Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24885658›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2014

Gene expression profiling of 49 human tumor xenografts from in vitro culture through multiple in vivo passages--strategies for data mining in support of therapeutic studies.

Melinda G Hollingshead, Luke H Stockwin, Sergio Y Alcoser, Dianne L Newton, Benjamin C Orsburn, Carrie A Bonomi, Suzanne D Borgel, Raymond Divelbiss, Kelly M Dougherty, Elizabeth J Hager and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Alteration of Epigenetic Regulation by Long Noncoding RNAs in Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Review
  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

18 authors.

Melinda G HollingsheadBiological Testing Branch, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, 1050 Boyles Street, Building 1043, Room 11, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. hollingm@mail.nih.gov.
Luke H Stockwin
Sergio Y Alcoser
Dianne L Newton
Benjamin C Orsburn
Carrie A Bonomi
Suzanne D Borgel
Raymond Divelbiss
Kelly M Dougherty
Elizabeth J Hager
Susan L Holbeck
Gurmeet Kaur
David J Kimmel
Mark W Kunkel
Angelena Millione
Michael E Mullendore
Howard Stotler
Jerry Collins

Funding

CCR NIH HHS HHSN261200800001CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261200800001E
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDevelopment of cancer therapeutics partially depends upon selection of appropriate animal models. Therefore, improvements to model selection are beneficial.

resultsForty-nine human tumor xenografts at in vivo passages 1, 4 and 10 were subjected to cDNA microarray analysis yielding a dataset of 823 Affymetrix HG-U133 Plus 2.0 arrays. To illustrate mining strategies supporting therapeutic studies, transcript expression was determined: 1) relative to other models, 2) with successive in vivo passage, and 3) during the in vitro to in vivo transition. Ranking models according to relative transcript expression in vivo has the potential to improve initial model selection. For example, combining p53 tumor expression data with mutational status could guide selection of tumors for therapeutic studies of agents where p53 status purportedly affects efficacy (e.g., MK-1775). The utility of monitoring changes in gene expression with extended in vivo tumor passages was illustrated by focused studies of drug resistance mediators and receptor tyrosine kinases. Noteworthy observations included a significant decline in HCT-15 colon xenograft ABCB1 transporter expression and increased expression of the kinase KIT in A549 with serial passage. These trends predict sensitivity to agents such as paclitaxel (ABCB1 substrate) and imatinib (c-KIT inhibitor) would be altered with extended passage. Given that gene expression results indicated some models undergo profound changes with in vivo passage, a general metric of stability was generated so models could be ranked accordingly. Lastly, changes occurring during transition from in vitro to in vivo growth may have important consequences for therapeutic studies since targets identified in vitro could be over- or under-represented when tumor cells adapt to in vivo growth. A comprehensive list of mouse transcripts capable of cross-hybridizing with human probe sets on the HG-U133 Plus 2.0 array was generated. Removal of the murine artifacts followed by pairwise analysis of in vitro cells with respective passage 1 xenografts and GO analysis illustrates the complex interplay that each model has with the host microenvironment.

conclusionsThis study provides strategies to aid selection of xenograft models for therapeutic studies. These data highlight the dynamic nature of xenograft models and emphasize the importance of maintaining passage consistency throughout experiments.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsCell Line, TumorCisplatinCluster AnalysisDrug Resistance, NeoplasmFemaleGene Expression RegulationHumansMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMice, NudeNeoplasmsOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPaclitaxelAntineoplastic AgentsCisplatinPaclitaxelPTGER2 protein, humanReceptor Protein-Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, Prostaglandin E, EP2 Subtype

Identifiers

PMID24885658
PMCPMC4041995

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.