Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41557750›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2026

Anatomically aware simulation of patient-specific glioblastoma xenografts.

Adam A Malik, Cecilia Krona, Soumi Kundu, Philip Gerlee, Sven Nelander

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Adam A MalikMathematical Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1356-9039
Cecilia KronaDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6458-1949
Soumi KunduDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Philip GerleeMathematical Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Sven NelanderDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-derived cells (PDC) mouse xenografts are increasingly important tools in glioblastoma (GBM) research, essential to investigate case-specific growth patterns and treatment responses. Despite the central role of xenograft models in the field, few good simulation models are available to probe the dynamics of tumor growth and to support therapy design. We therefore propose a new framework for the patient-specific simulation of GBM in the mouse brain. Unlike existing methods, our simulations leverage a high-resolution map of the mouse brain anatomy to yield patient-specific results that are in good agreement with experimental observations. To facilitate the fitting of our model to histological data, we use Approximate Bayesian Computation. Because our model uses few parameters, reflecting growth, invasion and niche dependencies, it is well suited for case comparisons and for probing treatment effects. We demonstrate how our model can be used to simulate different treatment by perturbing the different model parameters. We expect in silico replicates of mouse xenograft tumors can improve the assessment of therapeutic outcomes and boost the statistical power of preclinical GBM studies.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaModels, BiologicalAnimalsBayes TheoremBrainComputational BiologyComputer SimulationHeterograftsHumansMiceXenograft Model Antitumor Assays

Identifiers

PMID41557750
PMCPMC12851450

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.