Literature DB >> 1280562

Prediction of response to drug therapy of cancer. A review of in vitro assays.

W T Bellamy1.   

Abstract

Cancer chemotherapy has witnessed a great deal of progress since the introduction of the nitrogen mustards in the 1940s. Unfortunately, individual patients with apparently identical tumour histologies do not always respond identically to the same drug regimen. Determining the sensitivity and resistance of an organism before treatment has been the standard of care in infectious diseases for many years, while in oncology treatment has been initiated according to tumour histology rather than the tumour's sensitivity to a given agent. Attempts to individualise therapy have been the goal of oncologists since the 1950s. Since that time a number of in vitro assays have been developed to predict therapeutic outcome prior to the start of therapy. In the 1970s, with the introduction of the human tumour stem cell assay, it was generally believed that oncology was on the threshold of entering an era of predictive in vitro chemosensitivity testing. Unfortunately, this assay was shown to have a number of technical drawbacks including the low plating efficiencies of many primary tumour samples which thus limits the percentage which can be evaluated, leaving us still at this threshold today. Several recent developments, such as the Kern assay, which measures inhibition of radioactive precursors into tumour cells in the presence of antineoplastic agents, ATP bioluminescence assays, and the fluorescent cytoprint assay offer the promise of rapid and sensitive results. Other assays, such as the tetrazolium-based MTT and the sulphorhodamine blue assay appear to hold more promise in the screening and evaluation of potential new agents in established tumour cell lines than for evaluating chemosensitivity of clinical specimens. However, before a particular assay can be considered as an in vitro test of chemosensitivity or resistance, controlled prospective studies must be carried out to validate the assay in a number of different tumour types.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1280562     DOI: 10.2165/00003495-199244050-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drugs        ISSN: 0012-6667            Impact factor:   9.546


  78 in total

1.  Further observations on the effects of cancer chemotherapeutic agents on the in vitro dehydrogenase activity of cancer tissue.

Authors:  M M BLACK; F D SPEER
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1954-04       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Pharmacologically based dosing of etoposide: a means of safely increasing dose intensity.

Authors:  M J Ratain; R Mick; R L Schilsky; N J Vogelzang; F Berezin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Chemosensitivity testing of fresh leukaemia cells using the MTT colorimetric assay.

Authors:  P R Twentyman; N E Fox; J K Rees
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 6.998

Review 4.  Three-dimensional histoculture: origins and applications in cancer research.

Authors:  R M Hoffman
Journal:  Cancer Cells       Date:  1991-03

5.  Tetrazolium-based assays for cellular viability: a critical examination of selected parameters affecting formazan production.

Authors:  D T Vistica; P Skehan; D Scudiero; A Monks; A Pittman; M R Boyd
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1991-05-15       Impact factor: 12.701

6.  New colorimetric cytotoxicity assay for anticancer-drug screening.

Authors:  P Skehan; R Storeng; D Scudiero; A Monks; J McMahon; D Vistica; J T Warren; H Bokesch; S Kenney; M R Boyd
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1990-07-04       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Preliminary correlations of clinical outcome with in vitro chemosensitivity of second passage human breast cancer cells.

Authors:  H S Smith; W Zoli; A Volpi; A Hiller; M Lippman; S Swain; B Mayall; C Dollbaum; A J Hackett; D Amadori
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1990-05-15       Impact factor: 12.701

8.  Bioluminescence of cellular ATP: a new method for evaluating cytotoxic agents in vitro.

Authors:  L Kangas; M Grönroos; A L Nieminen
Journal:  Med Biol       Date:  1984

9.  Comparison between succinate dehydrogenase inhibition test and subrenal capsule assay for chemosensitivity testing.

Authors:  H Anai; Y Maehara; H Kusumoto; K Sugimachi
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 2.935

10.  The fluorescent cytoprint assay: a new approach to in vitro chemosensitivity testing.

Authors:  P A Meitner
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 2.990

View more
  18 in total

1.  Positive Allosteric Modulation of Cannabinoid Receptor Type 1 Suppresses Pathological Pain Without Producing Tolerance or Dependence.

Authors:  Richard A Slivicki; Zhili Xu; Pushkar M Kulkarni; Roger G Pertwee; Ken Mackie; Ganesh A Thakur; Andrea G Hohmann
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2017-07-08       Impact factor: 13.382

2.  Evaluation of Tumor Cell Response to Hyperthermia with Bioluminescent Imaging.

Authors:  Renshu Zhang; Yanfei Zhou; Paul C Wang; Rajagopalan Sridhar
Journal:  J Basic Clin Med       Date:  2012-01-01

3.  Structure-apoptotic potency evaluations of novel sterols using human leukemic cells.

Authors:  B H Johnson; M J Russell; A S Krylov; R D Medh; S Ayala-Torres; J L Regner; E B Thompson
Journal:  Lipids       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 1.880

4.  Chemoresponse Assay in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Three-Year Follow Up.

Authors:  Basem T Jamal; Gregory A Grillone; Scharukh Jalisi
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-05-01

Review 5.  Methods and goals for the use of in vitro and in vivo chemosensitivity testing.

Authors:  Rosalyn D Blumenthal; David M Goldenberg
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.695

6.  Flow cytometric chemosensitivity assay as a predictive tool of early clinical response in acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  Faith Galderisi; Linda Stork; Ju Li; Motomi Mori; Solange Mongoue-Tchokote; James Huang
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.167

7.  Rodent pharmacokinetic and anti-tumor efficacy studies with a series of synthetic inhibitors of matrix metalloproteinases.

Authors:  O Santos; C D McDermott; R G Daniels; K Appelt
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 5.150

8.  An application of a Hill-based response surface model for a drug combination experiment on lung cancer.

Authors:  Shaoyang Ning; Hongquan Xu; Ibrahim Al-Shyoukh; Jiaying Feng; Ren Sun
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Accurate non-invasive image-based cytotoxicity assays for cultured cells.

Authors:  Patricia Marqués-Gallego; Hans den Dulk; Claude Backendorf; Jaap Brouwer; Jan Reedijk; Julian F Burke
Journal:  BMC Biotechnol       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 2.563

10.  Cytotoxicity of unsaturated fatty acids in fresh human tumor explants: concentration thresholds and implications for clinical efficacy.

Authors:  David E Scheim
Journal:  Lipids Health Dis       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 3.876

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.