Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on disease free survival and over all survival in triple-negative breast cancer patients

Gill, J.; Mishra, A.N.

doi:10.1093/annonc/mdx365.041

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Chelamalla, 45% of cancers are resistant to standard anticancer drugs, and even initially responsive tumors develop resistance during the following cycles of chemotherapy [ 5 ], which is still leading among other anticancer approaches. For example, chemotherapy before surgery, known as neoadjuvant chemotherapy, is a frequent choice for treatment in women diagnosed with triple-negative breast cancer, since it leads to a pathologic complete response and improves disease-free survival and overall survival [ 6 , 7 ]. This tumor type accounts for about 10–15% of all breast tumors and does not respond to hormonal or HER2-targeted therapy, and the lack of estrogen, progesterone, and HER2 receptors limits the treatment options to a combination of surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CBP/p300 Bromodomain Inhibitor–I–CBP112 Declines Transcription of the Key ABC Transporters and Sensitizes Cancer Cells to Chemotherapy Drugs

Strachowska

Gronkowska

Michlewska

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The high expression of some ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters is linked to multidrug resistance in cancer cells. We aimed to determine if I-CBP112, which is a CBP/p300 bromodomain inhibitor, altered the vulnerability of the MDA-MB-231 cell line to chemotherapy drugs, which are used in neoadjuvant therapy in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). MDA-MB-231 cells represent TNBC, which is negative for the expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors and HER2 protein. An I-CBP112-induced decrease in the expression of all the studied ABCs in the breast, but also in the lung (A549), and hepatic (HepG2) cancer cell lines was associated with increased accumulation of doxorubicin, daunorubicin, and methotrexate inside the cells as well as considerable cell sensitization to a wide range of chemotherapeutics. Gene promoters repressed by I-CBP112 in MDA-MB-231 cells, such as ABCC1 and ABCC10, were characterized by enhanced nucleosome acetylation and, simultaneously, by considerably lower trimethylation in the transcription-promoting form of H3K4me3. The CBP/p300 bromodomain inhibitor induced the recruitment of LSD1 to the gene promoters, and the inhibition of this demethylase in the presence of I-CBP112 prevented the repression of ABCC1 and ABCC10 and, to a considerable extent, cancer cells’ sensitization to drugs. In conclusion, the CBP/p300 bromodomain inhibitor I-CBP112 can be considered as a potent anti-multidrug-resistance agent, capable of repressing key ABC transporters responsible for drug efflux in various cancer types.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CBP/p300 Bromodomain Inhibitor–I–CBP112 Declines Transcription of the Key ABC Transporters and Sensitizes Cancer Cells to Chemotherapy Drugs

Strachowska

Gronkowska

Michlewska

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparing Rates of Fusion and Time to Fusion in Viable Cellular Allograft and Autograft

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Autograft or allograft frequently are used to enhance bone union in foot and ankle surgery. Viable cellular bone allograft uses viable cells and bone scaffolding in a gel base, but uncertainty remains around allograft’s greater efficacy than autograft regarding rates of fusion (ROF) and time to fusion (TTF). Methods: Autograft, viable cellular allograft, and viable cellular allograft with autograft were compared in 199 forefoot, midfoot, and hindfoot arthrodeses performed over a 6-year period. Data collected from electronic medical records and radiographs were analyzed to determine ROF and TTF as well as rates of revision surgery for delayed or nonunion and compared among groups. Results: Eighty-seven patients comprised the autograft group, 81 the allograft group, and 31 the combined group. No significant differences were noted in patient demographics among the groups. No statistically significant differences in ROF were noted among the 3 groups, with 86% (75 of 87) fusion in the autograft group, 93% (75 of 81) in the allograft group, and 84% (26 of 31) in the combined group ( P = .20). After conducting a multivariate analysis, we found no statistically significant difference for allograft or combined graft on TTF ( P = .1379 and .2311, respectively). No significant difference was found in rate of revision surgery for nonunion, which was 1.2% (1 of 81) in the allograft group, 3.4% (3 of 87) in the autograft group, and 6.5% (2 of 31) in the combined group ( P = .3). Conclusion: No significant difference was found in ROF, TTF, or rate of revision surgery when comparing viable cellular allograft to autograft or combined allograft-autograft. Viable cellular allograft may be a reasonable alternative to the gold standard of autograft and should be considered an option in patients undergoing arthrodesis in foot and ankle surgery. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic.

show abstract

Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on disease free survival and over all survival in triple-negative breast cancer patients

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

CBP/p300 Bromodomain Inhibitor–I–CBP112 Declines Transcription of the Key ABC Transporters and Sensitizes Cancer Cells to Chemotherapy Drugs

CBP/p300 Bromodomain Inhibitor–I–CBP112 Declines Transcription of the Key ABC Transporters and Sensitizes Cancer Cells to Chemotherapy Drugs

Comparing Rates of Fusion and Time to Fusion in Viable Cellular Allograft and Autograft

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About