NF-κB-mediated EAAT3 upregulation in antioxidant defense and ferroptosis sensitivity in lung cancer

Background

N.A.R. is currently an employee and shareholder of Synthekine Inc. B.S.H. has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Ideaya, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Sorrento Therapeutics, Genentech-Roche, OncLive, Veeva, Athenium, Boxer, Dava Oncology and SAI-Med and research funding to Columbia University from Neximmune, Inc, Janssen and Genentech-Roche. A.D.A. is now an employee of Adaptimmune. J.B. is now an employee of Pfizer. S.W., .S.K.D, and G.S. are employees of Caris Life Sciences. A.S. received consulting fees and honoraria from Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Veracyte, Genentech, Medscape and Physician Education Resource, and research support from Boehringer Ingelheim. All remaining authors report no competing interests.

Relevant Prescribing Information

strongly enriched in brain metastases, which was also recovered in matched single-cell spatial transcriptomics. Using multiplexed immunofluorescence in an independent cohort of treatment-naive pairs of primary tumors and brain metastases from the same patients with NSCLC, we validated genomic and tumor-microenvironmental findings and identified a cancer cell population characterized by neural features strongly enriched in brain metastases. This comprehensive analysis provides insights into human NSCLC brain metastasis biology and serves as an important resource for additional discovery.

Literature Review

A search of the published medical literature revealed 1 study investigating the researchable question:

NF-κB-mediated EAAT3 upregulation in antioxidant defense and ferroptosis sensitivity in lung cancer

Level of evidence

B - One high-quality study or multiple studies with limitations Read more→

Please see Table 1 for your response.

Enter title in bold, with all first words capitalized, and without a reference number
Design
Objective	State the objective (purpose) of the study using the author’s language(usually beginning with “To” and without a period, assuming a non-complete sentence)
Study Groups	Only the separate groups and their cohort number (n) should be listed. You can describe more details of the cohorts in the methods section so this section can stay very succinct.
Inclusion Criteria	Include relevant inclusion criteria (not a comprehensive list).
Exclusion Criteria	Include relevant exclusion criteria (not a comprehensive list).
Methods	This is our most important section. Data collection and any other information needed to understand the results is presented. Any loose ends from all other sections are tied up here, as concisely as possible.
Duration	Include the duration of the trial as a whole, as well as the duration of the interventions.
Outcome Measures	If the primary outcome measure isn't explicit from the study, all outcome measures applicable to the inquiry can be listed in this section. If the primary outcome measure is explicit, then make separate sections for ‘Primary' and ‘Secondary' Outcome Measures. All outcome measures listed should correlate directly/exactly with the results presented later.
Baseline Characteristics		A	B
	Age, years
	Female
	White
	---
	Include relevant baseline characteristics that will provide a general (big picture) view of the patients in the study.
Results	Endpoint	A	B	p-Value
	----
	----
	All results listed should correlate directly/exactly with the outcome measures presented previously. Results that do not have to do with the inquiry should not be included; just the stated outcomes need corresponding results. Tables are encouraged to display the most info using the least space/words.
Adverse Events	Common Adverse Events: (or those deemed frequent; if not listed in study, use N/A or “Not disclosed”)
	Serious Adverse Events: (or those deemed high risk; if not listed in study, use N/A or “Not disclosed”)
	Percentage that Discontinued due to Adverse Events: (if not listed in study, use N/A or “Not disclosed”)
Study Author Conclusions	Copy and paste the author's conclusions on the question at hand, using full sentences. Don't include any conclusions that don't correspond to results we list.
InpharmD Researcher Critique	As the expert, add 1-2 sentences on strengths, weaknesses, and takeaways from this study. Focus on insight as “more research is needed” is obvious.