Back

A simple method for analyzing competitive growth of multiple cell types in xenograft tumors

Melhuish, T. A.; Adair, S. J.; Pemberton, O. S.; Bauer, T. W.; Wotton, D.

2026-01-26 cancer biology
10.64898/2026.01.23.701386 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Low take rates and inter-tumor variability in growth rates can limit the effectiveness of mouse xenograft models when comparing between groups. To address this problem we developed a simple method to compare multiple cell types within a single mixed xenograft. Individual cell lines or clones were transduced with a lentiviral vector that includes a unique PCR tag, allowing the use of qPCR to determine the proportion of each tagged cell type within a mixed xenograft tumor. We generated vectors with six distinct PCR tags, and two different selectable markers, and have optimized the approach for determining their relative proportions within a mix. An initial pre-amplification step is used to increase the amount of material for subsequent qPCR reactions. This also removes the bulk of the genomic DNA, increasing the specificity of the qPCR step. Samples are then used for qPCR with specific pairs of primers that distinguish between each of the individual PCR tags, and the relative proportion of each tag is determined relative to that in the starting mix. We have tested this approach for in vitro growth of mixed cell cultures and in an orthotopic cecal xenograft model using a human colon cancer cell line. Since each individual tumor is initiated with a mix of cells, multiple tumors within a single animal can be analyzed separately, and overall tumor size is not important. Similarly, multiple metastatic lesions from the same animal can be analyzed individually. Thus, each tumor provides a direct comparison between individually tagged cell lines or clones. This low throughput "bar-coding" approach is simple and cost effective and has the potential to reduce the number of animals needed for xenograft experiments.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 2%
34.9%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 8%
8.9%
3
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.9%
50% of probability mass above
4
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.8%
5
Current Protocols
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
6
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
7
Journal of Immunological Methods
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
8
Disease Models & Mechanisms
119 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.6%
9
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.6%
10
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.6%
11
Journal of Visualized Experiments
30 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
12
STAR Protocols
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
13
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
14
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
15
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
Molecular Therapy - Methods & Clinical Development
38 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
17
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 23%
0.8%
18
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
19
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
20
BioTechniques
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
21
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
22
Nature Protocols
30 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
23
Journal of Virology
456 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
25
Cancer Research Communications
46 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
Development, Growth & Differentiation
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.7%
27
Poultry Science
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
28
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
222 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
Mobile DNA
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
30
Protein Science
221 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%