Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37111355›Full record

ArticlePharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Zebrafish Patient-Derived Xenograft Model as a Preclinical Platform for Uveal Melanoma Drug Discovery.

Jie Yin, Gangyin Zhao, Helen Kalirai, Sarah E Coupland, Aart G Jochemsen, Gabriel Forn-Cuní, Annemijn P A Wierenga, Martine J Jager, B Ewa Snaar-Jagalska, Arwin Groenewoud

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Zebrafish live imaging: a strong weapon in anticancer drug discovery and development.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jie YinInstitute of Biology, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-6327-4273
Gangyin ZhaoInstitute of Biology, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands.
Helen KaliraiLiverpool Ocular Oncology Research Centre, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.
Sarah E CouplandLiverpool Ocular Oncology Research Centre, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1464-2069
Aart G JochemsenDepartment of Cell and Chemical Biology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0570-7967
Gabriel Forn-CuníInstitute of Biology, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5976-4759
Annemijn P A WierengaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3537-3662
Martine J JagerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2261-3820
B Ewa Snaar-JagalskaInstitute of Biology, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands.
Arwin GroenewoudInstitute of Biology, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare malignant cancer of the eye, with up to 50% of patients dying from metastasis, for which no effective treatment is available. Due to the rarity of the disease, there is a great need to harness the limited material available from primary tumors and metastases for advanced research and preclinical drug screening. We established a platform to isolate, preserve, and transiently recover viable tissues, followed by the generation of spheroid cultures derived from primary UM. All assessed tumor-derived samples formed spheroids in culture within 24 h and stained positive for melanocyte-specific markers, indicating the retention of their melanocytic origin. These short-lived spheroids were only maintained for the duration of the experiment (7 days) or re-established from frozen tumor tissue acquired from the same patient. Intravenous injection of fluorescently labeled UM cells derived from these spheroids into zebrafish yielded a reproducible metastatic phenotype and recapitulated molecular features of the disseminating UM. This approach allowed for the experimental replications required for reliable drug screening (at least 2 individual biological experiments, with

Indexed as

drug screeningdrug toxicityeyeoncologyuveal melanomaxenograftzebrafish

Identifiers

PMID37111355
PMCPMC10141637
OpenAlexW4366091071

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.