ReviewTranslational cancer research2026
Introduction to animal modelling: factors and tools for choosing the optimal model for sarcoma research-a comprehensive literature review.
Review in Translational cancer research, 2026. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Most sarcomas have complex karyotypes, making them particularly challenging to study and treat due to their genetic diversity and aggressive nature. Animal models are essential in sarcoma research as they provide a comprehensive approach to studying tumour biology, progression and therapeutic responses that cannot be fully replicated Methods: We performed a literature search in Scopus, MEDLINE and Web of Science using specific search terms to identify published original in vivo studies regarding different sarcoma subtypes, as well as selection tools. Key Content and Findings: The most commonly used models are: syngeneic, genetically engineered mouse (GEM), chemically induced, cell-derived xenografts (CDX), patient-derived xenografts (PDX), humanised PDX (huPDX), and zebrafish. Each model has its own advantages, for example: CDXs enable high-throughput drug screening, PDXs preserve tumour heterogeneity in patients, while huPDXs most closely resemble the human immune response, However, there are various limitations to each model, including a lack of genetic diversity in syngeneic models, the complexity and time requirements of GEMs, and the short life span of cost-effective zebrafish. We also described various tools that can be used to help select the right animal model, including the International Mouse Strain Resource (ISMR) and the Mouse Tumour Biology Database (MTB), and inoculation methods (e.g., subcutaneus, orthopic). Conclusions: With the right model, researchers can accurately study tumour behaviour, therapeutic responses and the basic mechanisms that underlie sarcoma development. We provide a practical guide for animal model selection though detailed discussion of model classes, inoculation routes, and endpoint to sarcoma-specific use cases as well as a list of active repositories/databases.
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.