ReviewEXCLI journal2025
Breast cancer preclinical models: a vital resource for comprehending disease mechanisms and therapeutic development.
Review in EXCLI journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Host-Derived Proteomic Profiling of Human and Canine Mammary Tumor Xenografts Identifies Enrichment of Lipid Metabolism-Related Pathways.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Article
- Trastuzumab-Conjugated Nanoliposomes for Targeted Capecitabine Delivery to Suppress HER2-Positive Breast Tumor: Efficacy Analysis in NOD SCID Mice Xenografts.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Article
- Natural supplements in breast cancer therapy: translational evidence, clinical safety, and emerging challenges.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A significant obstacle in translating innovative breast cancer treatments from bench to bed side is demonstrating efficacy in preclinical settings prior to clinical trials, as the heterogeneity of breast cancer can be challenging to replicate in the laboratory. A significant number of potential medicines have not progressed to clinical trials because preclinical models inadequately replicate the complexities of the varied tumor microenvironment. Consequently, the variety of breast cancer models is extensive, and the selection of a model frequently depends on the specific inquiry presented. This review aims to present an overview of the existing breast cancer models, highlighting their advantages, limitations, and challenges in the context of innovative drug discovery, thereby offering insights that may be advantageous to future translational studies. Conventional monolayer cultures are critical for elucidating the different breast cancer types and their behavior, have limitations in adequately replicating tumor environments. The 3D models such as patient-derived xenografts, cell-derived xenografts and genetically engineered models offer better insights by maintaining tumor microenvironments and cellular heterogeneity. Results can be further enhanced when compared with breast epithelial cells, a negative control to determine early stages by investigating differences between healthy and cancerous mammary cells. While cell lines such as MCF-7, MDA-MB-231 etc are useful
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.