Abstract
Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in industrialized countries. Most patients are cured by surgery; however, about 15% of the patients develop recurrence with limited treatment options. Patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDX) mouse models represent useful tools for preclinical evaluation of new therapies and biomarker identification. Preclinical imaging by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and optical imaging during disease progression enables visualization and quantification of functional tumor characteristics, which may serve as imaging biomarkers guiding targeted therapies. A critical question, however, is whether the in vivo model systems mimic the disease setting in patients to such an extent that the imaging biomarkers may be translatable to the clinic. The primary objective of this review is to give an overview of current and novel preclinical imaging methods relevant for endometrial cancer animal models. Furthermore, we highlight how these advanced imaging methods depict pathogenic mechanisms important for tumor progression that represent potential targets for treatment in endometrial cancer.
Highlights
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecologic malignancy in industrialized countries and the incidence is increasing [1,2]
During the last decade preclinical cancer models have advanced with the introduction of orthotopic models and patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDX) models, both putatively more translatable and transferable to the clinic
diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (ADC value is negatively correlated to Ki67 proliferation index) to assess treatment response by PI3K-inhibitor perifosine and cisplatin in ovarian xenografts [72]
Summary
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecologic malignancy in industrialized countries and the incidence is increasing [1,2]. The identification of different genetic alterations has defined specific molecular subtypes with potential for more individualized therapy in EC, the clinical treatment mostly remains the same across molecular subtypes [4,5]. New, promising therapeutics based on preclinical models frequently fail to produce similar effects in clinical trials. This may be related to poor preclinical model systems such as immortalized cell lines implanted subcutaneously in mice, lacking metastatic potential and immediate relevance for the Cancers 2019, 11, 1885; doi:10.3390/cancers11121885 www.mdpi.com/journal/cancers. During the last decade preclinical cancer models have advanced with the introduction of orthotopic models (tumor cells implanted in the organ of origin) and patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDX) models, both putatively more translatable and transferable to the clinic
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
