Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39811602›Full record

ReviewBreast cancer (Dove Medical Press)2025

Optimizing Xenograft Models for Breast Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of Cell-Derived and Patient-Derived Implantation Techniques in Pre-Clinical Research.

Astrid Feinisa Khairani, Shella Harmonia, Yoan Chou, Nayla Majeda Alfarafisa, Julia Ramadhanti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Role of circulating tumor cell clusters in breast cancer.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  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

5 authors.

Astrid Feinisa KhairaniDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-7242-4791
Shella HarmoniaUndergraduate Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.
Yoan ChouGraduate School of Master Program in Anti Aging and Aesthetic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.ORCID 0009-0004-9937-4746
Nayla Majeda AlfarafisaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0003-3817-763X
Julia RamadhantiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-5921-7624

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The high mortality rate of breast cancer motivates researchers to search for effective treatments. Due to their ability to simulate human conditions, xenograft models such as CDX (Cell line-Derived Xenografts) and PDX (Patient-Derived Xenografts) have gained popularity in pre-clinical research. The choice of xenograft technique is influenced by the type of tumor employed, particularly in more aggressive tumor models like TNBC with metastases. Subcutaneous or orthotopic implantation may influence tumor engraftment rates and the applicability of the models for drug testing. To optimize xenograft models and support the development of breast cancer drugs, selecting a suitable transplantation technique is essential to attaining the best results. Methods: This scoping review used PRISMA-Scr methodology to summarize findings from eleven articles published between 2012 and 2024 on pre-clinical trials related to xenograft models for breast cancer considering PDX began traction after 2010. Using specific criteria, the review included studies from electronic platforms. The inclusion criteria ensured relevant English sources were available in full text, while the exclusion criteria eliminated certain types of articles and inadequately comprehensive studies. Results: Subcutaneous and orthotopic implantation are critical methods for xenograft models in cancer research. Subcutaneous implantation is less invasive and more manageable but does not fully mimic the tumor's natural environment. Orthotopic implantation accurately mimic the migration, invasion, and molecular characteristics of the original tumor, although the procedure is more complex and requires specialized techniques. The specific research objectives determine their choice, the need for accurate tumor replication, and the testing convenience. Conclusion: Orthotopic implantation is the preferable method for developing PDX and CDX models of breast cancer because it closely mimics the tumor microenvironment and metastatic behavior, yielding clinically relevant results for drug testing. Subcutaneous implantation may result in higher engraftment rates, but it cannot accurately represent the complexity of tumors.

Indexed as

breast cancerimplantationorthotopicsubcutaneousxenograft

Identifiers

PMID39811602
PMCPMC11727321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.