ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2025
Three-dimensional bioprinting of patient-derived Gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a novel platform for precision oncology and drug response profiling.
Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 3D bioprinting for cancer modeling and drug screening.Biomarker research · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) exhibit significant heterogeneity, posing substantial challenges for personalized treatment strategies. Patients often display varied responses to different therapeutic agents and dosages. Currently, the absence of robust and physiologically relevant in vitro models for GISTs impedes accurate prediction of therapeutic efficacy, thereby constraining the advancement of effective treatment strategies. Traditional 2D cell cultures fail to replicate the tumor microenvironment (TME) and lack patient-specific characteristics, limiting their predictive value. In contrast, three-dimensional bioprinting (3DP) technology faithfully recapitulates key histological architecture and molecular features of their parental tumors, enhancing the physiological relevance of in vitro models.
methodsWe employed patient-derived 3DP-GIST models via 3D bioprinting technology, followed by comprehensive histopathological, genomic, and transcriptomic analyses. Subsequently, we applied clinically approved targeted therapeutic agents to perform drug screening and response prediction on the 3DP-GIST models. The drug sensitivity profiles obtained from these models were then correlated with retrospective clinical data and patient follow-up records to assess the models' potential in guiding the selection and prediction of effective GIST therapies.
resultsIn our study, we successfully constructed 12 patient-derived 3DP-GIST models. Histopathological assessments, whole-exome sequencing (WES), and transcriptomic analyses confirmed that these models accurately recapitulate the histological architecture, biomarker expression, and molecular features of their corresponding parental tumors. Transcriptomic profiling further revealed gene expression signatures associated with GIST recurrence risk and imatinib resistance. Importantly, the 3DP-GIST models demonstrated the capacity to provide precise, individualized treatment recommendations within 10 days post-surgery, potentially reducing treatment delays and improving patient outcomes.
conclusionsOverall, the 3DP-GIST model represents a robust and efficient platform for evaluating patient-specific drug sensitivities in vitro, thereby guiding personalized therapeutic strategies for GIST patients.
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.