ArticleNeuro-oncology2021
Experimental design of preclinical experiments: number of PDX lines vs subsampling within PDX lines.
Article in Neuro-oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Anti-tumor activity of valproic acid in EBV-positive Burkitt lymphoma via PFN2-associated PI3K/AKT pathway repression.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumors and the Role of Androgen Receptors.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Optimizing Drug Response Study Design in Patient-Derived Tumor Xenografts.Cancer informatics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAppropriately designed preclinical patient-derived xenograft (PDX) experiments are important to accurately inform human clinical trials. There is little experimental design guidance regarding choosing the number of PDX lines to study, and the number of mice within each PDX line.
methodsRetrospective data from IDH-wildtype glioblastoma preclinical experiments evaluating a uniform regimen of fractionated radiation (RT), temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy, and concurrent RT/TMZ across 27 PDX lines were used to evaluate experimental designs and empirically estimate statistical power for ANOVA and Cox regression.
resultsIncreasing the number of PDX lines resulted in more precise and reproducible estimates of effect size. To achieve 80% statistical power using ANOVA, experiments using a single PDX line required subsampling of 6 mice per PDX for each treatment group to detect a difference in survival of 135 days, and 9 mice per PDX to detect a difference of 100 days. Alternatively, a design that used 10 PDX lines had greater than 80% power to detect a difference of 135 days with a single mouse per PDX per treatment group, a difference of 100 days with 2 mice per PDX per treatment, and 35 days with more than 10 mice per PDX per treatment. Power for Cox regression was slightly smaller than ANOVA for very small experiments regardless of effect size and slightly higher than ANOVA for detecting a smaller effect size of 35 days difference in survival for moderate-to-large experiments.
conclusionsExperimental designs using few mice across many PDX lines can provide robust results and account for inter-tumor variability.
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.