There are many ways for assessment of Breast Cancer drugs however every way has limitations : primary culture leads to loss of cell- cell interaction,explant culture had limited success and cell line may change through continual culture.
So what do you prefer especially for anti hormonal therapy ?
Hello Mohamed. If you are asking whether which cell lines or primary culture are best for in vitro studies, you may refer to Zhang's paper as I linked it here. Her statements are more towards the use of cell lines, as she proved that primary cultures are very difficult to maintain in the long run, and primary cultures lose their features soon after few phases. Unless you have a research budget to buy animals for the primary culture (because you are going to use a lot of animals), you may go for primary culture as they mimic the best in comparison to the human. Using cell lines give you the assurance that they will most likely retain the features on the cells longer even after few phases.
In addition, most papers actually marry the two types together - primary culture and cell lines, as co-culture on a transwell membrane, either as a contact or non-contact culture.
Article Co-culture Based Blood-brain Barrier In Vitro Model, a Tissu...
MCF7, T47D and BT474 established ER+ cell lines for anti-hormonal therapy. And best if u can use patients derived xenografts cell lines.
Dear Mohamed,
A model remains a model and an in vitro model (whatever the model) will never be representative of the clinical situation.
The choice of an in vitro model directly depends on the scientific hypothesis you want to demonstrate scientifically, not at all to its "pseudo-clinical relevance".
If it is to analyze the anti-breast cancer effects in terms of ER+/ER-, most of the articles use MCF-7 (ER+) versus MDA-MB-231 (ER-) cancer cell lines.
Best regards
Robert
Dear Mohamed,
Here attached are some articles that I "retrieve" and that could be of interest / help.
Best regards
Robert
- Badges
- Science topic