Fig. 5.

Pharmacological modulation of pd‐GBSCs confirms the subtype‐specific effects observed in previous integration approaches. (A–D) Barplots representing the cell viability status of a Proneural (PN), a Classical (CL) and a Mesenchymal (MS) patient‐derived GBM stem cell (pd‐GBSCs) subjected to pharmacological inhibition of AP‐1 with the chemical compound T‐5224 (A), RUNX2 inhibition with the small drug CADD522 (B), SMAD3 inhibition with the SIS3 reagent (C) and RUNX1 inhibition using the compound Ro5‐3335 (D). The concentration of the different pharmacological interventions is indicated at the top of each graph, and the concentration of the combined treatment with temozolomide or temozolomide alone was kept at a constant concentration of 800 μm. All the conditions were assayed at least in quintuplicate, error bars represent the standard deviation (SD) and asterisks denote statistical significance obtained from a Welch's t‐test between the indicated comparisons (ns, not‐significant, **: P‐value < 0.01, ***: P‐value < 0.001).