ReviewSeminars in radiation oncology2015
Patient-Derived Xenografts as a Model System for Radiation Research.
Review in Seminars in radiation oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- MARCKS as a mediator and target for pathological tunneling nanotubes between patient-derived glioblastoma cells and astrocytes.Cell death & disease · 2026Article
- The roles of patient-derived xenograft models and artificial intelligence toward precision medicine.MedComm · 2024Review
- Radiation Sensitivity: The Rise of Predictive Patient-Derived Cancer Models.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2023Review
- Translation of DNA Damage Response Inhibitors as Chemoradiation Sensitizers From the Laboratory to the Clinic.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2021Article
- Review
- Towards an Image-Informed Mathematical Model of In Vivo Response to Fractionated Radiation Therapy.Cancers · 2021Article
- N-cadherin upregulation mediates adaptive radioresistance in glioblastoma.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2021Article
- Understanding cell-cell communication and signaling in the colorectal cancer microenvironment.Clinical and translational medicine · 2021Review
- Cancer Explant Models.Current topics in microbiology and immunology · 2021Article
- A cell-penetrating MARCKS mimetic selectively triggers cytolytic death in glioblastoma.Oncogene · 2020Article
- Automated microfluidic platform for dynamic and combinatorial drug screening of tumor organoids.Nature communications · 2020Article
- The Roles of Autophagy and Senescence in the Tumor Cell Response to Radiation.Radiation research · 2020Review
- Patient Derived Xenografts Expand Human Primary Pancreatic Tumor Tissue Availability forFrontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Review
- Human Organoids Share Structural and Genetic Features with Primary Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Tumors.Molecular cancer research : MCR · 2019Article
- Assessing effects of pressure on tumor and normal tissue physiology using an automated self-calibrated, pressure-sensing probe for diffuse reflectance spectroscopy.Journal of biomedical optics · 2018Article
- Increasing aggressiveness of patient-derived xenograft models of cervix carcinoma during serial transplantation.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- Relative biological effectiveness in proton beam therapy - Current knowledge and future challenges.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2018Review
- Article
- Current status and perspectives of patient-derived xenograft models in cancer research.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The cancer literature is filled with promising preclinical studies demonstrating impressive efficacy for new therapeutics, yet translation of these approaches into clinical successes has been rare, indicating that current methods used to predict efficacy are suboptimal. The most likely reason for the limitation of these studies is the disconnect between preclinical models and cancers treated in the clinic. Specifically, most preclinical models are poor representations of human disease. Immortalized cancer cell lines that dominate the cancer literature may be, in a sense, "paper tigers" that have been selected by decades of culture to be artificially driven by highly targetable proteins. Thus, although effective in treating these cell lines either in vitro or as artificial tumors transplanted from culture into experimental animals as xenografts, the identified therapies would likely underperform in a clinical setting. This inherent limitation applies not only to drug testing but also to experiments with radiation therapy. Indeed, traditional radiobiology methods rely on monolayer culture systems, with emphasis on colony formation and DNA damage assessment that may have limited clinical translation. As such, there has been keen interest in developing tumor explant systems in which patient tumors are directly transplanted into and solely maintained in vivo, using immunocompromised mice. These so-called patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) represent a robust model system that has been garnering support in academia and industry as a superior preclinical approach to drug testing. Likewise, PDX models have the potential to improve radiation research. In this review, we describe how PDX models are currently being used for both drug and radiation testing and how they can be incorporated into a translational research program.
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.