Literature DB >> 26479923

High-throughput screening using patient-derived tumor xenografts to predict clinical trial drug response.

Hui Gao1, Joshua M Korn1, Stéphane Ferretti2, John E Monahan3, Youzhen Wang4, Mallika Singh5, Chao Zhang4, Christian Schnell2, Guizhi Yang1, Yun Zhang4, O Alejandro Balbin1, Stéphanie Barbe2, Hongbo Cai1, Fergal Casey5, Susmita Chatterjee5, Derek Y Chiang1, Shannon Chuai4, Shawn M Cogan1, Scott D Collins1, Ernesta Dammassa2, Nicolas Ebel2, Millicent Embry5, John Green1, Audrey Kauffmann2, Colleen Kowal1, Rebecca J Leary1, Joseph Lehar3, Ying Liang4, Alice Loo1, Edward Lorenzana5, E Robert McDonald1, Margaret E McLaughlin3, Jason Merkin1, Ronald Meyer3, Tara L Naylor3, Montesa Patawaran5, Anupama Reddy3, Claudia Röelli2, David A Ruddy3, Fernando Salangsang5, Francesca Santacroce2, Angad P Singh1, Yan Tang5, Walter Tinetto2, Sonja Tobler2, Roberto Velazquez1, Kavitha Venkatesan1, Fabian Von Arx2, Hui Qin Wang3, Zongyao Wang4, Marion Wiesmann2, Daniel Wyss2, Fiona Xu4, Hans Bitter1, Peter Atadja4, Emma Lees5, Francesco Hofmann2, En Li4, Nicholas Keen1, Robert Cozens2, Michael Rugaard Jensen2, Nancy K Pryer5, Juliet A Williams1, William R Sellers1.   

Abstract

Profiling candidate therapeutics with limited cancer models during preclinical development hinders predictions of clinical efficacy and identifying factors that underlie heterogeneous patient responses for patient-selection strategies. We established ∼1,000 patient-derived tumor xenograft models (PDXs) with a diverse set of driver mutations. With these PDXs, we performed in vivo compound screens using a 1 × 1 × 1 experimental design (PDX clinical trial or PCT) to assess the population responses to 62 treatments across six indications. We demonstrate both the reproducibility and the clinical translatability of this approach by identifying associations between a genotype and drug response, and established mechanisms of resistance. In addition, our results suggest that PCTs may represent a more accurate approach than cell line models for assessing the clinical potential of some therapeutic modalities. We therefore propose that this experimental paradigm could potentially improve preclinical evaluation of treatment modalities and enhance our ability to predict clinical trial responses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26479923     DOI: 10.1038/nm.3954

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Med        ISSN: 1078-8956            Impact factor:   53.440


  432 in total

1.  Cancer: Xenograft encyclopaedia identifies drug combination opportunities.

Authors:  Megan Cully
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2015-11-20       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 2.  Humanized mice for immune checkpoint blockade in human solid tumors.

Authors:  Henry Yip; Carl Haupt; Grace Maresh; Xin Zhang; Li Li
Journal:  Am J Clin Exp Urol       Date:  2019-10-15

3.  Resistance mechanisms to TP53-MDM2 inhibition identified by in vivo piggyBac transposon mutagenesis screen in an Arf-/- mouse model.

Authors:  Emilie A Chapeau; Agnieszka Gembarska; Eric Y Durand; Emeline Mandon; Claire Estadieu; Vincent Romanet; Marion Wiesmann; Ralph Tiedt; Joseph Lehar; Antoine de Weck; Roland Rad; Louise Barys; Sebastien Jeay; Stephane Ferretti; Audrey Kauffmann; Esther Sutter; Armelle Grevot; Pierre Moulin; Masato Murakami; William R Sellers; Francesco Hofmann; Michael Rugaard Jensen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-03-06       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  CDK4/6 Inhibitors Sensitize Rb-positive Sarcoma Cells to Wee1 Kinase Inhibition through Reversible Cell-Cycle Arrest.

Authors:  Ashleigh M Francis; Angela Alexander; Yanna Liu; Smruthi Vijayaraghavan; Kwang Hui Low; Dong Yang; Tuyen Bui; Neeta Somaiah; Vinod Ravi; Khandan Keyomarsi; Kelly K Hunt
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 6.261

Review 5.  Heralding a new paradigm in 3D tumor modeling.

Authors:  Eliza L S Fong; Daniel A Harrington; Mary C Farach-Carson; Hanry Yu
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 12.479

6.  High-Content Screening Comparison of Cancer Drug Accumulation and Distribution in Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Culture Models of Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Feng Shan; David A Close; Daniel P Camarco; Paul A Johnston
Journal:  Assay Drug Dev Technol       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 1.738

7.  Optimization of 3-Pyrimidin-4-yl-oxazolidin-2-ones as Orally Bioavailable and Brain Penetrant Mutant IDH1 Inhibitors.

Authors:  Qian Zhao; James R Manning; James Sutton; Abran Costales; Martin Sendzik; Cynthia M Shafer; Julian R Levell; Gang Liu; Thomas Caferro; Young Shin Cho; Mark Palermo; Gregg Chenail; Julia Dooley; Brian Villalba; Ali Farsidjani; Jinyun Chen; Stephanie Dodd; Ty Gould; Guiqing Liang; Kelly Slocum; Minying Pu; Brant Firestone; Joseph Growney; Tycho Heimbach; Raymond Pagliarini
Journal:  ACS Med Chem Lett       Date:  2018-06-11       Impact factor: 4.345

8.  Establishment and characterization of an ovarian yolk sac tumor patient-derived xenograft model.

Authors:  Manling Luo; Yuanqiao He; Baogang Xie; Shiyun Li; Fuqiang Gan; Shouhua Zhang; Puying Luo
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 1.827

9.  Fluorescence Molecular Tomography for In Vivo Imaging of Glioblastoma Xenografts.

Authors:  Jorge A Benitez; Ciro Zanca; Jianhui Ma; Webster K Cavenee; Frank B Furnari
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 1.355

10.  A Plug-and-Play, Drug-on-Pillar Platform for Combination Drug Screening Implemented by Microfluidic Adaptive Printing.

Authors:  Jiannan Li; Wen Tan; Wenwu Xiao; Randy P Carney; Yongfan Men; Yuanpei Li; Gerald Quon; Yousif Ajena; Kit S Lam; Tingrui Pan
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 6.986

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.