decreased the expression of CD133+ stem cell markers. The combination of Mino and STAT3 inhibitor synergistically reduced the cell viability of glioma cells. Furthermore, this combination synergistically suppressed tumor growth in nude mice. The results suggest that concurrent targeting of different subpopulations of glioblastoma cells may be an effective therapeutic strategy for patients with malignant glioma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 21% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 13 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,583,054
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,462
of 8,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#329,961
of 441,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#136
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.