| Title |
Inactivation of nuclear factor κB by MIP-based drug combinations augments cell death of breast cancer cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s141925 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Menaga Subramaniam, Su Ki Liew, Lionel LA In, Khalijah Awang, Niyaz Ahmed, Noor Hasima Nagoor |
| Abstract |
Drug combination therapy to treat cancer is a strategic approach to increase successful treatment rate. Optimizing combination regimens is vital to increase therapeutic efficacy with minimal side effects. In the present study, we evaluated the in vitro cytotoxicity of double and triple combinations consisting of 1'S-1'-acetoxychavicol acetate (ACA), Mycobacterium indicus pranii (MIP) and cisplatin (CDDP) against 14 various human cancer cell lines to address the need for more effective therapy. Our data show synergistic effects in MCF-7 cells treated with MIP:ACA, MIP:CDDP and MIP:ACA:CDDP combinations. The type of interaction between MIP, ACA and CDDP was evaluated based on combination index being <0.8 for synergistic effect. Identifying the mechanism of cell death based on previous studies involved intrinsic apoptosis and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) and tested in Western blot analysis. Inactivation of NF-κB was confirmed by p65 and IκBα, while intrinsic apoptosis pathway activation was confirmed by caspase-9 and Apaf-1 expression. All combinations confirmed intrinsic apoptosis activation and NF-κB inactivation. Double and triple combination regimens that target induction of the same death mechanism with reduced dosage of each drug could potentially be clinically beneficial in reducing dose-related toxicities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 57% |
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 17 May 2018.
All research outputs
#17,534,407
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,125
of 2,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,471
of 340,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#25
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 340,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.