Extended Data Fig. 8: Comparison of the activity of NEP162 and MZ1 in vivo.
From: Design of PROTACs utilizing the E3 ligase GID4 for targeted protein degradation
a, Schematic of the administration of tumor-bearing mice. b,c, Images (b) and volumes (c) of tumors isolated from xenograft mice after intraperitoneal injection of DMSO, NEP162N (10 mg/kg), NEP162 (10 mg/kg) or MZ1 (10 mg/kg). Data are shown as mean ± S.D. (n = 5 biological replicates); two-sided t-test, *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; ****, P < 0.0001. d, Tumor weights of mice at the endpoint. Data are shown as mean ± S.D. (n = 5 biological replicates); two-sided t-test, *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; ****, P < 0.0001. e, Changes in body weight of mice during the treatments. Data are shown as mean ± S.D. (n = 5 biological replicates). f, Immunofluorescence imaging of TUNEL, and immunohistochemistry imaging of Ki67 and BRD4 in U2OS tumor sections from various groups. g,h,i, Quantitative analysis of tumor sections stained with TUNEL (g), Ki67 (h) and BRD4 (i). Data are shown as mean ± S.D. (n = 5 biological replicates); two-sided t-test, *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; ****, P < 0.0001. Panel a created with BioRender.com.
