Biological response modifiers.

F Calabresi; T Gamucci

doi:10.1016/0169-5002(95)00436-5

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7551929

Biological response modifiers.

F Calabresi·T Gamucci

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Biological response modifiers (BRMs) of current clinical interest may be divided into two categories: immunomodulating agents and colony stimulating factors (CSFs). The first are employed to potentiate the host defences towards the tumor but results have proved disappointing in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With regard to the second, the real dose increment which may be ascribed to CSFs is not sufficient to overcome chemoresistance of NSCLCs. CSFs can, however, reduce the hematologic toxicity of chemotherapy, which represents the most significant result.

Explore related subjects

Antineoplastic Agents Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung Humans Immunologic Factors Lung Neoplasms Journal Article Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

F Calabresi, T Gamucci. 1995. Biological response modifiers.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5002(95)00436-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2021

Deep generative neural network for accurate drug response imputation.

Drug response differs substantially in cancer patients due to inter- and intra-tumor heterogeneity. Particularly, transcriptome context, especially tumor microenvironment, has been shown playing a significant role in shaping the actual treatment outcome. In this study, we develop a deep variational autoencoder (VAE) model to compress thousands of genes into latent vectors in a low-dimensional space. We then demonstrate that these encoded vectors could accurately impute drug response, outperform standard signature-gene based approaches, and appropriately control the overfitting problem. We apply rigorous quality assessment and validation, including assessing the impact of cell line lineage, cross-validation, cross-panel evaluation, and application in independent clinical data sets, to warrant the accuracy of the imputed drug response in both cell lines and cancer samples. Specifically, the expression-regulated component (EReX) of the observed drug response achieves high correlation across panels. Using the well-trained models, we impute drug response of The Cancer Genome Atlas data and investigate the features and signatures associated with the imputed drug response, including cell line origins, somatic mutations and tumor mutation burdens, tumor microenvironment, and confounding factors. In summary, our deep learning method and the results are useful for the study of signatures and markers of drug response.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMed1997

Resistance to the antitumor agent gallium nitrate in human leukemic cells is associated with decreased gallium/iron uptake, increased activity of iron regulatory protein-1, and decreased ferritin production.

The mechanism of drug resistance to gallium nitrate is not known. Since gallium can be incorporated into ferritin, an iron storage protein that protects cells from iron toxicity, we investigated whether ferritin expression was altered in gallium-resistant (R) CCRF-CEM cells. We found that the ferritin content of R cells was decreased, while heavy chain ferritin mRNA levels and iron regulatory protein-1 (IRP-1) RNA binding activity were increased. IRP-1 protein levels were similar in gallium-sensitive (S) and R cells, indicating that R cells contain a greater proportion of IRP-1 in a high affinity mRNA binding state. 59Fe uptake and transferrin receptor expression were decreased in R cells. In both S and R cells, gallium inhibited cellular 59Fe uptake, increased ferritin mRNA and protein, and decreased IRP-1 binding activity. Gallium uptake by R cells was markedly diminished; however, the sensitivity of R cells to gallium could be restored by increasing their uptake of gallium with excess transferrin. Our results suggest that R cells have developed resistance to gallium by down-regulating their uptake of gallium. In parallel, iron uptake by R cells is also decreased, leading to changes in iron homeostasis. Furthermore, since gallium has divergent effects on iron uptake and ferritin synthesis, its action may also include a direct effect on ferritin mRNA induction and IRP-1 activity.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMed1997

Biological properties of two gold(III) complexes: AuCl3(Hpm) and AuCl2(pm).

The reactivity in solution of two recently characterized gold(III) complexes, AuCl3(Hpm) and AuCl2(pm), has been investigated in view of their potential use as anti-cancer agents. In water, both compounds undergo relatively fast hydrolysis of the bound chlorides without loss of the heterocycle ligand; the process is much faster within a physiological buffer. When the two gold(III) complexes react with proteins like albumin or transferrin, reduction of gold(III) to gold(I) and/or hydrolysis is observed. On the other hand, both complexes bind rapidly and tightly to either polynucleotides or calf thymus DNA, with gold remaining in the +3 oxidation state. Circular dichroism investigations reveal a large perturbation of DNA conformation upon gold(III) binding; preferential binding to GC sequences is shown. Cytotoxicity studies on a number of tumor cell lines demonstrate a good activity of these gold(III) complexes compared to cisplatin. However, quick hydrolysis and/or reduction of these compounds under physiological conditions may represent a severe limitation to their use.

Antineoplastic Agents↗