Back

How clinically relevant are prostate cancer cell lines? A comprehensive characterisation and multiomics comparison.

Ahmed, Z.; Mosabbir, W.; Tandon, D.; Pereira, S. P.; Cheema, U.; Loizidou, M.; Withington, J.; Moore, C.; Okoli, U.; Heavey, S.

2024-03-21 cancer biology
10.1101/2024.03.20.585982 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Cell line experiments arguably remain the most used tool in preclinical cancer research, despite their limitations. With almost 95% drugs entering human trials failing, and up to 90% preclinical research failing before even being tested in humans, we must shift the pre-clinical paradigm. A range of in silico, in vitro, in vivo and ex vivo approaches are gaining popularity, with the aim of potentially replacing cell line use. However, we cannot ignore the plethora of historical data from cell lines, nor write off their future use- especially within advanced bioengineered models. Therefore, we must question if and how cell lines hold clinical relevance. This study evaluates the clinical characteristics of 46 prostate cancer cell lines against worldwide data and investigates the biological features of seven cell lines in depth, comparing them to over 10,000 well characterised human cases from 24 studies in nine countries. Clinical features compared included age, ethnicity, Gleason grade, cancer type, treatment history and multiomics variables included mutations, copy number alterations, structural variants, microsatellite instability, mRNA and protein expression, and tumour mutational burden. We found that the most used cell lines accurately represent a minute proportion of prostate cancer patients. Furthermore, we recommend a pipeline for tailoring selection of clinically relevant cell lines with the ultimate aim of increasing the scientific methodology behind choosing a cell line.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The Prostate
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.9%
2
Frontiers in Oncology
103 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.2%
3
British Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.4%
4
International Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
5
Modern Pathology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
6
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.3%
7
The Journal of Pathology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.3%
9
Oncogene
85 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.3%
10
Molecular Cancer Research
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.5%
11
Cancer Research
130 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
12
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
13
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.0%
14
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.0%
15
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
16
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
17
Neoplasia
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
18
Journal of Translational Medicine
57 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.5%
19
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.4%
20
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 63%
1.2%
21
Cancer Research Communications
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
22
Cells
249 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
23
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
24
Journal of Clinical Investigation
179 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
25
Cancer Medicine
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
26
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
27
Cell Reports Methods
165 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%