Establishment of a ccRCC patient-derived chick chorioallantoic membrane model for drug testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is an aggressive subtype of renal cell carcinoma accounting for the majority of deaths in kidney cancer patients. Advanced ccRCC has a high mortality rate as most patients progress and develop resistance to currently approved targeted therapies, highlighting the ongoing need for adequate drug testing models to develop novel therapies. Current animal models are expensive and time-consuming. In this study, we investigated the use of the chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM), a rapid and cost-effective model, as a complementary drug testing model for ccRCC. Our results indicated that tumor samples from ccRCC patients can be successfully cultivated on the chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) within 7 days while retaining their histopathological characteristics. Furthermore, treatment of ccRCC xenografts with sunitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor used for the treatment of metastatic RCC, allowed us to evaluate differential responses of individual patients. Our results indicate that the CAM model is a complementary in vivo model that allows for rapid and cost-effective evaluation of ccRCC patient response to drug therapy. Therefore, this model has the potential to become a useful platform for preclinical evaluation of new targeted therapies for the treatment of ccRCC.
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".