ArticleCancer research communications2025
Impact of Subcutaneous Versus Orthotopic Implantations on Patient-Derived Xenograft Transcriptomic Profiles.
Article in Cancer research communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Characterisation of Subcutaneous, Intraperitoneal and Intrabursal OVCAR3 Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- The molecular similarity landscape of preclinical cancer models to patient tumors.JCI insight · 2026Article
- Role of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in malignancies: current status and future prospects.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Experimental Models and Nanotechnology-Based Platforms in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: From Tumor Biology to Translational Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Comparative single-cell transcriptomics of orthotopic and subcutaneous gastric tumors reveal immune and stromal heterogeneity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Foundation models and deep learning for cancer drug response prediction: a framework for data, metrics, and validation.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Tumour Microenvironment-Informed Radiotheranostics: Why and How Nuclear Medicine Could Advance Precision Oncology in the Decade Ahead.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Harnessing PDX and PDX 2.0: the next-generation paradigm for precision oncology and translational breakthroughs.Molecular cancer · 2026Review
- Role of circulating tumor cell clusters in breast cancer.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2026Review
- Optimizing Xenograft Models for Breast Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of Cell-Derived and Patient-Derived Implantation Techniques in Pre-Clinical Research.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Review
- Genetic Alterations of NF-κB and Its Regulators: A Rich Platform to Advance Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) are essential preclinical models, capturing the histologic and molecular features of human tumors. Subcutaneous (s.c.) and orthotopic (ortho) PDXs are widely used, but their comparative utility remains unclear, especially regarding tumor and stromal gene expression. This study analyzed 45 matched s.c. and ortho PDX models spanning five cancer types using bulk RNA sequencing. Tumor (human) gene expression was highly conserved between s.c. and ortho PDXs, with similar epithelial-mesenchymal transition, angiogenesis, and stemness scores. In contrast, stromal (mouse) gene expression varied by implantation site, with ortho models better reflecting native tissue environments. A conserved subset of stromal genes, consisting of histone and ribosomal protein genes and driven by tumor-intrinsic factors, exhibited stable expression patterns across implantation sites, indicating that tumor characteristics shape stromal responses. Differential expression analysis identified metastasis-related stromal genes in both PDX types, although no direct links to metastatic pathways were found. These findings highlight the stability of tumor-driven gene expression across implantation sites and reveal the impact of implantation location on stromal profiles, guiding model selection for future cancer research. SIGNIFICANCE: This study reveals conserved tumor gene expression, distinct tumor microenvironment differences, and key stromal and metastasis-related genes in s.c. and ortho PDX models, providing valuable insights for oncology drug development.
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.