Carboplatin response in preclinical models for ovarian cancer: comparison of 2D monolayers, spheroids, ex vivo tumors and in vivo models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most lethal gynecological cancer. Among the key challenges in developing effective therapeutics is the poor translation of preclinical models used in the drug discovery pipeline. This leaves drug attrition rates and costs at an unacceptably high level. Previous work has highlighted the discrepancies in therapeutic response between current in vitro and in vivo models. To address this, we conducted a comparison study to differentiate the carboplatin chemotherapy response across four different model systems including 2D monolayers, 3D spheroids, 3D ex vivo tumors and mouse xenograft models. We used six previously characterized EOC cell lines of varying chemosensitivity and performed viability assays for each model. In vivo results from the mouse model correlated with 2D response in 3/6 cell lines while they correlated with 3D spheroids and the ex vivo model in 4/6 and 5/5 cell lines, respectively. Our results emphasize the variability in therapeutic response across models and demonstrate that the carboplatin response in EOC cell lines cultured in a 3D ex vivo model correlates best with the in vivo response. These results highlight a more feasible, reliable, and cost-effective preclinical model with the highest translational potential for drug screening and prediction studies in EOC.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".