Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40572053›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2025

Personalised Medicine in Cervical Cancer: Evaluating Therapy Resistance Through Multi-Model Approaches.

Madré Meyer, Carla Eksteen, Cayleigh de Sousa, Nireshni Chellan, Ruzayda Van Aarde, Meenal Bhaga, Johann Riedemann, Matthys H Botha, Frederick H van der Merwe, Anna-Mart Engelbrecht

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Madré MeyerDepartment of Physiological Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1813-5996
Carla EksteenDepartment of Physiological Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Cayleigh de SousaDepartment of Physiological Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9770-7402
Nireshni ChellanSouth African Medical Research Council (SAMRC), Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9968-0998
Ruzayda Van AardeSouth African Medical Research Council (SAMRC), Cape Town, South Africa.
Meenal BhagaDepartment of Physiological Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Johann RiedemannCancerCare, Cape Gate Oncology Centre, Cape Town, South Africa.
Matthys H BothaCancerCare, Cape Gate Oncology Centre, Cape Town, South Africa.
Frederick H van der MerweDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Anna-Mart EngelbrechtDepartment of Physiological Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1469-0148

Funding

Cancer Association of South AfricaNational Research Foundation South Africa 138118South African Medical Research CouncilTechnology Innovation Agency
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCervical cancer remains a leading cause of malignancy among women globally, disproportionately affecting women from low-to-middle-income countries, including South Africa. The high prevalence in impoverished communities places significant pressure on the public healthcare system. In these regions, human papillomavirus (HPV); the primary risk factor for cervical cancer-along with co-occurring immunosuppressive conditions such as HIV, is common. Compounding this burden is the widespread development of treatment resistance to conventional therapies like cisplatin and carboplatin. Resistance is frequently associated with therapy-induced cellular senescence, underscoring the need for more personalised treatment strategies tailored to individual patient profiles. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study aimed to assess ex vivo methods' utility in predicting patient-specific therapy responses. Biopsy samples from cervical cancer patients were cultured and subjected to various chemotherapies. Cell viability, senescence markers and treatment resistance pathways were analysed to determine optimal treatment outcomes.

resultsThe findings revealed significant variability in optimal treatment responses, with ex vivo methods demonstrating limitations in fully capturing the complexity of patient-specific reactions to therapy. No single experimental model provided comprehensive predictive insights into treatment outcomes.

conclusionThis study underscores the need for integrative and multidisciplinary approaches when evaluating treatment strategies for cervical cancer. While ex vivo models offer valuable insights, combining multiple experimental methods is crucial for a more reliable and comprehensive understanding of treatment response and resistance mechanisms. Standardiszing approaches or employing method combinations may enhance personalised medicine efforts, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsDrug Resistance, NeoplasmPrecision MedicineUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultCell SurvivalCellular SenescenceCisplatinFemaleHumansMiddle AgedAntineoplastic AgentsCisplatincervical cancerpersonalised medicinesenescencetreatment resistance

Identifiers

PMID40572053
PMCPMC12202468

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.