RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is (CRC) one of the commonest cancers and its therapy is still based on few drugs. Currently, no biological criteria are used to choose the most effective of the established drugs for treatment. METHODS: A panel of 77 CRC cell lines was tested for sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil (5FU) using the SRB assay. The responses were grouped into three categories and correlated with genetic changes in the cell lines. RESULTS: The strongest and most clearcut correlation was between 5-fluorouracil response and replication error status (mismatch repair deficiency). All the other significant correlations (loss of heterozygosity for DCC and mutations in TGFbIIR) are secondary to the association with replication error status. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION: Our findings validate previous analyses based mainly on clinical data, and indicate that replication error status could be a useful guide to 5-fluorouracil-based CRC therapy. Essentially, all previously described correlations with 5FU response are secondary to the association with replication error status.
Assuntos
Linhagem Celular Tumoral/efeitos dos fármacos , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Reparo de Erro de Pareamento de DNA/efeitos dos fármacos , Fluoruracila/toxicidade , Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/toxicidade , Materiais Biocompatíveis , Colágeno , Neoplasias Colorretais/genética , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Replicação do DNA/efeitos dos fármacos , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Combinação de Medicamentos , Humanos , Laminina , Perda de Heterozigosidade/efeitos dos fármacos , Mutação , ProteoglicanasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Internet may be a useful resource for people with coeliac disease as a great deal of health-related information is published online. However, not all of it is accurate. It has been suggested that accurate information is most likely found on transparent sites and kitemarks are awarded on this basis. This paper examines whether the Internet is a useful resource for people with coeliac disease and whether transparency criteria can be used in identifying accurate sites. METHOD: An evaluation tool was developed using selected transparency criteria and clinical guidelines for accuracy. A total of 63 websites were evaluated. RESULTS: In the study, 66% of the websites scored less than 50% for accuracy. This was primarily because of incomplete information but 15.9% of sites contained inaccuracies. Over 50% of sites scored less than 50% for transparency. No correlation was found between sites that scored highly for accuracy and those that scored highly for transparency. CONCLUSION: There are useful information available for people with coeliac disease but transparency criteria alone cannot be used to identify accurate sites.
