ReviewMolecular cancer2026
Harnessing PDX and PDX 2.0: the next-generation paradigm for precision oncology and translational breakthroughs.
Review in Molecular cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer research has achieved remarkable breakthroughs over the past decades with the aid of patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. However, the limitations of conventional PDX models in hindering clinical translation have become increasingly apparent. In 2025, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a funding shift away from exclusive reliance on animal models without justified integration of novel alternative methods (NAMs), human-relevant modeling approaches. Nevertheless, PDX models cannot be fully replaced currently due to the lingering immaturity and uncertainties of NAMs technologies, indicating that a complete non-animal research paradigm will require sustained methodological development. Therefore, developing an innovative, optimized PDX model to navigate this transitional phase remains the holy grail of preclinical cancer research. Herein, we propose PDX 2.0, a novel conceptual framework that advances conventional PDX models via the systematic integration of NAMs and complementary technologies, thereby enabling more efficient and precise cancer research. This review first delineates the core determinants, major applications, and critical limitations of traditional PDX models, then defines the conceptual architecture and distinctive characteristics of PDX 2.0. We further highlight emerging applications of this framework in high-throughput drug screening, biomarker discovery, and adaptive therapeutic evaluation, positioning PDX 2.0 as a critical evolution of PDX-based research to better support clinically actionable precision oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.