Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Although recent regulations improved conditions of laboratory animals, their use remains essential in cancer research to determine treatment efficacy. In most cases, such experiments are performed on xenografted animals for which tumor volume is mostly estimated from cali...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274886 |
| _version_ | 1828132692536852480 |
|---|---|
| author | Anne Rodallec Cristina Vaghi Joseph Ciccolini Raphaelle Fanciullino Sebastien Benzekry |
| author_facet | Anne Rodallec Cristina Vaghi Joseph Ciccolini Raphaelle Fanciullino Sebastien Benzekry |
| author_sort | Anne Rodallec |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <h4>Purpose</h4>Although recent regulations improved conditions of laboratory animals, their use remains essential in cancer research to determine treatment efficacy. In most cases, such experiments are performed on xenografted animals for which tumor volume is mostly estimated from caliper measurements. However, many formulas have been employed for this estimation and no standardization is available yet.<h4>Methods</h4>Using previous animal studies, we compared all formulas used by the scientific community in 2019. Data were collected from 93 mice orthotopically xenografted with human breast cancer cells. All formulas were evaluated and ranked based on correlation and lower mean relative error. They were then used in a Gompertz quantitative model of tumor growth.<h4>Results</h4>Seven formulas for tumor volume estimation were identified and a statistically significant difference was observed among them (ANOVA test, p < 2.10-16), with the ellipsoid formula (1/6 π × L × W × (L + W)/2) being the most accurate (mean relative error = 0.272 ± 0.201). This was confirmed by the mathematical modeling analysis where this formula resulted in the smallest estimated residual variability. Interestingly, such result was no longer valid for tumors over 1968 ± 425 mg, for which a cubic formula (L x W x H) should be preferred.<h4>Main findings</h4>When considering that tumor volume remains under 1500mm3, to limit animal stress, improve tumor growth monitoring and go toward mathematic models, the following formula 1/6 π × L × W x (L + W)/2 should be preferred. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T17:09:01Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-475b760edec8498ca25e8d9928dc8b5c |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T17:09:01Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-475b760edec8498ca25e8d9928dc8b5c2022-12-22T04:12:57ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032022-01-01179e027488610.1371/journal.pone.0274886Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic.Anne RodallecCristina VaghiJoseph CiccoliniRaphaelle FanciullinoSebastien Benzekry<h4>Purpose</h4>Although recent regulations improved conditions of laboratory animals, their use remains essential in cancer research to determine treatment efficacy. In most cases, such experiments are performed on xenografted animals for which tumor volume is mostly estimated from caliper measurements. However, many formulas have been employed for this estimation and no standardization is available yet.<h4>Methods</h4>Using previous animal studies, we compared all formulas used by the scientific community in 2019. Data were collected from 93 mice orthotopically xenografted with human breast cancer cells. All formulas were evaluated and ranked based on correlation and lower mean relative error. They were then used in a Gompertz quantitative model of tumor growth.<h4>Results</h4>Seven formulas for tumor volume estimation were identified and a statistically significant difference was observed among them (ANOVA test, p < 2.10-16), with the ellipsoid formula (1/6 π × L × W × (L + W)/2) being the most accurate (mean relative error = 0.272 ± 0.201). This was confirmed by the mathematical modeling analysis where this formula resulted in the smallest estimated residual variability. Interestingly, such result was no longer valid for tumors over 1968 ± 425 mg, for which a cubic formula (L x W x H) should be preferred.<h4>Main findings</h4>When considering that tumor volume remains under 1500mm3, to limit animal stress, improve tumor growth monitoring and go toward mathematic models, the following formula 1/6 π × L × W x (L + W)/2 should be preferred.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274886 |
| spellingShingle | Anne Rodallec Cristina Vaghi Joseph Ciccolini Raphaelle Fanciullino Sebastien Benzekry Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic. PLoS ONE |
| title | Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic. |
| title_full | Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic. |
| title_fullStr | Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic. |
| title_short | Tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts: A good technique for a strong ethic. |
| title_sort | tumor growth monitoring in breast cancer xenografts a good technique for a strong ethic |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274886 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT annerodallec tumorgrowthmonitoringinbreastcancerxenograftsagoodtechniqueforastrongethic AT cristinavaghi tumorgrowthmonitoringinbreastcancerxenograftsagoodtechniqueforastrongethic AT josephciccolini tumorgrowthmonitoringinbreastcancerxenograftsagoodtechniqueforastrongethic AT raphaellefanciullino tumorgrowthmonitoringinbreastcancerxenograftsagoodtechniqueforastrongethic AT sebastienbenzekry tumorgrowthmonitoringinbreastcancerxenograftsagoodtechniqueforastrongethic |