Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of the cytostatic effects of the gemcitabine preparations Gemcitera and Gemzar

  • Molecular-Biological Problems of Drug Design and Mechanism of Drug Action
  • Published:
Pharmaceutical Chemistry Journal Aims and scope

Cytostatic effects of Gemzar and Gemcitera, drugs containing gemcitabine as the active substance, have been studied using cell cultures of normal rat fibroblasts, MCF-7 (human breast cancer), and HeLa (cervical cancer) as alternative models. Both drugs exhibited high cytostatic activity. With respect to their sensitivity to Gemzar and Gemcitera, the model cells can be ordered as follows: HeLa < MCF-7 < fibroblasts. Gemcitera produced significant dose-dependent cytostatic effects on MCF-7 and HeLa cells, being comparable in this respect to the antitumor action of the reference drug Gemzar.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  1. Handbook of Experimental (Preclinical) Study of New Drugs [in Russian], Minzdrav RF, ZAO IIA Remedium, Moscow (2000), pp. 18–25.

  2. J. H. Li and X. G. Luo, Zhongnan Daxue Xuebao Yixueban, 31, 710–713 (2006).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. P. Hernandez, P. Olivera, A. Dueñas-Gonzalez, et al., Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol., 48, 488–492 (2001).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. J. F. Rosier, M. Bruniaux, B. Husson, et al., Radiother. Oncol., 70, 55–61 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Y. P. Istomin, E. A. Zhavrid, E. N. Alexandrova, et al., Exp. Oncol., 30, 56–59 (2008).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. P. A. Foster, C. Stengel, T. Ali, et al., Anticancer Res., 28, 1483–1491 (2008).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. T. Mossman, J. Immunol. Methods, 65, 55–63 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. K. Takara, T. Sakaeda, T. Yagami, et al., Biol. Pharm. Bull., 25, 771 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. K. Haug, K. L. Kravik, and P. M. De Angelis, Anticancer Res., 28, 583–592 (2008).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. L. Krasna, I. Netikova, A. Chaloupkova, et al., Anticancer Res., 23, 2593–2599 (2003).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. B. W. Robinson, L. Ostruszka, M. M. Im, and D. S. Shewach, Semin. Oncol., 31(5), 2–12 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. N. Mark, K. M. Kirstein, and B. W. Wieman, Lung Cancer, 58, 196–204 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. J. L. Horning, S. K. Sahoo, S. Vijayaraghavalu, et al., Mol. Pharm., 5, 849–862 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Translated from Khimiko-Farmatsevticheskii Zhurnal, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 11–14, February, 2009.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gil’deeva, G.N., Semeikin, A.V. Comparison of the cytostatic effects of the gemcitabine preparations Gemcitera and Gemzar. Pharm Chem J 43, 81–83 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11094-009-0247-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11094-009-0247-6

Key words