2020
DOI: 10.3892/or.2020.7822
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Synergistic activity of agents targeting growth factor receptors, CDKs and downstream signaling molecules in a panel of pancreatic cancer cell lines and the identification of antagonistic combinations: Implications for future clinical trials in pancreatic cancer

Abstract: Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive, heterogeneous and fatal type of human cancers for which more effective therapeutic agents are urgently needed. Here, we investigated the sensitivity of a panel of seven human pancreatic cancer cell lines (HPCCLs) to treatment with various tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitors, an inhibitor of STAT3 stattic, and a cytotoxic agent gemcitabine both as single agents and in combination. The membranous expression of various recept… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
2
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The 4 CCA cell lines tested showed different response to gemcitabine as indicated by a wide IC 50 range of 87-241 nM, whereas all cell lines showed a similar sensitivity to dinaciclib with a narrow IC 50 range of 5.4-6.9 nM. Cancers seem to be more sensitive to dinaciclib than gemcitabine as the similar observations were also reported in several pancreatic cancer cell lines (Khan et al, 2020) and hepatocellular carcinoma (Shao et al, 2019;Hassan et al, 2019). The different response of cancer cells to gemcitabine and dinaciclib may be due to the different drug targets and actions.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…The 4 CCA cell lines tested showed different response to gemcitabine as indicated by a wide IC 50 range of 87-241 nM, whereas all cell lines showed a similar sensitivity to dinaciclib with a narrow IC 50 range of 5.4-6.9 nM. Cancers seem to be more sensitive to dinaciclib than gemcitabine as the similar observations were also reported in several pancreatic cancer cell lines (Khan et al, 2020) and hepatocellular carcinoma (Shao et al, 2019;Hassan et al, 2019). The different response of cancer cells to gemcitabine and dinaciclib may be due to the different drug targets and actions.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…This evidence was confirmed by the study of Parry et al [16] which investigated the effect of dinaciclib on tumour lines of diverse origins, including pancreatic cancer, reported that dinaciclib treatment induced cell cycle arrest, with a relatively high percentage of cells in G2/M phase, at the expense of S phase. In contrast, Khan et al [19] found that treatment of human PDAC cell lines with dinaciclib generally resulted in an increased proportion of cells in the S phase, which is associated with the blockage of CDK2 activity. Since dinaciclib inhibits multiple CDKs, these results may suggest that the effect of the drug is dependent on the mutations present in the PDAC cell type used.…”
Section: Inducing G2/m Phase Cell Cycle Arrestmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…The proportion of cells in the sub G1 phase was elevated in all cell lines tested, indicating that many cells were in an apoptotic state. Despite the different effect of dinaciclib in the PDAC cell lines, it is possible to say this drug significantly inhibited proliferation of PDAC cells and the drug was identified as a potent cytotoxic agent against PDAC [16,18,19].…”
Section: Inducing G2/m Phase Cell Cycle Arrestmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As the results of preclinical and clinical studies discussed above and presented in summary tables suggest, the application of monoclonal antibody-based agents in the treatment of pancreatic cancer is more likely to be successful when used in combination with other therapies such as cytotoxic drugs, other mAbs, cancer vaccines and/or oncolytic viruses. In addition, simultaneous targeting of signalling pathways, the tumour stroma and the incorporation of immune checkpoint inhibitors could yield better results by modifying the immunosuppressive environment of pancreatic tumours [ 70 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 ].…”
Section: Challenges and Future Opportunities With Antibody Therapeutics In Pancreatic Cancermentioning
confidence: 99%