Evidence mapPaperPMID 41874155Full record

ReviewMethods and protocols2026

Improving Laboratory-Based Cancer Drug Discovery Study Designs for Better Research Translations.

Sivananthan Manoharan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Methods and protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Sivananthan ManoharanMolecular Pathology Unit, Cancer Research Centre, Institute for Medical Research, National Institutes of Health, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Setia Alam, Shah Alam 40170, Selangor, Malaysia.

Funding

Ministry of Health NMRR ID-24-01431-SXW
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The process of developing a drug is complex and involves many steps, from basic research (bench) to patient applications (bedside), which are conducted to ensure the drug is both safe and effective. In cancer research, the failure rate is high when translating basic findings to clinical trials. One of the main factors probably contributing to high failure rates is the basic quality of in vitro and in vivo study designs. Advanced basic cancer research techniques, including various types of 3D cell culture, the use of valuable organoids, organs, or tumors on chips, traditional or automated Western blots, omics research, advanced imaging techniques, usage of cutting-edge preclinical models and others, may produce inaccurate results for translational research if the basic study design is not carefully planned, especially when drugs or compounds are involved. In this manuscript, the author discussed (i) the importance of understanding and applying pharmacokinetic data in basic research, (ii) a proper comparison of the efficacy and safety of investigational drugs with the standard of care, (iii) the importance of following the actual route of drug administration as experienced by patients, the cruciality of human-to-animal dose conversion, and dose frequencies in animal models, (iv) significance of the age, gender, and strain of mice, along with adherence to the ARRIVE guidelines for ensuring transparency in conducting and reporting preclinical research, (v) benefits of having both subcutaneous and metastasis models in preclinical studies, (vi) the impact of comorbidities and related cancer drug studies in animal models and (vii) the importance of testing drug candidate/s in model mimicking acidic tumor microenvironment.

Indexed as

basic cancer researchcancer study designsdrug discoverypreclinical cancer modelstranslational research

Identifiers

PMID41874155
PMCPMC13010692

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.