ArticleScientific reports2015
High efficacy vasopermeability drug candidates identified by screening in an ex ovo chorioallantoic membrane model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Proteomic Analysis of Chicken Chorioallantoic Membrane (CAM) during Embryonic Development Provides Functional Insight.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Exploitation of the chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) as a platform for anti-metastatic drug testing.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Upcoming Revolutionary Paths in Preclinical Modeling of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
- The chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) as a versatile patient-derived xenograft (PDX) platform for precision medicine and preclinical research.American journal of cancer research · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of rodent models to evaluate efficacy during testing is accompanied by significant economic and regulatory hurdles which compound the costs of screening for promising drug candidates. Vasopermeation Enhancement Agents (VEAs) are a new class of biologics that are designed to increase the uptake of cancer therapeutics at the tumor site by modifying vascular permeability in the tumor to increase the therapeutic index of co-administered drugs. To evaluate the efficacy of a panel of VEA clinical candidates, we compared the rodent Miles assay to an equivalent assay in the ex ovo chicken embryo model. Both model systems identified the same candidate (PVL 10) as the most active promoter of vasopermeation in non-tumor tissues. An ex ovo chicken embryo system was utilized to test each candidate VEA in two human tumor models at a range of concentrations. Vasopermeation activity due to VEA was dependent on tumor type, with HEp3 tumors displaying higher levels of vasopermeation than MDA-MB-435. One candidate (PVL 10) proved optimal for HEp3 tumors and another (PVL 2) for MDA-MB-435. The use of the ex ovo chicken embryo model provides a rapid and less costly alternative to the use of rodent models for preclinical screening of drug candidates.
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.