Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33806933›Full record

ReviewCells2021

Contemporary Mouse Models in Glioma Research.

William H Hicks, Cylaina E Bird, Jeffrey I Traylor, Diana D Shi, Tarek Y El Ahmadieh, Timothy E Richardson, Samuel K McBrayer, Kalil G Abdullah

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Modeling pediatric brain tumors with human stem cells.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A clinically relevant model and method to study necrosis as a driving force in glioma restructuring and progression.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

William H HicksDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75235, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2689-3199
Cylaina E BirdDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75235, USA.
Jeffrey I TraylorDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75235, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1749-8143
Diana D ShiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Tarek Y El AhmadiehDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75235, USA.
Timothy E RichardsonDepartment of Pathology, Glenn Biggs Institute for Alzheimer's and Neurodegenerative Diseases, University of Texas Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 75229, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7068-5517
Samuel K McBrayerChildren's Medical Center Research Institute, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, USA.
Kalil G AbdullahDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75235, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5662-0829
Neurological Surgery · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USChildren's Medical Center · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · US

Funding

Novel Approaches to Modeling and Treating IDH1 Mutant GliomaK22CA237752 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI MCBRAYER, SAMUEL KENT · 2019 to 2021
$494k
Burroughs Wellcome Fund n/aCancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas RR190034Eugene P. Frenkel, M.D. Endowed Scholar Program n/aNCI NIH HHS K22 CA237752NCI NIH HHS K22CA237752
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite advances in understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of glioma, outcomes remain dismal. Developing successful treatments for glioma requires faithful in vivo disease modeling and rigorous preclinical testing. Murine models, including xenograft, syngeneic, and genetically engineered models, are used to study glioma-genesis, identify methods of tumor progression, and test novel treatment strategies. Since the discovery of highly recurrent isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutations in lower-grade gliomas, there is increasing emphasis on effective modeling of IDH mutant brain tumors. Improvements in preclinical models that capture the phenotypic and molecular heterogeneity of gliomas are critical for the development of effective new therapies. Herein, we explore the current status, advancements, and challenges with contemporary murine glioma models.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalGenetic EngineeringGliomaMiceMutationXenograft Model Antitumor Assaysgenetically engineered mouse models (GEMM)gliomaisocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)mouse modelpatient-derived xenograft (PDX)

Identifiers

PMID33806933
PMCPMC8004772
OpenAlexW3135382570

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.