Skip to main content
Log in

Time-schedule dependency of the inhibiting activity of various anticancer drugs in the clonogenic assay

  • Original Articles
  • Anticancer Drugs, Clonogenic Assay, Chemosensitivity, Time Dependency
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

To analyze the discrepancy between the in vitro response in the clonogenic assay and the clinical response, the time-schedule dependencies of various anticancer drugs were determined by comparing the inhibiting effect against colony formation by PC-7 cells treated with the drugs for 1 h with that of those treated for 24h. According to their schedule dependency the drugs can be divided into a schedule-dependent drug group (5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, bleomycin, pepleomycin, etoposide, cisplatin, teniposide, vindesine, and vinblastine) and a non-schedule-dependent drug group (adriamycin, actinomycin D, ranomustine, mitomycin C, aclacinomycin, daunomycin, nimustine, melphalan, and KW 2083). In the clonogenic assay, the 1-h exposure schedule is appropriate for predicting clinical response for the non-schedule-dependent drugs. However, the effect of the schedule-dependent drugs was underestimated in the same conditions. Therefore, it is necessary to test these drugs in the assay by 24-h exposure for a more accurate assessment of their antitumor activity.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Drewinko B, Gottlieb JA (1975) Action of cis-dichlorodiamine-platinum (II) (NSC-119875) at the cellular level. Cancer Chemother Rep 59:665

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fischer GA, Sartorelli AC (1964) Development, maintenance and assay of drug resistance. Methods Med Res 10:247

    Google Scholar 

  3. Greenberg BR, Salmon SE (1984) Human tumor clonogenic assay in patients with unknown primary carcinomas. J Clin Oncol 2:46

    Google Scholar 

  4. Grieder A, Maurer R, Stahelin H (1974) Effect of an epipodophyllotoxin derivative (VP-16-213) on macromolecular synthesis and mitosis in mastocytoma cells in vitro. Cancer Res 34:1788

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hamburger AW, Salmon SE (1977) Primary bioassay of human tumor stem cells. Science 197:461

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hamburger AW, Salmon SE, Kim MB, Trent JM, Soehnlen BJ, Alberts DS, Schmidt HJ (1978) Direct cloning of human ovarian carcinoma cells in agar. Cancer Res 38:3438

    Google Scholar 

  7. Johnson PA, Rossof AH (1983) The role of the human tumor stem cell assay in medical oncology. Arch Intern Med 143:111

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kanzawa F, Hoshi A, Kuretani K (1980) Mechanism of cytotoxicity of 5-fluorouracil: Distinction between the irreversible cytotoxic effect of 5-fluorouridine and the reversible cytotoxic effect of 5-fluoro-2′-deoxyuridine on murine lymphoma L5178Y cells in culture. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 98:85

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kanzawa F, Hoshi A, Shimizu E, Saijo N, Miyazawa N, Shimabukuro Z (1984) Clonogenic cell assay for carcinoma of the lung. Gan 75:81

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kitten CM, Von Hoff DD, Bennett EV Jr, Trinkle JK, Grover FL (1983) The human tumor clonogenic assay in the treatment of patients with lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 36:408

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ludwig R, Alberts DS, Miller TP, Salmon SE (1984) Evaluation of anticancer drug schedule dependency using an in vitro human tumor clonogenic assay. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 12:135

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rosenblum ML, Dougherty DV, Deen DF, Wilson CB (1981) Potentials and limitations of a clonogenic cell assay for human brain tumors. Cancer Treat Rep (Suppl) 65:61

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rupniak HT, Whelan RDH, Hill BT (1983) Concentration and time-dependent inter-relationships for antitumor drug cytotoxicities against tumour cells in vitro. Int J Cancer 32:7

    Google Scholar 

  14. Salmon SE (1984) Human tumor colony assay and chemosensitivity testing. Cancer Treat Rep 68:117

    Google Scholar 

  15. Shimoyama M (1975) Cytocidal action of anticancer agents: Evaluation of the sensitivity of cultured animal and human cancer cells. In: Ito Y, Dutcher RM (eds) Comparative leukemia research 1973. Leukemogenesis. University Press, Tokyo; Karger, Basel, p 117

    Google Scholar 

  16. Van Putten LM (1974) Are cell kinetic data relevant for the design of tumour chemotherapy schedules? Cell Tissue Kinet 7:493

    Google Scholar 

  17. Von Hoff DD, Casper JT, Bradley E, Sandbach J, Jones D, Makuch R (1981) Association between human tumor colony-forming assay results and response of an individual patient's tumor to chemotherapy. Am J Med 70:1027

    Google Scholar 

  18. Von Hoff DD, Clark GM, Stogdill BJ, Sarosdy MF, O'Brien MT, Casper JT, Mattox DE, Page CP, Cruz AB, Sandbach JF (1983) Prospective clinical trial of a human tumor cloning system. Cancer Res 43:1926

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Matsushima, Y., Kanzawa, F., Hoshi, A. et al. Time-schedule dependency of the inhibiting activity of various anticancer drugs in the clonogenic assay. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 14, 104–107 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00434345

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00434345

Keywords

Navigation