Human Organ‐Specific 3D Cancer Models Produced by the Stromal Self‐Assembly Method of Tissue Engineering for the Study of Solid Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer research has considerably progressed with the improvement of in vitro study models, helping to understand the key role of the tumor microenvironment in cancer development and progression. Over the last few years, complex 3D human cell culture systems have gained much popularity over in vivo models, as they accurately mimic the tumor microenvironment and allow high‐throughput drug screening. Of particular interest, in vitro human 3D tissue constructs, produced by the self‐assembly method of tissue engineering, have been successfully used to model the tumor microenvironment and now represent a very promising approach to further develop diverse cancer models. In this review, we describe the importance of the tumor microenvironment and present the existing in vitro cancer models generated through the self‐assembly method of tissue engineering. Lastly, we highlight the relevance of this approach to mimic various and complex tumors, including basal cell carcinoma, cutaneous neurofibroma, skin melanoma, bladder cancer, and uveal melanoma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".