ReviewCancer metastasis reviews2021
Current methods in translational cancer research.
Review in Cancer metastasis reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fluorescently engineered KRAS-mutant organoids as versatile tools for in vitro and in vivo cancer modeling.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Interpreting cancer genetics through a two-step "evolutionary cascade hypothesis": bridging neutral and selective perspectives.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Tumor-derived systems as novel biomedical tools-turning the enemy into an ally.Biomaterials research · 2023Review
- Review
- Current methods for studying metastatic potential of tumor cells.Cancer cell international · 2022Review
- Heparin-Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles for Theranostic Applications.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Correlation between Patient-Derived Xenograft Modeling and Prognosis in Osteosarcoma.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- Review
- Modeling the Tumor Microenvironment of Ovarian Cancer: The Application of Self-Assembling Biomaterials.Cancers · 2021Review
- Three-Dimensional Culture Models to Study Innate Anti-Tumor Immune Response: Advantages and Disadvantages.Cancers · 2021Review
- The In Vivo Selection Method in Breast Cancer Metastasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Twelve unanswered questions in cancer inspired by the life and work of Leland Chung: "if this is true, what does it imply"?American journal of clinical and experimental urology · 2021Article
- Implementing targeted therapies in the treatment of glioblastoma: Previous shortcomings, future promises, and a multimodal strategy recommendation.Neuro-oncology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent developments in pre-clinical screening tools, that more reliably predict the clinical effects and adverse events of candidate therapeutic agents, has ushered in a new era of drug development and screening. However, given the rapid pace with which these models have emerged, the individual merits of these translational research tools warrant careful evaluation in order to furnish clinical researchers with appropriate information to conduct pre-clinical screening in an accelerated and rational manner. This review assesses the predictive utility of both well-established and emerging pre-clinical methods in terms of their suitability as a screening platform for treatment response, ability to represent pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug properties, and lastly debates the translational limitations and benefits of these models. To this end, we will describe the current literature on cell culture, organoids, in vivo mouse models, and in silico computational approaches. Particular focus will be devoted to discussing gaps and unmet needs in the literature as well as current advancements and innovations achieved in the field, such as co-clinical trials and future avenues for refinement.
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.