Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Sep 10.
Published in final edited form as: Exp Cell Res. 2016 Aug 8;347(1):222–231. doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2016.08.006

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Effects of E2 and 4-OHT on ECAR in TAM-sensitive versus TAM -resistant breast cancer cells. TAM-sensitive MCF-7 (A), estrogen-independent/tamoxifen-sensitive LCC1 (B), and TAM-resistant LCC2 (C) and LCC9 (D) breast cancer cells were grown in phenol-red-free IMEM containing 5% DCC-FBS (‘serum-starved’) for 48 h prior to 24 h treatment with EtOH (vehicle control), 10 nM E2, or 100 nM 4-OHT followed by extracellular flux analysis. After baseline ECAR measurements were collected, oligomycin (1.5 μM), FCCP (0.5 μM) and rotenone (2 μM) were injected sequentially as in Supplementary Figure 2. All values were normalized to protein/well at the conclusion of the assay. Baseline ECAR and glycolytic reserve capacity were calculated. Each point the avg. of 5 separate wells ± SEM within one experiment. * p < 0.05 versus EtOH. Analysis used one-way ANOVA followed by Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison Test.