@article{EgenolfAltenschildescheKressetal.2021,
  author    = {Egenolf, Nadine and Altenschildesche, Caren Meyer zu and Kreß, Luisa and Eggermann, Katja and Namer, Barbara and Gross, Franziska and Klitsch, Alexander and Malzacher, Tobias and Kampik, Daniel and Malik, Rayaz A. and Kurth, Ingo and Sommer, Claudia and {\"U}{\c{c}}eyler, Nurcan},
  title     = {Diagnosing small fiber neuropathy in clinical practice: a deep phenotyping study},
  series = {Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders},
  issn      = {1756-2864},
  doi       = {10.1177/17562864211004318},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-232019},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Background and aims: Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is increasingly suspected in patients with pain of uncertain origin, and making the diagnosis remains a challenge lacking a diagnostic gold standard. Methods: In this case-control study, we prospectively recruited 86 patients with a medical history and clinical phenotype suggestive of SFN. Patients underwent neurological examination, quantitative sensory testing (QST), and distal and proximal skin punch biopsy, and were tested for pain-associated gene loci. Fifty-five of these patients additionally underwent pain-related evoked potentials (PREP), corneal confocal microscopy (CCM), and a quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test (QSART). Results: Abnormal distal intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) (60/86, 70\%) and neurological examination (53/86, 62\%) most frequently reflected small fiber disease. Adding CCM and/or PREP further increased the number of patients with small fiber impairment to 47/55 (85\%). Genetic testing revealed potentially pathogenic gene variants in 14/86 (16\%) index patients. QST, QSART, and proximal IENFD were of lower impact. Conclusion: We propose to diagnose SFN primarily based on the results of neurological examination and distal IENFD, with more detailed phenotyping in specialized centers.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Gross2020,
  author    = {Gross, Franziska},
  title     = {Verst{\"a}rkung von Tumor Treating Fields durch Inhibition der MPS1 Kinase in Glioblastom-Zelllinien},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-21180},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-211804},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) sind alternierende Wechselfelder mit einer intermedi{\"a}ren Frequenz und niedrigen Intensit{\"a}t, die zu einer Destabilisierung des Spindelapparates w{\"a}hrend der Mitose f{\"u}hren. Sie sind als zus{\"a}tzliche Behandlungsoption bei Glioblastoma multiforme zugelassen. Der mitotische Spindelkontrollpunkt {\"u}berwacht eine fehlerhafte Anheftung der Spindelfasern von Schwesterchromatiden und leitet Reparaturprozesse ein. Monopolar spindle 1 (MPS1) ist eine Schl{\"u}sselkomponente dieses Kontrollpunktes und kann den durch TTFields physikalisch induzierten Spindelsch{\"a}den entgegenwirken. Durch Zellzahlmessung, Zellzyklusuntersuchungen und durchflusszytometrische Analysen als auch Fluoreszenzf{\"a}rbungen konnte gezeigt werden, dass eine Inhibition von MPS1 die antimitotischen Wirkungen von TTFields verst{\"a}rken kann.},
  subject      = {Tumortherapiefelder},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{KesslerFroemblingGrossetal.2018,
  author    = {Kessler, Almuth F. and Fr{\"o}mbling, Greta E. and Gross, Franziska and Hahn, Mirja and Dzokou, Wilfrid and Ernestus, Ralf-Ingo and L{\"o}hr, Mario and Hagemann, Carsten},
  title     = {Effects of tumor treating fields (TTFields) on glioblastoma cells are augmented by mitotic checkpoint inhibition},
  series = {Cell Death Discovery},
  volume    = {4},
  journal   = {Cell Death Discovery},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41420-018-0079-9},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-325744},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Tumor treating fields (TTFields) are approved for glioblastoma (GBM) therapy. TTFields disrupt cell division by inhibiting spindle fiber formation. Spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) inhibition combined with antimitotic drugs synergistically decreases glioma cell growth in cell culture and mice. We hypothesized that SAC inhibition will increase TTFields efficacy. Human GBM cells (U-87 MG, GaMG) were treated with TTFields (200 kHz, 1.7 V/cm) and/or the SAC inhibitor MPS1-IN-3 (IN-3, 4 µM). Cells were counted after 24, 48, and 72 h of treatment and at 24 and 72 h after end of treatment (EOT). Flow cytometry, immunofluorescence microscopy, Annexin-V staining and TUNEL assay were used to detect alterations in cell cycle and apoptosis after 72 h of treatment. The TTFields/IN-3 combination decreased cell proliferation after 72 h compared to either treatment alone (-78.6\% vs. TTFields, P = 0.0337; -52.6\% vs. IN-3, P = 0.0205), and reduced the number of viable cells (62\% less than seeded). There was a significant cell cycle shift from G1 to G2/M phase (P < 0.0001). The apoptotic rate increased to 44\% (TTFields 14\%, P = 0.0002; IN-3 4\%, P < 0.0001). Cell growth recovered 24 h after EOT with TTFields and IN-3 alone, but the combination led to further decrease by 92\% at 72 h EOT if IN-3 treatment was continued (P = 0.0288). The combination of TTFields and SAC inhibition led to earlier and prolonged effects that significantly augmented the efficacy of TTFields and highlights a potential new targeted multimodal treatment for GBM.},
  language  = {en}
}