Back

Comparative analysis of patient-derived organoids and patient-derived xenografts as avatar models for predicting response to anti-cancer therapy

Romero, J. M.; Magrill, J.; Kalashnikov, N.; Luo, Y. Z.; Chen, O. J.; Busque, S.; Ma, R.; Atallah, A.; Lazaratos, A.-M.; Mendelson, D.; Wilson, L.; Deshmukh, S.; Taifour, T.; Sorin, M.; Arthur, I.; Kuasne, H.; Levett, J. Y.; Wang, Y.; Seufferlein, T.; Kleger, A.; Gout, J.; Beutel, A. K.; Brugarolas, J.; Poshusta, Z. S.; Hogenson, T. L.; Fernandez-Zapico, M. E.; Hamada, A.; Yagishita, S.; Nichols, A.; Barrett, J. W.; Papaccio, F.; Castillo, J.; Inoue, M.; Massfelder, T.; Lang, H.; Lindner, V.; Nilsson, J.; Dantes, Z.; Wells, G. A.; Kim, S. H.; Ittmann, M. M.; Villanueva, H.; Lerner, S. P.; Siko

2025-08-12 oncology
10.1101/2025.08.10.25333051 medRxiv
Show abstract

Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) and organoids (PDO) are widely used to model cancer and predict treatment response in matched patients. However, their predictive accuracy has not been systematically studied nor compared. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using PDX or PDO from solid tumors treated with identical anti-cancer agents as the matched patient, identifying 411 patient-model pairs (267 PDX, 144 PDO). Overall concordance in treatment response between patients and matched models was 70%, with no significant differences between PDX and PDO. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value were also comparable. Patients whose matched PDO responded to therapy had prolonged progression-free survival. For PDX, this association held only when analyses were restricted to patient-model pairs with low risk of bias after applying a bias assessment metric. Together, these findings suggest that PDO perform similarly to PDX in predicting matched-patient response, while potentially offering lower financial and ethical burdens. Graphical abstract O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=139 SRC="FIGDIR/small/25333051v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (23K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@b635d7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@88ee03org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1c21ed3org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@175beef_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.1%
2
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
9.9%
3
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
9.0%
4
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
5
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
6
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.7%
50% of probability mass above
7
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
8
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.5%
9
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.0%
10
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.5%
11
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.3%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.8%
13
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
14
Cancer Letters
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
15
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 43%
1.7%
17
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
18
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.5%
19
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
20
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
64 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
21
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
22
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
23
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
24
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 67%
0.8%
25
Molecular Systems Biology
142 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
68 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
33 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
29
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%
30
Nature Cancer
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%