ReviewEBioMedicine2021
Mimicking and surpassing the xenograft model with cancer-on-chip technology.
Review in EBioMedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Drug Screening of Primary Human Endometriotic Cells Based on Micro-Encapsulating Microfluidic Chip.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Tumor Microenvironment On-A-Chip and Single-Cell Analysis Reveal Synergistic Stromal-Immune Crosstalk on Breast Cancer Progression.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Microphysiological Systems for Cancer Immunotherapy Research and Development.Advanced biology · 2024Review
- Towards a New 3Rs Era in the construction of 3D cell culture models simulating tumor microenvironment.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- The Effect of Dynamic, In Vivo-like Oxaliplatin on HCT116 Spheroids in a Cancer-on-Chip Model Is Representative of the Response in Xenografts.Micromachines · 2022Article
- Bioprinting and its Use in Tumor-On-A-Chip Technology for Cancer Drug Screening: A Review.International journal of bioprinting · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Organs-on-chips are in vitro models in which human tissues are cultured in microfluidic compartments with a controlled, dynamic micro-environment. Specific organs-on-chips are being developed to mimic human tumors, but the validation of such 'cancer-on-chip' models for use in drug development is hampered by the complexity and variability of human tumors. An important step towards validation of cancer-on-chip technology could be to first mimic cancer xenograft models, which share multiple characteristics with human cancers but are significantly less complex. Here we review the relevant biological characteristics of a xenograft tumor and show that organ-on-chip technology is capable of mimicking many of these aspects. Actual comparisons between on-chip tumor growth and xenografts are promising but also demonstrate that further development and empirical validation is still needed. Validation of cancer-on-chip models to xenografts would not only represent an important milestone towards acceptance of cancer-on-chip technology, but could also improve drug discovery, personalized cancer medicine, and reduce animal testing.
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.