Esophageal cancer remains one of the hardest cancers to treat with rising incidence rates, low overall survival and high levels of treatment resistance. The lack of clinically available biomarkers hinder diagnosis and treatment stratification. While large scale sequencing approaches have uncovered a number of molecular makers, little has translated in the routine treatment of esophageal cancer patients.
We evaluate the treatment response towards a panel of 215 FDA-approved and 163 epigenetic compounds of 4 established and 2 patient-derived esophageal cancer cell lines. Cell viability was evaluated after 72h of treatment using cell titer glow. The drug sensitivity testing results for gemcitabine and cisplatin were validated using clonogenic assays.
The tested cell lines display different drug sensitivity profiles, although we found compounds that display efficacy in all of the tested established or patient-derived cell lines. Clonogenic assays confirmed the validity of the drug sensitivity testing results. Using the epigenetic library, we observed high sensitivity towards a number of epigenetic modifiers.
Ex vivo drug sensitivity testing may present a viable option for the treatment stratification of esophageal cancer patients and holds the potential to greatly improve patient outcome while reducing treatment toxicity.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
1
4%
Mathematics
1
4%
Other
4
15%
Unknown
8
31%
Attention Score in Context
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 14 September 2018.
All research outputs
#18,649,291
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#157,265
of 197,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#259,374
of 337,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,686
of 3,383 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 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 197,133 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 337,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,383 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
