Construction of orthotopic xenograft mouse models for human pancreatic cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal models are indispensable for the study of tumorigenesis and the development of anti‑cancer drugs for human pancreatic cancer. In the present study, two orthotopic xenograft mouse models were developed. AsPC‑1 human pancreatic cancer cells were stably labeled with red fluorescent protein (RFP) and injected subcutaneously into nude mice. For the orthotopic tumor mass model, the formed subcutaneous tumors were cut into blocks and implanted into the pancreas of nude mice via laparotomy. For the Matrigel™ tumor block model, solidified Matrigel containing RFP‑labeled AsPC‑1 cells was cut into blocks and implanted into the pancreas of nude mice. A subcutaneous tumor xenograft model was used as a control. Tumor growth and metastasis were assessed using an in vivo fluorescence imaging system. Thirty‑six days after implantation, all mice from the two orthotopic xenograft models (n=20 per group) and 55% of the subcutaneous xenograft mice (n=20) developed tumors. The tumor growth rate was significantly higher in the orthotopic models than that in the subcutaneous model (P<0.01). Metastasis to organs such as the liver was observed in the orthotopic tumor models. Histological examination showed that the tumors were poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas. In conclusion, two orthotopic xenograft mouse models of human pancreatic cancer were established; these exhibited greater tumor growth and metastasis than the subcutaneous xenograft mouse model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".