Evidence Hub

Dataset related to article "Metformin and Everolimus: A Promising Combination for Neuroendocrine Tumors Treatment"

Eleonora Vitali, Boemi Ilena, Tarantola Giulia, Piccini Sara, Zerbi Alessandro, Veronesi Giulia, Baldelli Roberto, Gherardo Mazziotti et al.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2021

Abstract

This record contains data related to article: Metformin and Everolimus: A Promising Combination for Neuroendocrine Tumors Treatment Introduction: Treatment options for neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rarely curative, as NETs frequently show resistance to medical therapy. The use of everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, is limited by the development of resistance, probably due to the activation of Akt signaling. In this context, the antidiabetic drug metformin is able to inhibit mTOR, providing a rationale for the use of metformin and everolimus in combination. Methods: We investigated the effects of the metformin and everolimus combination on NET cell proliferation, apoptosis, colony formation, cell viability, NET spheroids growth and the involvement of the Akt and mTOR pathways, and also developed everolimus-resistant NET cells to further study this combination. Results: Metformin and everolimus in combination are more effective than monotherapy in inhibiting pancreatic NET (PAN-NET) cell proliferation (−71% ± 13%, p < 0.0001 vs. basal), whereas no additive effects were observed on pulmonary neuroendocrine tumor (PNT) cell proliferation. The combinatorial treatment is more effective than monotherapy in inhibiting colony formation, cell viability, NET spheroids growth rate and mTOR phosphorylation in both NET cell lines. In a PAN-NET cell line, metformin did not affect Akt phosphorylation; conversely, it significantly decreased Akt phosphorylation in a PNT cell line. Using…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a dataset, done in cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free