ArticlePloS one2017
Microfluidic Biopsy Trapping Device for the Real-Time Monitoring of Tumor Microenvironment.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microfluidic lung cancer models: Bridging clinical treatment strategies and tumor microenvironment recapitulation.APL bioengineering · 2025Review
- Insights on Three Dimensional Organoid Studies for Stem Cell Therapy in Regenerative Medicine.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2024Review
- Spheroids and organoids derived from colorectal cancer as tools forExploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2024Review
- Progress and application of lung-on-a-chip for lung cancer.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Cancer 3D Models for Metallodrug Preclinical Testing.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- 3D Models as a Tool to Assess the Anti-Tumor Efficacy of Therapeutic Antibodies: Advantages and Limitations.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Patient-Derived In Vitro and In Vivo Models of Cancer.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Microdissected Tissue vs Tissue Slices-A Comparative Study of Tumor Explant Models Cultured On-Chip and Off-Chip.Cancers · 2021Article
- 3D Printed Monolithic Device for the Microfluidic Capture, Perfusion, and Analysis of Multicellular Spheroids.Frontiers in medical technology · 2021Article
- Microfluidics for interrogating live intact tissues.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2020Review
- The Tumor-on-Chip: Recent Advances in the Development of Microfluidic Systems to Recapitulate the Physiology of Solid Tumors.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Modelling cancer in microfluidic human organs-on-chips.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2019Review
- Addressing Patient Specificity in the Engineering of Tumor Models.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2019Review
- Luminescent nanomaterials for droplet tracking in a microfluidic trapping array.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2019Article
- Microfluidics in Malignant Glioma Research and Precision Medicine.Advanced biosystems · 2018Article
- Halfway between 2D and Animal Models: Are 3D Cultures the Ideal Tool to Study Cancer-Microenvironment Interactions?International journal of molecular sciences · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The tumor microenvironment is composed of cellular and stromal components such as tumor cells, mesenchymal cells, immune cells, cancer associated fibroblasts and the supporting extracellular matrix. The tumor microenvironment provides crucial support for growth and progression of tumor cells and affects tumor response to therapeutic interventions. To better understand tumor biology and to develop effective cancer therapeutic agents it is important to develop preclinical platforms that can faithfully recapitulate the tumor microenvironment and the complex interaction between the tumor and its surrounding stromal elements. Drug studies performed in vitro with conventional two-dimensional cancer cell line models do not optimally represent clinical drug response as they lack true tumor heterogeneity and are often performed in static culture conditions lacking stromal tumor components that significantly influence the metabolic activity and proliferation of cells. Recent microfluidic approaches aim to overcome such obstacles with the use of cell lines derived in artificial three-dimensional supportive gels or micro-chambers. However, absence of a true tumor microenvironment and full interstitial flow, leads to less than optimal evaluation of tumor response to drug treatment. Here we report a continuous perfusion microfluidic device coupled with microscopy and image analysis for the assessment of drug effects on intact fresh tumor tissue. We have demonstrated that fine needle aspirate biopsies obtained from patient-derived xenograft models of adenocarcinoma of the lung can successfully be analyzed for their response to ex vivo drug treatment within this biopsy trapping microfluidic device, wherein a protein kinase C inhibitor, staurosporine, was used to assess tumor cell death as a proof of principle. This approach has the potential to study tumor tissue within its intact microenvironment to better understand tumor response to drug treatments and eventually to choose the most effective drug and drug combination for individual patients in a cost effective and timely manner.
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.