• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

肾包膜下种植法对肝癌细胞化学敏感性的研究

[Study on the chemosensitivity of liver cell carcinoma by subrenal capsule assay].

作者信息

Takahashi H, Sasaki F, Hata Y, Une Y, Inoue K, Uchino J

机构信息

1st Dept. of Surgery, School of Medicine, Hokkaido University.

出版信息

Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1988 Mar;15(3):437-42.

PMID:3348629
Abstract

Chemosensitivity of liver cell carcinoma was studied by subrenal capsule assay. The method of assay was based on Bogden's one, but the antitumor activity was evaluated by tumor growth inhibition rate (TG-IR). The anticancer agent with more than 50% TG-IR was judged as positive in the chemosensitivity test. Of 3 human hepatoma cell lines transplanted in the subcutaneous space of nude mice, all of 3 were evaluable. The positive rates of ADR, MMC, CDDP, 5-FU and CPA were 66.7%, 100%, 66.7%, 100% and 0%, respectively. Of 24 patients who provided fresh tumor specimens for the assay, 12 (50%) were evaluable. The positive rates of ADR, MMC, CDDP, 5-FU and CPA were 25%, 16.7%, 16.7%, 33.3% and 8.3%, respectively. Our study suggested that 5-FU, MMC and ADR were comparatively active against the hepatoma cell, CDDP was less active than these 3 agents, CPA was inactive. These results seem to justify the use of current anticancer agents against hepatic cell carcinoma and indicate the usefulness of SRC assay for selecting chemotherapeutic agents against liver cell carcinoma.

摘要

采用肾包膜下接种法研究肝癌细胞的化学敏感性。该检测方法基于博登的方法,但通过肿瘤生长抑制率(TG-IR)评估抗肿瘤活性。在化学敏感性试验中,TG-IR超过50%的抗癌药物被判定为阳性。在接种于裸鼠皮下的3种人肝癌细胞系中,所有3种均可供评估。阿霉素(ADR)、丝裂霉素(MMC)、顺铂(CDDP)、5-氟尿嘧啶(5-FU)和环磷酰胺(CPA)的阳性率分别为66.7%、100%、66.7%、100%和0%。在为该检测提供新鲜肿瘤标本的24例患者中,12例(50%)可供评估。ADR、MMC、CDDP、5-FU和CPA的阳性率分别为25%、16.7%、16.7%、33.3%和8.3%。我们的研究表明,5-FU、MMC和ADR对肝癌细胞的活性相对较高,CDDP的活性低于这3种药物,CPA无活性。这些结果似乎证明了目前使用的抗癌药物对肝癌的有效性,并表明肾包膜下接种法在选择抗肝癌化疗药物方面的有用性。

相似文献

1
[Study on the chemosensitivity of liver cell carcinoma by subrenal capsule assay].肾包膜下种植法对肝癌细胞化学敏感性的研究
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1988 Mar;15(3):437-42.
2
[Subrenal capsule assay using nude mice].[使用裸鼠的肾包膜下测定法]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1990 Mar;17(3 Pt 2):532-41.
3
[Fundamental study of subrenal capsule assay by measuring specific activity of succinate dehydrogenase].[通过测定琥珀酸脱氢酶比活性对肾被膜下测定法的基础研究]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1992 Feb;19(2):217-22.
4
[Results of the UFT sensitivity test using human urogenital cancers transplanted subcutaneously and under the subrenal capsule of nude mice].[使用皮下移植及裸鼠肾包膜下移植的人泌尿生殖系统癌症进行优福定敏感性试验的结果]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1988 Feb;15(2):231-5.
5
[Analysis of chemosensitivity against a human breast cancer xenograft (MX-1) with the subrenal capsule assay in BDF1 mice].[采用BDF1小鼠肾包膜下移植法对人乳腺癌异种移植瘤(MX-1)进行化学敏感性分析]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1985 Aug;12(8):1644-50.
6
Anticancer chemosensitivity profiles of human breast cancer cells assessed by in vitro DNA synthesis inhibition assay.通过体外DNA合成抑制试验评估人乳腺癌细胞的抗癌化学敏感性概况。
Anticancer Res. 2000 Mar-Apr;20(2B):1237-44.
7
[Preclinical evaluation of several cisplatinum analogs against human esophageal carcinoma by subrenal capsule assay].[几种顺铂类似物经肾包膜下移植法对人食管癌的临床前评估]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1990 Feb;17(2):269-73.
8
[Effects of 8 antitumor drugs against the growth of human lung adenocarcinoma (LAX-83) transplanted under the kidney capsule of nude mice].8种抗肿瘤药物对裸鼠肾包膜下移植的人肺腺癌(LAX-83)生长的影响
Zhongguo Yao Li Xue Bao. 1989 Sep;10(5):450-3.
9
[Clinical studies of in vitro chemosensitivity test evaluated by ATP assay of gastrointestinal cancer].[基于ATP检测评估的胃肠道癌体外化疗敏感性试验的临床研究]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1990 Nov;17(11):2235-9.
10
[Fundamental studies on the subrenal capsule assay as chemosensitivity test for nonsolid tumors].[关于将肾上腺囊测定作为非实体瘤化学敏感性试验的基础研究]
Nihon Sanka Fujinka Gakkai Zasshi. 1990 May;42(5):415-21.