The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Rhodamine efflux patterns predict P-glycoprotein substrates in the National Cancer Institute drug screen.
Abstract
Fifty-eight cell lines in the National Cancer Institute drug screen were analyzed for their ability to efflux the fluorescent dye rhodamine 123 as a functional assay for P-glycoprotein (Pgp). Using flow cytometry, the rhodamine fluorescence was measured for each cell line under four incubation conditions, i.e., after accumulation in the presence or absence of the Pgp antagonist cyclosporin A and after efflux in rhodamine-free medium in the presence or absence of cyclosporin A. The results in some cell lines were compatible with Pgp-mediated efflux. There was a significant correlation between mdr-1 expression and rhodamine efflux in the 58 cell lines (r = 0.788, p = 0.0001). Using the rhodamine efflux data as a seed for COMPARE analysis with the cytotoxicity data on > 30,000 compounds in the National Cancer Institute drug screen database, hundreds of compounds with high correlation coefficients were identified. Selected compounds were tested for reversal of cross-resistance in a multidrug-resistant cell line. A high degree of reversibility, up to 10,000-fold, for some of the compounds was noted in the presence of the Pgp antagonist PSC 833. This finding suggested that compounds with predominately Pgp-mediated resistance were being identified. Using these compounds as seeds for COMPARE analysis against a more restricted database of 187 standard agents, a series of standard compounds were repeatedly identified as having high correlation coefficients with the newly identified Pgp substrates. These standard agents, including phyllanthoside, bisantrene, and homoharringtonine, constitute an mdr-1 profile. New agents identified as being highly correlated with these compounds may benefit from clinical trials with Pgp antagonists.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Multidrug resistance in cancer: role of ATP–dependent transporters
Gottesman, M. M., Fojo, T., & Bates, S. E. (2002) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc706 · Cited by 5,536
Self-citationA gene expression database for the molecular pharmacology of cancer
Scherf, U., Ross, D. T., Waltham, M., Smith, L. H., Lee, J. K., Tanabe, L., Kohn, K. W., Reinhold, W. C., Myers, T. G., Andrews, D. T., et al. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/73439 · Cited by 1,450
Self-citationEnzyme-activatable polymer–drug conjugate augments tumour penetration and treatment efficacy
Zhou, Q., Shao, S., Wang, J., Xu, C., Xiang, J., Piao, Y., Zhou, Z., Yu, Q., Tang, J., Liu, X., et al. (2019) · Nature Nanotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41565-019-0485-z · Cited by 819
The Blood-Brain Barrier and Cancer: Transporters, Treatment, and Trojan Horses
Deeken, J. F., & Löscher, W. (2007) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-06-2854 · Cited by 721
Litman, T., Druley, T. E., Stein, W. D., & Bates, S. E. (2001) · Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/pl00000912 · Cited by 688
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lee, J. S., Paull, K., Alvarez, M., Hose, C., Monks, A., Grever, M., Fojo, A. T., & Bates, S. E.
- Venue
- Molecular Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1994-10
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 627-638
- ISSN
- 0026-895X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1925657344
- Cited by
- 336
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rhodamine efflux patterns predict P-glycoprotein substrates in the National Cancer Institute drug screen. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0026-895x(25)09793-7
- The paper
- Lee, J. S., Paull, K., Alvarez, M., Hose, C., Monks, A., Grever, M., Fojo, A. T., & Bates, S. E. (1994). Rhodamine efflux patterns predict P-glycoprotein substrates in the National Cancer Institute drug screen. Molecular Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0026-895x(25)09793-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.