Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24603616›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

The use of ovarian cancer cells from patients undergoing surgery to generate primary cultures capable of undergoing functional analysis.

Rachel L O Donnell, Aiste McCormick, Asima Mukhopadhyay, Laura C Woodhouse, Madeleine Moat, Anna Grundy, Michelle Dixon, Angelika Kaufman, San Soohoo, Ahmed Elattar and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. From Donor to the Lab: A Fascinating Journey of Primary Cell Lines.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  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

12 authors.

Rachel L O DonnellNorthern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, United Kingdom; Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Aiste McCormickNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Asima MukhopadhyayNorthern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, United Kingdom; Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Laura C WoodhouseNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Madeleine MoatNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Anna GrundyNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Michelle DixonNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Angelika KaufmanNorthern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, United Kingdom; Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
San SoohooNorthern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, United Kingdom; Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Ahmed ElattarNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Nicola J CurtinNorthern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Richard J EdmondsonFaculty Institute for Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of cell lines or animal models has significant disadvantages when dealing with a set of heterogeneous diseases such as epithelial ovarian cancer. This has clinical relevance in that biomarkers developed using cell line or animal models are often not transferable to the clinical setting. In this study, we describe the development of a robust protocol for developing primary cultures of ovarian cancer which will overcome some of these difficulties. Women undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer were recruited and samples of ascites and solid tumour deposits were used to develop primary cultures. Cells were characterised using a panel of immunofluorescent antibodies prior to use in a variety of assays including functional assessment of DNA repair pathways. During the four year study period, viable cultures, confirmed to be epithelial in origin were generated from 156 of 172 (91%) cases recruited. Characterisation was carried out using a panel of antibodies including pancytokeratin, CA125, EpCAM, MOC-31, D2-40 and vimentin. Senescence occurred between the 2nd and 8th passages in all cultures except one in which spontaneous immortalization occurred. Cells could be successfully cultured even after a period of storage at 4°C and cultured cells were capable of being used for a variety of applications including functional assays. Upon functional assessment there was minimal intra-tumour heterogeneity. It is therefore possible to derive viable ovarian cancer cell cultures in the majority of patients undergoing surgery. Cells cultured directly from patient cancers provide an accurate and highly diverse model.

Indexed as

Antigens, NeoplasmAntineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialCell Culture TechniquesCell ProliferationDNA RepairDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorFemaleHumansIndolesNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialOvarian NeoplasmsPhenotypePrimary Cell CultureSpecimen HandlingTransfectionAntigens, NeoplasmAntineoplastic AgentsIndolesrucaparib

Identifiers

PMID24603616
PMCPMC3948341

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.