Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32483457›Full record

ArticleTheranostics2020

Comparative study of preclinical mouse models of high-grade glioma for nanomedicine research: the importance of reproducing blood-brain barrier heterogeneity.

Caterina Brighi, Lee Reid, Laura A Genovesi, Marija Kojic, Amanda Millar, Zara Bruce, Alison L White, Bryan W Day, Stephen Rose, Andrew K Whittaker and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Theranostics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Caterina BrighiAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Lee ReidAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Laura A GenovesiInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Marija KojicInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Amanda MillarInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Zara BruceDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Alison L WhiteAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Bryan W DayDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Stephen RoseAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Andrew K WhittakerAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Simon PuttickAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
University of Queensland · AURoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital · AUAustralian e-Health Research Centre · AUQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AUQueensland University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical translation of new nanoparticle-based therapies for high-grade glioma (HGG) remains extremely poor. This has partly been due to the lack of suitable preclinical mouse models capable of replicating the complex characteristics of recurrent HGG (rHGG), namely the heterogeneous structural and functional characteristics of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). The goal of this study is to compare the characteristics of the tumor BBB of rHGG with two different mouse models of HGG, the ubiquitously used U87 cell line xenograft model and a patient-derived cell line WK1 xenograft model, in order to assess their suitability for nanomedicine research.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlood-Brain BarrierBrain NeoplasmsCapillary PermeabilityCell Line, TumorDrug Delivery SystemsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalFemaleGliomaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiceMice, Inbred NODMice, SCIDNanomedicineNanoparticlesblood-brain barrierHigh-grade gliomananoparticle-based therapiespreclinical mouse modelvascular permeability

Identifiers

PMID32483457
PMCPMC7255036
OpenAlexW3028371813

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.