Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35267582›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

A Systematic Comparative Assessment of the Response of Ovarian Cancer Cells to the Chemotherapeutic Cisplatin in 3D Models of Various Structural and Biochemical Configurations-Does One Model Type Fit All?

Priyanka Gupta, Aline Miller, Adedamola Olayanju, Thumuluru Kavitha Madhuri, Eirini Velliou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Double Imprinted Nanoparticles for Sequential Membrane-to-Nuclear Drug Delivery.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Microphysiological systems as models for immunologically 'cold' tumors.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Priyanka GuptaCentre for 3D Models of Health and Disease, Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London W1W 7TY, UK.
Aline MillerManchester BIOGEL, 19F4, Mereside, Alderley Park, Alderley Edge, Chesire SK10 4TG, UK.
Adedamola OlayanjuManchester BIOGEL, 19F4, Mereside, Alderley Park, Alderley Edge, Chesire SK10 4TG, UK.
Thumuluru Kavitha MadhuriDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Egerton Road, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9591-8441
Eirini VelliouCentre for 3D Models of Health and Disease, Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London W1W 7TY, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3313-4446

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R025762/1Medical Research Council MR/V028553/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (EOC) is a silent, deadly and aggressive gynaecological disease with a relatively low survival rate. This has been attributed, to some extent, to EOC's high recurrence rate and resistance to currently available platinum-based chemotherapeutic treatment methods. Multiple groups have studied and reported the effect of chemotherapeutic agents on various EOC 3D in vitro models. However, there are very few studies wherein a direct comparative study has been carried out between the different in vitro 3D models of EOC and the effect of chemotherapy within them. Herein, we report, for the first time, a direct comprehensive systematic comparative study of three different 3D in vitro platforms, namely (i) spheroids, (ii) synthetic PeptiGels/hydrogels of various chemical configurations and (iii) polymeric scaffolds with coatings of various extracellular matrices (ECMs) on the cell growth and response to the chemotherapeutic (Cisplatin) for ovary-derived (A2780) and metastatic (SK-OV-3) EOC cell lines. We report that all three 3D models are able to support the growth of EOC, but for different time periods (varying from 7 days to 4 weeks). We have also reported that chemoresistance to Cisplatin, in vitro, observed especially for metastatic EOC cells, is platform-dependent, in terms of both the structural and biochemical composition of the model/platform. Our study highlights the importance of selecting an appropriate 3D platform for in vitro tumour model development. We have demonstrated that the selection of the best platform for producing in vitro tumour models depends on the cancer/cell type, the experimental time period and the application for which the model is intended.

Indexed as

3D in vitro modelA2780chemotherapyCisplatinepithelial ovarian cancerhydrogelspolymeric scaffoldsSK-OV-3spheroidstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID35267582
PMCPMC8909317

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.