Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30446898›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2019

International experience in the development of patient-derived xenograft models of diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma.

Maria Tsoli, Han Shen, Chelsea Mayoh, Laura Franshaw, Anahid Ehteda, Danielle Upton, Diana Carvalho, Maria Vinci, Michael H Meel, Dannis van Vuurden and 24 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Frontiers in oncology · 2021
    Review
  17. The impact of initial tumor microenvironment on imaging phenotype.Cancer treatment and research communications · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

34 authors at 17 institutions in 8 countries.

Maria TsoliChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Han ShenChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Chelsea MayohChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Laura FranshawChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Anahid EhtedaChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Danielle UptonChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Diana CarvalhoDivisions of Molecular Pathology and Cancer Therapeutics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Maria VinciDivisions of Molecular Pathology and Cancer Therapeutics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Michael H MeelDepartment of Pediatric Oncology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Dannis van VuurdenDepartment of Pediatric Oncology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Alexander PlessierUnite Mixte de Recherche 8203 du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) et Departement de Cancerologie de l'Enfant et de l'Adolescent, Gustave Roussy et Universite Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
David CastelUnite Mixte de Recherche 8203 du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) et Departement de Cancerologie de l'Enfant et de l'Adolescent, Gustave Roussy et Universite Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
Rachid DrissiBrain Tumor Center, Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Michael FarrellHistopathology Department, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Jane CryanHistopathology Department, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Darach CrimminsDepartment of Neurosurgery, Temple Street Children's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
John CairdDepartment of Neurosurgery, Temple Street Children's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Jane PearsOur Lady's Children's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Stephanie FrancisKids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Louise E A LudlowMurdoch Children's Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Andrea CaraiNeurosurgery Unit, Department of Neuroscience and Neurorehabilitation, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Angela MastronuzziNeuro-Oncology Unit, Department of Hemato-Oncology, Cell and Gene Therapy, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Bing LiuChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Jordan HansfordMurdoch Children's Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Nick GottardoDepartment of Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Perth, WA, Australia.
Tim HassallLady Cilento Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Maria KirbyDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Maryam FouladiBrain Tumor Center, Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Cynthia HawkinsThe Arthur and Sonia Labatt Brain Tumour Research Centre, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Michelle MonjeStanford University and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Jacques GrillUnite Mixte de Recherche 8203 du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) et Departement de Cancerologie de l'Enfant et de l'Adolescent, Gustave Roussy et Universite Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
Chris JonesDivisions of Molecular Pathology and Cancer Therapeutics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Esther HullemanUnite Mixte de Recherche 8203 du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) et Departement de Cancerologie de l'Enfant et de l'Adolescent, Gustave Roussy et Universite Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
David S ZieglerChildren's Cancer Institute, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia. d.ziegler@unsw.edu.au.
Children's Cancer Institute Australia · AUInstitute of Cancer Research · GBAmsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLBambino Gesù Children's Hospital · ITBeaumont Hospital · IECentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USInstitut Gustave Roussy · FRMurdoch Children's Research Institute · AUSydney Children's Hospital · AUTemple Street Children's University Hospital · IEOur Lady's Hospital · IEPrincess Margaret Hospital for Children · AUQueensland Children’s Hospital · AUSickKids Foundation · CAStanford University · USWomen's and Children's Hospital · AU

Funding

Cancer Research UK 13982Cancer Research UK 23536
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDiffuse intrinsic pontine glioma is the most aggressive form of high grade glioma in children with no effective therapies. There have been no improvements in survival in part due poor understanding of underlying biology, and lack of representative in vitro and in vivo models. Recently, it has been found feasible to use both biopsy and autopsy tumors to generate cultures and xenograft models.

methodsTo further model development, we evaluated the collective international experience from 8 collaborating centers to develop DIPG pre-clinical models from patient-derived autopsies and biopsies. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to determine key factors associated with the success of in vitro and in vivo PDX development.

resultsIn vitro cultures were successfully established from 57% of samples (84.2% of biopsies and 38.2% of autopsies). Samples transferred in DMEM media were more likely to establish successful culture than those transported in Hibernate A. In vitro cultures were more successful from biopsies (84.2%) compared with autopsies (38.2%) and as monolayer on laminin-coated plates than as neurospheres. Primary cultures successfully established from autopsy samples were more likely to engraft in animal models than cultures established from biopsies (86.7% vs. 47.4%). Collectively, tumor engraftment was more successful when DIPG samples were directly implanted in mice (68%), rather than after culturing (40.7%).

conclusionThis multi-center study provides valuable information on the success rate of establishing patient-derived pre-clinical models of DIPG. The results can lead to further optimization of DIPG model development and ultimately assist in the investigation of new therapies for this aggressive pediatric brain tumor.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrain Stem NeoplasmsCells, CulturedCell SurvivalDisease Models, AnimalGliomaHistonesHumansMiceMutationRetrospective StudiesXenograft Model Antitumor AssaysHistonesBrainstem gliomaDIPGH3K27MNeurospheresPatient-derived xenograftsPDX

Identifiers

PMID30446898
OpenAlexW2901308104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.