ArticlePeerJ2019
Factors that influence response classifications in chemotherapy treated patient-derived xenografts (PDX).
Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Co-occurrence of transcriptionally distinct persister cell states underpins neoadjuvant therapy resistance in triple‑negative breast cancer.Genome medicine · 2026Article
- Development of an automated 3D high content cell screening platform for organoid phenotyping.SLAS discovery : advancing life sciences R & D · 2024Article
- Unlocking Translational Potential: Conditionally Reprogrammed Cells in Advancing Breast Cancer Research.Cells · 2023Review
- A Molecularly Characterized Preclinical Platform of Subcutaneous Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Patient-Derived Xenograft Models to Evaluate Novel Treatment Strategies.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Patient-Derived Xenografts of High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Subtype as a Powerful Tool in Pre-Clinical Research.Cancers · 2021Article
- Conditional reprogramming: Modeling urological cancer and translation to clinics.Clinical and translational medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, we investigated the impact of initial tumor volume, rate of tumor growth, cohort size, study duration, and data analysis method on chemotherapy treatment response classifications in patient-derived xenografts (PDXs). The analyses were conducted on cisplatin treatment response data for 70 PDX models representing ten cancer types with up to 28-day study duration and cohort sizes of 3-10 tumor-bearing mice. The results demonstrated that a 21-day dosing study using a cohort size of eight was necessary to reliably detect responsive models (i.e., tumor volume ratio of treated animals to control between 0.1 and 0.42)-independent of analysis method. A cohort of three tumor-bearing animals led to a reliable classification of models that were both highly responsive and highly nonresponsive to cisplatin (i.e., tumor volume ratio of treated animals to control animals less than 0.10). In our set of PDXs, we found that tumor growth rate in the control group impacted treatment response classification more than initial tumor volume. We repeated the study design factors using docetaxel treated PDXs with consistent results. Our results highlight the importance of defining endpoints for PDX dosing studies when deciding the size of cohorts to use in dosing studies and illustrate that response classifications for a study do not differ significantly across the commonly used analysis methods that are based on tumor volume changes in treatment versus control groups.
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.