Search

Simple Summary: It was found that long-established tumor-derived cell lines do not adequately reproduce drug sensitivity and behavior of a real human cancers. Therefore, more reliable tumor models that recapitulate the heterogeneity and patho-physiology of patient tumors are under development. The aim of our review is to describe the current patient-derived models of cancer, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and provide information about clinical trials and inventions in this field. This work provides a comprehensive overview of the strong and weak sides of patient-derived models, as well as the latest achievements in data collection, creation of repositories and biobanks. Cancer is a heterogeneous disease. Each individual tumor is unique and characterized by structural, cellular, genetic and molecular features. Therefore, patient-derived cancer models are indispensable tools in cancer research and have been actively introduced into the healthcare system. For instance, patient-derived models provide a good reproducibility of susceptibility and resistance of cancer cells against drugs, allowing personalized therapy for patients. In this article, we review the advantages and disadvantages of the following patient-derived models of cancer: (1) PDC—patient-derived cell culture, (2) PDS—patient-derived spheroids and PDO—patient-derived organoids, (3) PDTSC—patient-derived tissue slice cultures, (4) PDX—patient-derived xenografts, humanized PDX, as well as PDXC—PDX-derived cell cultures and PDXO—PDX-derived organoids. We also provide an overview of current clinical investigations and new developments in the area of patient-derived cancer models. Moreover, attention is paid to databases of patient-derived cancer models, which are collected in specialized repositories. We believe that the widespread use of patient-derived cancer models will improve our knowledge in cancer cell biology and contribute to the development of more effective personalized cancer treatment strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer is a heterogeneous disease. Each individual tumor is unique and characterized by structural, cellular, genetic and molecular features. Therefore, patient-derived cancer models are indispensable tools in cancer research and have been actively introduced into the healthcare system. For instance, patient-derived models provide a good reproducibility of susceptibility and resistance of cancer cells against drugs, allowing personalized therapy for patients. In this article, we review the advantages and disadvantages of the following patient-derived models of cancer: (1) PDC-patient-derived cell culture, (2) PDS-patient-derived spheroids and PDO-patient-derived organoids, (3) PDTSC-patient-derived tissue slice cultures, (4) PDX-patient-derived xenografts, humanized PDX, as well as PDXC-PDX-derived cell cultures and PDXO-PDX-derived organoids. We also provide an overview of current clinical investigations and new developments in the area of patient-derived cancer models. Moreover, attention is paid to databases of patient-derived cancer models, which are collected in specialized repositories. We believe that the widespread use of patient-derived cancer models will improve our knowledge in cancer cell biology and contribute to the development of more effective personalized cancer treatment strategies.

Simple Summary: The active disease status of patients with a malignant germ cell tumor can be evaluated using detection of specific body-circulating microRNAs. However, various methods are reported to isolate and detect microRNAs from blood, possibly influencing the score as positive or negative. Here, we investigated two frequently used techniques for microRNA isolation from blood, either serum or plasma, to evaluate possible differences. These data are required to compare published studies and to select the best methods in the future. No effect of either starting with plasma or serum was found, indicating that both blood products can be used. The bead-based method was more stable and applicable on small blood volumes, whereas the total RNA method exhibited a higher sensitivity due to a larger starting volume. These results are important to develop the optimal method for the detection of microRNAs in blood to monitor malignant germ cell tumor patients in clinic practice. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are short, non-coding RNAs involved in translation regulation. Dysregulation has been identified in cancer cells. miRNAs can be secreted and detectable in body fluids; therefore, they are potential liquid-biopsy biomarkers. The miR-371a-3 cluster members are an example, monitoring the presence of malignant germ cell tumors based on patient serum/plasma analyses. However, a large variety of isolation techniques on sample types (serum vs. plasma) are reported, hampering interstudy comparisons. Therefore, we analyzed the impact of using the miRNeasy Serum/Plasma Kit (cell-free total RNA purification) Qiagen extraction kit and the TaqMan anti-miRNA bead-capture procedure of ThermoFisher for miRNA isolation. Ten normal male matched serum and plasma samples and seventeen testicular germ cell tumor patient serum samples were investigated. The Qiagen kit requires a higher input volume (200 µL vs. 50 µL), resulting in higher sensitivity. Serum and plasma comparison demonstrated high similarity in miRNA levels. Titration experiments showed that the bead-capture procedure is superior in cases of lower starting volumes (<100 µL). This study highlights the strengths and limitations of two different isolation protocols, relevant for in vivo analysis with small starting volumes. In summary, miRNA detection levels results varied little between plasma and serum, whereas for low volumes the bead capture isolation method is preferable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]