Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22726358›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2012

Defining new criteria for selection of cell-based intestinal models using publicly available databases.

Jon Christensen, Sara El-Gebali, Manuela Natoli, Thierry Sengstag, Mauro Delorenzi, Susanne Bentz, Hanifa Bouzourene, Martin Rumbo, Armando Felsani, Sanna Siissalo and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Wine Pomace Product InhibitFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.

Jon Christensen1Institute for Macromolecular Chemistry and Center for Biological Signaling Studies (BIOSS), University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Sara El-Gebali
Manuela Natoli
Thierry Sengstag
Mauro Delorenzi
Susanne Bentz
Hanifa Bouzourene
Martin Rumbo
Armando Felsani
Sanna Siissalo
Jouni Hirvonen
Maya R Vila
Piercarlo Saletti
Michel Aguet
Pascale Anderle
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CHInstitute of Cell Biology and Neurobiology · ITUniversity of Bern · CHUniversity of Helsinki · FILeitat Technological Center · ESOspedale regionale di Lugano · CHRIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences · JPSIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics · CHUniversidad Nacional de La Plata · ARUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CHUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe criteria for choosing relevant cell lines among a vast panel of available intestinal-derived lines exhibiting a wide range of functional properties are still ill-defined. The objective of this study was, therefore, to establish objective criteria for choosing relevant cell lines to assess their appropriateness as tumor models as well as for drug absorption studies.

resultsWe made use of publicly available expression signatures and cell based functional assays to delineate differences between various intestinal colon carcinoma cell lines and normal intestinal epithelium. We have compared a panel of intestinal cell lines with patient-derived normal and tumor epithelium and classified them according to traits relating to oncogenic pathway activity, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and stemness, migratory properties, proliferative activity, transporter expression profiles and chemosensitivity. For example, SW480 represent an EMT-high, migratory phenotype and scored highest in terms of signatures associated to worse overall survival and higher risk of recurrence based on patient derived databases. On the other hand, differentiated HT29 and T84 cells showed gene expression patterns closest to tumor bulk derived cells. Regarding drug absorption, we confirmed that differentiated Caco-2 cells are the model of choice for active uptake studies in the small intestine. Regarding chemosensitivity we were unable to confirm a recently proposed association of chemo-resistance with EMT traits. However, a novel signature was identified through mining of NCI60 GI50 values that allowed to rank the panel of intestinal cell lines according to their drug responsiveness to commonly used chemotherapeutics.

conclusionsThis study presents a straightforward strategy to exploit publicly available gene expression data to guide the choice of cell-based models. While this approach does not overcome the major limitations of such models, introducing a rank order of selected features may allow selecting model cell lines that are more adapted and pertinent to the addressed biological question.

Indexed as

Databases, GeneticModels, BiologicalAntineoplastic AgentsCaco-2 CellsCell DifferentiationCell Line, TumorColonic NeoplasmsDrug Resistance, NeoplasmEpithelial-Mesenchymal TransitionGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHT29 CellsHumansIntestinal MucosaPrincipal Component AnalysisAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID22726358
PMCPMC3412164
OpenAlexW2131525177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.