Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 21;8(24):38811–38824. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.16402

Figure 5. In vivo effects of Smad inhibitor-mediated chemosensitization.

Figure 5

(A) Schematic experimental setup for the treatment of a cyclin D1 sphere-derived xenograft tumor model. (B) Tumor volume 4 weeks after treatment with different doses of SB431542 alone. (C) Tumor growth kinetics based on the luciferin bioluminescence signal in cisplatin versus pre-SB431542 followed by cisplatin treatment. Data are the means ± SD; n = 8 (injection). (D) Representative tumor images based on the luciferin bioluminescence of (C). (E) Statistical comparison of the tumor volume at the endpoint (6 weeks). (F) Representative tumor mass (C) at the endpoint. Scale bar = 1 cm. (G) Summary of tumor incidence (%) of respective treatment groups: vehicle, cisplatin alone, SB431542 alone, SB431542 + cisplatin simultaneously (SB +cis), or SB431542 pretreatment followed by cisplatin (SB >cis). (H) The xenograft tumor tissue was digested at the endpoint to detect the CD90+ population. The percentage of the CD90+ population of the control was defined as 1 for the fold-change of treatment groups. The fold decrease in the CD90+ population in the cis or SB >cis group was calculated as the inverse of the fold change. (I) The xenograft tumor tissue was digested and cultured for a few days, followed by single sphere formation. The single sphere formation capacity in the control was defined as 1, the fold decrease in the cis or SB >cis group was calculated as the inverse of the fold change.