Icancer Efficiency of PtAs shown in Figure 5A, combination Pt (20 mg/ml) with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml) exhibited higher anticancer efficiency than any agents used alone. The average inhibition rate of the five regimen were 23.68 614.32 for PPI alone, 22.08 613.61 for EVO alone, 39.69 619.57 for Pt alone, 53.56 618.80 for Pt combined with PPI, 45.61 616.29 for Pt combined with EVO, respectively. The inhibition rates of those 20 samples after combination with Pt and PPI or EVO compared with Pt alone were shown in Figure 5B. When combined with PPI, the inhibition rates were approximately 13.88 higher than Pt used alone (P,0.001, HIF-2��-IN-1 web Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 48.45 . When combined with EVO, the inhibition rates were approximately 5.92 higher than Pt usedalone (P = 0.028, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 33.45 . Some of the freshly-removed gastric tumor tissues in these samples were resistant to Pt with the inhibition rate below approximately 30 . Therefore, we examined the effect of PPI and EVO on reverse Pt resistance. Examples of Pt resistant samples were listed in Table 2 and Table S1, which showed that when Pt (20 mg/ml) combined with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml), resistant samples were sensitive to the treatment again with the inhibition rates more than 30 in general.MedChemExpress Rubusoside Effects of PPI and EVO on Enhance the Anticancer Efficiency of 5-FUAs shown in Figure 5C, combination 5-FU (300 mg/ml) with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml) exhibited higher anticancer efficiency than any agents used alone. The average inhibition rate of the five regimen were 23.68 614.32 for PPI alone, 22.08613.61 for EVO alone, 52.23621.78 for 5-FU alone, 53.10 621.91 for 5-FU combined with PPI, 58.49 625.50 for 5-FU combined with EVO, respectively. The inhibition rates of those 20 samples after combination with 5-FU and PPI or EVO compared with 5-FU alone were shown in Figure 5D. When combined with PPI, the inhibition rates were approximatelySynergistic Anticancer Effects of PPI and EVOTable 2. The effects of PPI and EVO on reverse Pt resistance.PatientsInhibition rate of Pt(20 mg/ml)Inhibition rate of Pt(20 mg/ml)+PPI(200 mg/ml) 47.61 46.70 50.86 61.12 70.03 24.53 39.17 31.41 26.34 52.89Inhibition rate of Pt(20 mg/ml)+EVO(200 mg/ml) 34.97 30.99 61.62 43.94 22.76 38.73 32.89 19.48 36.80 41.63P1 P4 P8 P9 P11 P12 P13 P15 P18 P27.49 30.60 32.45 34.99 21.58 5.28 23.31 25.51 16.98 31.05doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065164.t0.87 higher than 5-FU used alone (P.0.05, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 17.36 . When combined with EVO, the inhibition rates were approximately 6.26 higher than 5-FU used alone (P = 0.017, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 23.63 . The results of synergy analysis are summarized in Table 3, which shows, for each combination, the computer-calculated CI for 20, 50 and 80 inhibition rates, respectively. The CI values were below 1 in all combination at fraction affected (Fa) = 80 , indicating a synergistic anti-cancer effect. The CI values were also below 1 when combined PPI or EVO with Pt at Fa = 50 .Effects of PPI and EVO on Enhance the Anticancer Efficiency of CPT-As shown in Figure 5E, combination CPT-11 (20 mg/ml) with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml) exhibited higher anticancer efficiency than PPI or EVO used alone. The average inhibition rate of the five regimen were 23.68 614.32 for PPI alone.Icancer Efficiency of PtAs shown in Figure 5A, combination Pt (20 mg/ml) with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml) exhibited higher anticancer efficiency than any agents used alone. The average inhibition rate of the five regimen were 23.68 614.32 for PPI alone, 22.08 613.61 for EVO alone, 39.69 619.57 for Pt alone, 53.56 618.80 for Pt combined with PPI, 45.61 616.29 for Pt combined with EVO, respectively. The inhibition rates of those 20 samples after combination with Pt and PPI or EVO compared with Pt alone were shown in Figure 5B. When combined with PPI, the inhibition rates were approximately 13.88 higher than Pt used alone (P,0.001, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 48.45 . When combined with EVO, the inhibition rates were approximately 5.92 higher than Pt usedalone (P = 0.028, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 33.45 . Some of the freshly-removed gastric tumor tissues in these samples were resistant to Pt with the inhibition rate below approximately 30 . Therefore, we examined the effect of PPI and EVO on reverse Pt resistance. Examples of Pt resistant samples were listed in Table 2 and Table S1, which showed that when Pt (20 mg/ml) combined with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml), resistant samples were sensitive to the treatment again with the inhibition rates more than 30 in general.Effects of PPI and EVO on Enhance the Anticancer Efficiency of 5-FUAs shown in Figure 5C, combination 5-FU (300 mg/ml) with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml) exhibited higher anticancer efficiency than any agents used alone. The average inhibition rate of the five regimen were 23.68 614.32 for PPI alone, 22.08613.61 for EVO alone, 52.23621.78 for 5-FU alone, 53.10 621.91 for 5-FU combined with PPI, 58.49 625.50 for 5-FU combined with EVO, respectively. The inhibition rates of those 20 samples after combination with 5-FU and PPI or EVO compared with 5-FU alone were shown in Figure 5D. When combined with PPI, the inhibition rates were approximatelySynergistic Anticancer Effects of PPI and EVOTable 2. The effects of PPI and EVO on reverse Pt resistance.PatientsInhibition rate of Pt(20 mg/ml)Inhibition rate of Pt(20 mg/ml)+PPI(200 mg/ml) 47.61 46.70 50.86 61.12 70.03 24.53 39.17 31.41 26.34 52.89Inhibition rate of Pt(20 mg/ml)+EVO(200 mg/ml) 34.97 30.99 61.62 43.94 22.76 38.73 32.89 19.48 36.80 41.63P1 P4 P8 P9 P11 P12 P13 P15 P18 P27.49 30.60 32.45 34.99 21.58 5.28 23.31 25.51 16.98 31.05doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065164.t0.87 higher than 5-FU used alone (P.0.05, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 17.36 . When combined with EVO, the inhibition rates were approximately 6.26 higher than 5-FU used alone (P = 0.017, Paired Student’s t test) with maximal improvement reached 23.63 . The results of synergy analysis are summarized in Table 3, which shows, for each combination, the computer-calculated CI for 20, 50 and 80 inhibition rates, respectively. The CI values were below 1 in all combination at fraction affected (Fa) = 80 , indicating a synergistic anti-cancer effect. The CI values were also below 1 when combined PPI or EVO with Pt at Fa = 50 .Effects of PPI and EVO on Enhance the Anticancer Efficiency of CPT-As shown in Figure 5E, combination CPT-11 (20 mg/ml) with PPI (200 mg/ml) or EVO (200 mg/ml) exhibited higher anticancer efficiency than PPI or EVO used alone. The average inhibition rate of the five regimen were 23.68 614.32 for PPI alone.
