Meningioma animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Animal models are widely used to study pathological processes and drug (side) effects in a controlled environment. There is a wide variety of methods available for establishing animal models depending on the research question. Commonly used methods in tumor research include xenografting cells (established/commercially available or primary patient-derived) or whole tumor pieces either orthotopically or heterotopically and the more recent genetically engineered models-each type with their own advantages and disadvantages. The current systematic review aimed to investigate the meningioma model types used, perform a meta-analysis on tumor take rate (TTR), and perform critical appraisal of the included studies. The study also aimed to assess reproducibility, reliability, means of validation and verification of models, alongside pros and cons and uses of the model types.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for all in vivo meningioma models. The primary outcome was tumor take rate. Meta-analysis was performed on tumor take rate followed by subgroup analyses on the number of cells and duration of incubation. The validity of the tumor models was assessed qualitatively. We performed critical appraisal of the methodological quality and quality of reporting for all included studies.

RESULTS

We included 114 unique records (78 using established cell line models (ECLM), 21 using primary patient-derived tumor models (PTM), 10 using genetically engineered models (GEM), and 11 using uncategorized models). TTRs for ECLM were 94% (95% CI 92-96) for orthotopic and 95% (93-96) for heterotopic. PTM showed lower TTRs [orthotopic 53% (33-72) and heterotopic 82% (73-89)] and finally GEM revealed a TTR of 34% (26-43).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows high consistent TTRs in established cell line models and varying TTRs in primary patient-derived models and genetically engineered models. However, we identified several issues regarding the quality of reporting and the methodological approach that reduce the validity, transparency, and reproducibility of studies and suggest a high risk of publication bias. Finally, each tumor model type has specific roles in research based on their advantages (and disadvantages).

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO-ID CRD42022308833.

Selecting an Appropriate Experimental Animal Model for Cholangiocarcinoma Research

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a highly aggressive biliary tree malignancy with intrahepatic and extra-hepatic subtypes that differ in molecular pathogeneses, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, treatment, and prognosis. The overall prognosis and patient survival remains poor because of lack of early diagnosis and effective treatments. Preclinical in vivo studies have become increasingly paramount as they are helpful not only for the study of the fundamental molecular mechanisms of CCA but also for developing novel and effective therapeutic approaches of this fatal cancer. Recent advancements in cell and molecular biology have made it possible to mimic the pathogenicity of human CCA in chemical-mechanical, infection-induced inflammatory, implantation, and genetically engineered animal models. This review is intended to help investigators understand the particular strengths and weaknesses of the currently used in vivo animal models of human CCA and their related modeling techniques to aid in the selection of the one that is the best for their research needs.