ArticleBioTechniques2010
Quantifying the relative amount of mouse and human DNA in cancer xenografts using species-specific variation in gene length.
Article in BioTechniques, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meningioma animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Establishment of a patient-derived 3D in vitro meningioma model in xeno-free hydrogel for clinical applications.Acta neuropathologica communications · 2025Article
- Benchmarking mouse contamination removing protocols in patient-derived xenografts genomic profiling.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Characterization of HCI-EC-23 a novel estrogen- and progesterone-responsive endometrial cancer cell line.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Chromatin conformation capture (Hi-C) sequencing of patient-derived xenografts: analysis guidelines.GigaScience · 2021Article
- PDX-Derived Ewing's Sarcoma Cells Retain High Viability and Disease Phenotype in Alginate Encapsulated Spheroid Cultures.Cancers · 2021Article
- Bias in RNA-seq Library Preparation: Current Challenges and Solutions.BioMed research international · 2021Review
- Impact of mouse contamination in genomic profiling of patient-derived models and best practice for robust analysis.Genome biology · 2019Article
- Monitoring HIV DNA and cellular activation markers in HIV-infected humanized mice under cART.Virology journal · 2018Article
- Humanized TREM2 mice reveal microglia-intrinsic and -extrinsic effects of R47H polymorphism.The Journal of experimental medicine · 2018Article
- Article
- A Novel Tandem Duplication Assay to Detect Minimal Residual Disease in FLT3/ITD AML.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2015Article
- Human stromal cells are required for an anti-breast cancer effect of zoledronic acid.Oncotarget · 2015Article
- Ability to Generate Patient-Derived Breast Cancer Xenografts Is Enhanced in Chemoresistant Disease and Predicts Poor Patient Outcomes.PloS one · 2015Article
- Are special read alignment strategies necessary and cost-effective when handling sequencing reads from patient-derived tumor xenografts?BMC genomics · 2014Article
- The role of replicates for error mitigation in next-generation sequencing.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2014Review
- New cast for a new era: preclinical cancer drug development revisited.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2013Review
- Origin of the vasculature supporting growth of primary patient tumor xenografts.Journal of translational medicine · 2013Article
- Third-generation sequencing techniques and applications to drug discovery.Expert opinion on drug discovery · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Human cancer cell lines and xenografts are valuable samples for whole-genome sequencing of human cancer. Tumors can be maintained by serial xenografting in athymic (nude) or severe combined immunodeficient (SCID) mice. In the current study, we developed a molecular assay to quantify the relative contributions of human and mouse in mixed DNA samples. The assay was designed based on deletion/insertion variation between human and mouse genomes. The percentage of mouse DNA was calculated according to the relative peak heights of PCR products analyzed by capillary electrophoresis. Three markers from chromosomes 9 and 10 accurately predicted the mouse genome ratio and were combined into a multiplex PCR reaction. We used the assay to quantify the relative DNA amounts of 93 mouse xenografts used for a recently reported integrated genomic analysis of human pancreatic cancer. Of the 93 xenografts, the mean percentage of contaminating mouse DNA was 47%, ranging from 17% to 73%, with 43% of samples having >50% mouse DNA. We then comprehensively compared the human and mouse genomes to identify 370 additional candidate gene loci demonstrating human-mouse length variation. With increasing whole-genome sequencing of human cancers, this assay should be useful to monitor strategies to enrich human cancer cells from mixed human-mouse cell xenografts. Finally, we discuss how contaminating mouse DNA affects next-generation DNA sequencing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.