Articlenpj biomedical innovations2025
Automated microinjection for zebrafish xenograft models.
Article in npj biomedical innovations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Zebrafish tumor xenograft models for drug-screening: a systematic review of methods for treatment assessment.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Zebrafish swimming towards cures: a scalable NAM platform for drug discovery.Drug discovery today · 2026Review
- The function of TLR2 and the microbiome in macrophage-dependent dissemination of nontuberculous mycobacterial gut infection.International journal of biological sciences · 2026Article
- Multifunctional robotic micromanipulation system for automated cardiovascular disease therapy using zebrafish.npj biomedical innovations · 2025Article
- Zebrafish as a Model for Translational Immuno-Oncology.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Automation in microinjection for zebrafish pericardial space with image-based motion control and batch agarose microplate.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Zebrafish xenograft models are increasingly recognized for predicting patient responses to cancer therapeutics, suggesting their potential as clinical diagnostic tools. However, precise microinjection of cancer cells into numerous small and fragile zebrafish larvae is laborious, requires extensive training for new operators, and often yields variable results, limiting their clinical and drug discovery applications. To address these challenges, we have designed, built, and validated an automated microinjection robot. The robot performs injections into the vasculature, perivitelline space, and hindbrain ventricle in both fully automated and semi-automated modes. Combined results demonstrate an average injection success rate of approximately 60% and larvae survival exceeding 70%, comparable to manual methods, with the fully automated mode being twice as fast. This automation reduces the need for extensive personnel training while enhancing reproducibility, efficiency, and accuracy, paving the way for more extensive use of zebrafish xenograft models in drug discovery and patient diagnostics.
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.