Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28262028›Full record

ArticleJournal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry2017

Acridine Orange/exosomes increase the delivery and the effectiveness of Acridine Orange in human melanoma cells: A new prototype for theranostics of tumors.

Elisabetta Iessi, Mariantonia Logozzi, Luana Lugini, Tommaso Azzarito, Cristina Federici, Enrico Pierluigi Spugnini, Davide Mizzoni, Rossella Di Raimo, Daniela F Angelini, Luca Battistini and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

61 citing papers in PubMed, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elisabetta Iessia Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Mariantonia Logozzia Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Luana Luginia Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Tommaso Azzaritoa Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Cristina Federicia Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Enrico Pierluigi Spugninib SAFU Department , Regina Elena Cancer Institute , Rome , Italy.
Davide Mizzonia Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Rossella Di Raimoa Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Daniela F Angelinic Neuroimmunology Unit , IRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation , Rome , Italy.
Luca Battistinic Neuroimmunology Unit , IRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation , Rome , Italy.
Serena Cecchettid Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Stefano Faisa Anti-Tumour Drugs Section, Department of Drug Research and Medicines Evaluation , National Institute of Health , Rome , Italy.
Fondazione Santa Lucia · ITIstituto Superiore di Sanità · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Specifically targeted drug delivery systems with low immunogenicity and toxicity are deemed to increase efficacy of cancer chemotherapy. Acridine Orange (AO) is an acidophilic dye with a strong tumoricidal action following excitation with a light source at 466 nm. However, to date the clinical use of AO is limited by the potential side effects elicited by systemic administration. The endogenous nanocarrier exosomes have been recently introduced as a natural delivery system for therapeutic molecules. In this article, we show the outcome of the administration to human melanoma cells of AO charged Exosomes (Exo-AO), in both monolayer and spheroid models. The results showed an extended drug delivery time of Exo-AO to melanoma cells as compared to the free AO, improving the cytotoxicity of AO. This study shows that Exo-AO have a great potential for a real exploitation as a new theranostic approach against tumors based on AO delivered through the exosomes.

Indexed as

Drug Delivery SystemsExosomesTheranostic NanomedicineAcridine OrangeAntineoplastic AgentsCell Line, TumorFlow CytometryHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationMelanomaMicroscopy, ConfocalAcridine OrangeAntineoplastic AgentsAcridine Orangedelivery systemexosomemacrophagetheranostics

Identifiers

PMID28262028
PMCPMC6010124
OpenAlexW2594465601

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.