Establishment of primary human esophageal xenografts: Rationale for selection and cancer model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
45 Background: New animal models of esophageal cancer are required to accelerate research into novel treatment strategies. Mouse xenografts used in pre-clinical drug testing are typically derived from cell lines, but several esophageal cancer cell lines have been contaminated (PMID 20075370). Xenografts implanted from surgically resected human tumors are a potentially viable model, and may better recapitulate the characteristics of the original tumor. We describe the feasibility of such an approach. Methods: 2-10 mm esophageal carcinoma fragments obtained from resected patient tumors were implanted directly into NOD/SCID mice. Tumors that grew beyond 1.5 cm in diameter were passaged serially. Pathologic properties were assessed from passage to passage. Potential clinicopathological predictors of engraftment were evaluated. Results: Of the 63 patients with tumors used for implantation, 67% were male; median age 66 (range 31-89); 31% node negative disease; 69% node positive disease; 12% metastatic; 55% received neoadjuvant therapy; 12% had prior Barrett's esophagus; 46% had pre-existing heartburn; 88% were distal esophageal/GE junction cancers. Engraftment occurred in 14/43 (33%) adeno-, 1/14 (7%) squamous, and 1/1 adenosquamous carcinomas (p=0.05; 5 others were rare tumors e.g. granular or small cell). Engraftment occurred in 6/31 well/moderately vs 7/18 poorly differentiated tumors (p=0.08). Because we amended our implantation procedures, we compared engraftment rates pre- (7/39; 18%) and post-amendment (8/23; 35%; p=0.13). The primary architecture of the xenografted tissue remained similar pathologically for up to 5+ passages. None of the following variables predicted for engraftment (p>0.20 each comparison): cancer location, age, gender, history of heartburn, pre-operative therapy, presence of Barrett's esophagus, disease stage, or recurrence of primary cancer. Conclusions: Creation of esophageal cancer xenografts from primary human resected specimens is feasible. Adenocarcinomas, higher tumor grade, and newer implantation strategies were associated with improved engraftment. We are treating these models with chemotherapy to discover new pharmacogenomic predictive biomarkers. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".