Journal: International journal of oncology

Article Title: Although c‑MYC contributes to tamoxifen resistance, it improves cisplatin sensitivity in ER‑positive breast cancer.

doi: 10.3892/ijo.2020.4987

Figure Lengend Snippet: Figure 1. Establishment of TAM‑resistant breast cancer cells. (A) TAM‑resistant cells exhibited a more elongated, spindle‑shaped morphology compared with the respective parental cells. Magnification, x200. (B) Survival of TAM‑resistant cells and the respective parental cells was evaluated using a Cell Counting kit‑8 assay following treatment with various concentrations of TAM for 24 h. (C) Western blot analysis (D) and densitometry analysis of ERα and HER2 expression in MCF‑7, MCF‑7R, T47D and T47DR cells. Data are presented as the means ± standard deviation of the mean of 3 repeats. *P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001 vs. respective parental cells. TAM, tamoxifen.

Article Snippet: Non‐specific binding sites were blocked by incubating the membranes with 5% non-fat milk, after which the membranes were incubated overnight at 4 ̊C with the primary antibodies: ERα (1:1,000); HER2 (1:1,000); AKT (1:1,000); p‐AKT (1:1,000); c‐MYC (1:1,000); cyclin D1 (1:1,000); vimentin (1:1,000); E‐cadherin (1:1,000); p21 (1:500); β‐catenin (1:500); GAPDH (1:1,000) Membranes were subsequently incubated with a horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-rabbit/mouse immunoglobulin G secondary antibody (1:1,000; cat. no. BA1075 and BA1051; Wuhan Boster Biological Technology, Ltd.).

Techniques: CCK-8 Assay, Western Blot, Expressing, Standard Deviation