Literature DB >> 31409886

NSG mice as hosts for oncological precision medicine.

Claudia Maletzki1, Stephanie Bock2, Philipp Fruh2, Karolis Macius2, Anika Witt2, Friedrich Prall3, Michael Linnebacher4.   

Abstract

Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models have been rediscovered as meaningful research tool. By using severely immunodeficient mice, high-engraftment rates can be theoretically achieved, permitting clinical stratification strategies. Apart from engraftment efficacy, tolerability towards certain cytostatic drugs varies among individual mouse strains thus impeding large-scale screenings. Here, we aimed at optimizing an in vivo treatment schedule using the widely applied cytostatic drug 5-fluoruracil (5-FU) for exemplary response prediction in colorectal cancer (CRC) PDX models. Four different individual CRC PDX models were engrafted into NOD.Cg-PrkdcscidIl2rgtm1Wjl (NSG) mice. Mice with established PDX were allocated to different treatment groups, receiving 5-FU, the oral prodrug Capecitabine, or 5-FU/leucovorin (LV) at different doses. Body weight, tumor size, and general behavior were assessed during therapy. Ex vivo analyses were done from blood samples, liver, as well as tumor resection specimen. Engraftment efficacy was high as expected in NSG mice, yielding stable PDX growth for therapy stratification. However, overall tolerability towards 5-FU was unexpectedly low, whereas the prodrug Capecitabine as well as the combination of 5-FU/LV at low doses were well tolerated. Accompanying plasma level determination of DYPD, the rate-limiting enzyme for 5-FU-mediated toxicity, revealed reduced activity in NSG mice compared with other common laboratory mouse strains, offering a likely explanation for the drug incompatibility. Also, the De Ritis quotient was highly elevated in treated mice, reflecting overall organ injury even at low doses. Summarizing these findings, NSG mice are ideal hosts for in vivo engraftment studies. However, the complex immunodeficiency reduces tolerance to certain drugs, thus making those mice especially sensitive. Consequently, such dose finding and tolerance tests constitute a necessity for similar cancer precision medicine approaches.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31409886     DOI: 10.1038/s41374-019-0298-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lab Invest        ISSN: 0023-6837            Impact factor:   5.662


  10 in total

Review 1.  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

Review 2.  The next frontier of oncotherapy: accomplishing clinical translation of oncolytic bacteria through genetic engineering.

Authors:  Kaitlin M Dailey; JuliAnne E Allgood; Paige R Johnson; Mackenzie A Ostlie; Kambri C Schaner; Benjamin D Brooks; Amanda E Brooks
Journal:  Future Microbiol       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 3.165

3.  Terminally Differentiated CD4+ T Cells Promote Myocardial Inflammaging.

Authors:  Murilo Delgobo; Margarete Heinrichs; Nils Hapke; DiyaaElDin Ashour; Marc Appel; Mugdha Srivastava; Tobias Heckel; Ioakim Spyridopoulos; Ulrich Hofmann; Stefan Frantz; Gustavo Campos Ramos
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 7.561

4.  PPARα and PPARγ activation is associated with pleural mesothelioma invasion but therapeutic inhibition is ineffective.

Authors:  M Lizeth Orozco Morales; Catherine A Rinaldi; Emma de Jong; Sally M Lansley; Joel P A Gummer; Bence Olasz; Shabarinath Nambiar; Danika E Hope; Thomas H Casey; Y C Gary Lee; Connull Leslie; Gareth Nealon; David M Shackleford; Andrew K Powell; Marina Grimaldi; Patrick Balaguer; Rachael M Zemek; Anthony Bosco; Matthew J Piggott; Alice Vrielink; Richard A Lake; W Joost Lesterhuis
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2021-12-04

5.  The HROC-Xenobank-A High Quality Assured PDX Biobank of >100 Individual Colorectal Cancer Models.

Authors:  Stephanie Matschos; Florian Bürtin; Said Kdimati; Mandy Radefeldt; Susann Krake; Friedrich Prall; Nadja Engel; Mathias Krohn; Bianca Micheel; Michael Kreutzer; Christina Susanne Mullins; Michael Linnebacher
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  Genetically diverse mouse platform to xenograft cancer cells.

Authors:  Jennifer K Sargent; Mark A Warner; Benjamin E Low; William H Schott; Todd Hoffert; David Coleman; Xing Yi Woo; Todd Sheridan; Sonia Erattupuzha; Philipp P Henrich; Vivek M Philip; Jeffrey H Chuang; Michael V Wiles; Muneer G Hasham
Journal:  Dis Model Mech       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 5.732

Review 7.  Modeling metastasis in mice: a closer look.

Authors:  Arianna Giacobbe; Cory Abate-Shen
Journal:  Trends Cancer       Date:  2021-07-22

8.  Targeting P4HA1 with a Small Molecule Inhibitor in a Colorectal Cancer PDX Model.

Authors:  Sumit Agarwal; Michael Behring; Hyung-Gyoon Kim; Prachi Bajpai; Balabhadrapatruni V S K Chakravarthi; Nirzari Gupta; Amr Elkholy; Sameer Al Diffalha; Sooryanarayana Varambally; Upender Manne
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 4.243

9.  The SRG rat, a Sprague-Dawley Rag2/Il2rg double-knockout validated for human tumor oncology studies.

Authors:  Fallon K Noto; Jaya Sangodkar; Bisoye Towobola Adedeji; Sam Moody; Christopher B McClain; Ming Tong; Eric Ostertag; Jack Crawford; Xiaohua Gao; Lauren Hurst; Caitlin M O'Connor; Erika N Hanson; Sudeh Izadmehr; Rita Tohmé; Jyothsna Narla; Kristin LeSueur; Kajari Bhattacharya; Amit Rupani; Marwan K Tayeh; Jeffrey W Innis; Matthew D Galsky; B Mark Evers; Analisa DiFeo; Goutham Narla; Tseten Y Jamling
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Preclinical models as patients' avatars for precision medicine in colorectal cancer: past and future challenges.

Authors:  Erika Durinikova; Kristi Buzo; Sabrina Arena
Journal:  J Exp Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2021-06-05
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.