The Universal Remedy for Attorney Abandonment: Why Holland v. Florida and Maples v. Thomas Give All Courts the Power to Vacate Civil Judgments Against Abandoned Clients by Way of Rule 60(b)(6)

Stephen White

Pepperdine Law Review2014https://doi.org/10.1158/1541-7786.mcr-17-0413article
ABDC C
Weight
0.26

What the paper says

Interstitial fluid pressure (IFP) presents a barrier to drug uptake in solid tumors, including the aggressive primary brain tumor glioblastoma (GBM). It remains unclear how fluid dynamics impacts tumor progression and can be targeted therapeutically. To address this issue, a novel telemetry-based approach was developed to measure changes in IFP during progression of GBM xenografts. Antisecretory factor (AF) is an endogenous protein that displays antisecretory effects in animals and patients. Here, endogenous induction of AF protein or exogenous administration of AF peptide reduced IFP and increased drug uptake in GBM xenografts. AF inhibited cell volume regulation of GBM cells, an effect that was phenocopied <i>in vitro</i> by the sodium-potassium-chloride cotransporter 1 (SLC12A2/NKCC1) inhibitor bumetanide. As a result, AF induced apoptosis and increased survival in GBM models. <i>In vitro</i>, the ability of AF to reduce GBM cell proliferation was phenocopied by bumetanide and NKCC1 knockdown. Next, AF's ability to sensitize GBM cells to the alkylating agent temozolomide, standard of care in GBM patients, was evaluated. Importantly, combination of AF induction and temozolomide treatment blocked regrowth in GBM xenografts. Thus, AF-mediated inhibition of cell volume regulation represents a novel strategy to increase drug uptake and improve outcome in GBM. <i>Mol Cancer Res; 16(5); 777-90. ©2018 AACR</i>.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1158/1541-7786.mcr-17-0413

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{stephen2014,
  title        = {{The Universal Remedy for Attorney Abandonment: Why Holland v. Florida and Maples v. Thomas Give All Courts the Power to Vacate Civil Judgments Against Abandoned Clients by Way of Rule 60(b)(6)}},
  author       = {Stephen White},
  journal      = {Pepperdine Law Review},
  year         = {2014},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1158/1541-7786.mcr-17-0413},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The Universal Remedy for Attorney Abandonment: Why Holland v. Florida and Maples v. Thomas Give All Courts the Power to Vacate Civil Judgments Against Abandoned Clients by Way of Rule 60(b)(6)

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.26

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.00 × 0.4 = 0.00
M · momentum0.20 × 0.15 = 0.03
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.