Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31207870›Full record

ArticleCells2019

Establishment of Novel Gastric Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts and Cell Lines: Pathological Comparison between Primary Tumor, Patient-Derived, and Cell-Line Derived Xenografts.

Takeshi Kuwata, Kazuyoshi Yanagihara, Yuki Iino, Teruo Komatsu, Atsushi Ochiai, Shigeki Sekine, Hirokazu Taniguchi, Hitoshi Katai, Takahiro Kinoshita, Atsushi Ohtsu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cells, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Cholinergic Mechanisms in Gastrointestinal Neoplasia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Takeshi KuwataDepartment of Pathology and Clinical Laboratories, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan. tkuwata@east.ncc.go.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-0044-953X
Kazuyoshi YanagiharaDivision of Biomarker Discovery, EPOC, National Cancer Center, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan. kyanagih@east.ncc.go.jp.
Yuki IinoDivision of Biomarker Discovery, EPOC, National Cancer Center, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan. yuiino@east.ncc.go.jp.
Teruo KomatsuDivision of Biomarker Discovery, EPOC, National Cancer Center, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan. tkomatsu@east.ncc.go.jp.
Atsushi OchiaiDivision of Biomarker Discovery, EPOC, National Cancer Center, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan. aochiai@east.ncc.go.jp.
Shigeki SekineDepartment of Pathology and Clinical Laboratories, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan. ssekine@ncc.go.jp.
Hirokazu TaniguchiDepartment of Pathology and Clinical Laboratories, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan. hitanigu@ncc.go.jp.
Hitoshi KataiDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan. hkatai@ncc.go.jp.
Takahiro KinoshitaDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa 277-8577 Japan. takkinos@east.ncc.go.jp.
Atsushi OhtsuDirector, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan. aohtsu@east.ncc.go.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models have been recognized as being more suitable for predicting therapeutic efficacy than cell-culture models. However, there are several limitations in applying PDX models in preclinical studies, including their availability-especially for cancers such as gastric cancer-that are not frequently encountered in Western countries. In addition, the differences in morphology between primary, PDX, and tumor cell line-derived xenograft (CDX) models have not been well established. In this study, we aimed to establish a series of gastric cancer PDXs and cell-lines from a relatively large number of gastric cancer patients. We also investigated the clinicopathological factors associated with the establishment of PDX and CDX models, and compared the histology between the primary tumor, PDX, and CDX that originated from the same patient. We engrafted 232 gastric cancer tissues into immune-deficient mice subcutaneously and successfully established 35 gastric cancer PDX models (15.1% success rate). Differentiated type adenocarcinomas (DAs, 19.4%) were more effectively established than poorly differentiated type adenocarcinomas (PDAs, 10.8%). For establishing CDXs, the success rate was less influenced by histological differentiation grade (DA vs. PDA, 12.1% vs. 9.8%). In addition, concordance of histological differentiation grade between primary tumors and PDXs was significant (

Indexed as

Xenograft Model Antitumor AssaysAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnimalsCell DifferentiationCell Line, TumorFemaleHumansMaleMice, SCIDMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingPhenotypeStomach Neoplasmscell linegastric cancerpathologypatient-derived xenograft

Identifiers

PMID31207870
PMCPMC6627523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.