Review





Similar Products

anti ki67  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
96
Cell Signaling Technology Inc anti ki67
Anti Ki67, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/anti ki67/product/Cell Signaling Technology Inc
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
anti ki67 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
ki67  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
96
Cell Signaling Technology Inc ki67
Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of <t>Ki-67</t> positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.
Ki67, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/ki67/product/Cell Signaling Technology Inc
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
ki67 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
rabbit anti mouse ki67 monoclonal antibody  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
96
Cell Signaling Technology Inc rabbit anti mouse ki67 monoclonal antibody
Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of <t>Ki-67</t> positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.
Rabbit Anti Mouse Ki67 Monoclonal Antibody, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/rabbit anti mouse ki67 monoclonal antibody/product/Cell Signaling Technology Inc
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
rabbit anti mouse ki67 monoclonal antibody - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
mouse anti ki67  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
96
Cell Signaling Technology Inc mouse anti ki67
Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of <t>Ki-67</t> positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.
Mouse Anti Ki67, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mouse anti ki67/product/Cell Signaling Technology Inc
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mouse anti ki67 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
anti human ki67  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
96
Cell Signaling Technology Inc anti human ki67
Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of <t>Ki-67</t> positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.
Anti Human Ki67, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/anti human ki67/product/Cell Signaling Technology Inc
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
anti human ki67 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
mouse anti ki67  (Santa Cruz Biotechnology)
96
Santa Cruz Biotechnology mouse anti ki67
Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of <t>Ki-67</t> positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.
Mouse Anti Ki67, supplied by Santa Cruz Biotechnology, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mouse anti ki67/product/Santa Cruz Biotechnology
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mouse anti ki67 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of Ki-67 positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.

Journal: International Journal of Oncology

Article Title: Overcoming acquired doxorubicin resistance of ovarian carcinoma cells by verapamil-mediated promotion of DNA damage-driven cytotoxicity

doi: 10.3892/ijo.2026.5861

Figure Lengend Snippet: Cell cycle progression and proliferation following treatment of A2780 and A2780ADR cells with Topo II inhibitors. Logarithmically growing cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo or etoposide Eto for (A) 24 or (B) 72 h. Afterwards, cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry and the percentage of cells present in different phases of the cell cycle (SubG 1 -, G1-, S- and G 2 /M-phase) was quantified. Data shown in the histogram (left panel) are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments each performed in biological triplicates. The table on the right panel summarizes the mean values and indicates statistical differences between the individual groups. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR); # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01 (Con vs. treated group). (C) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later the percentage of Ki-67 positive or pH3 positive cells was determined as described in methods. Total magnification, ×400. Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from n=3 independent experiments, each performed with n=5 biological replicates. * P≤0.05; ** P≤0.01; **** P≤0.0001 (A2780 vs. A2780ADR). Con vs. treatment: # P≤0.05; ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. (D) Logarithmically growing parental A2780 and Doxo resistant A2780ADR cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of Doxo (0.1 and 1.0 μ M) or Eto (1.0 and 10 μ M). At 24 h later cells were pulse-labeled with EdU for 2 h as described in Methods and the percentage of EdU positive cells was determined microscopically (total magnification, ×400). Quantitative data shown in the histogram are the mean ± SD from five biological replicates. A2780 as compared with A2780ADR: ** P≤0.05; **** P≤0.0001. Con vs. treatment: ## P≤0.01; ### P≤0.001. Doxo, doxorubicin; Eto, etoposide; SD, standard deviation.

Article Snippet: The following primary antibodies were used: Copper transporting ATPase (ATP7A), extracellular regulated kinase 2 (ERK2), phosphorylated (p)-histone H3 (Ser10) from Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., cleaved caspase-7 (Asp198), p-Chk1 (Ser 345), cyclin B1, galactosidase β (E2U2I), GAPDH (14C10), MDR1/ABCB1 (D3H1Q), p-P53 (S15), PARP, TopBP1(D8G4L), topoisomerase IIa (D10G9), 53BP1 and Ki67 were from Cell Signaling Technology Inc., pChk2 (T68) [Y171], copper uptake protein 1 (CTR1/SLC31A1) [EPR7936] and Rad51 from Abcam, γH2AX (Ser 139) clone JBW301, p-KAP-1 (S824) and p-RPA32 (S4/S8) from Bethyl Laboratories Inc., organic cation transporter-2 (OCT2) from Biozol Diagnostics Vertrieb GmbH, p16 (F-12) and p21 (C-19) from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc. As secondary antibodies, horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibodies goat anti-mouse IgG and mouse anti-rabbit IgG were used (Rockland Immunochemicals Inc.).

Techniques: Flow Cytometry, Labeling, Standard Deviation