1,721,114 research outputs found

    Antimetastatic action of orally administered lysozyme in mice bearing Lewis lung carcinoma

    No full text
    The pharmacological activity of orally administered lysozyme, for the control of the growth of solid tumor metastases, was examined in mice bearing Lewis lung carcinoma. Groups of at least 10 tumor-bearing mice, fed daily for three consecutive weeks from subcutaneous tumor implantation with lysozyme, prepared from hen egg-white, had a pronounced reduction of the weight of their metastatic tumor to 25-50 per cent of controls within wide range of doses (25-200 mg/kg/day). The antimetastatic effect was not related to the length of the treatment schedule employed; a short course of 7 days, given on days 1-7 after tumor implantation, proved equally active. The inhibition of the formation of lung metastases, in mice treated with lysozyme prior to tumor inoculation, lasts for at least 2 weeks after discontinuation of treatment, indicating that the antimetastatic activity is not associated with cytotoxic activity of the lysozyme, and is probably mediated by the elicitation of host responses. The examination of the therapeutic potential of the antimetastatic action of lysozyme supplied throught the usual diet indicates that this treatment synergizes with the antitumor effects of cisplatin, given to mice after surgical removal of the primary tumor, causing a statistically significant prolongation of the survival time of the animals as compared with chemotherapy alone

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore