Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Tumor models in drug development

  • Published:
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this short essay, we have taken the opportunity to review briefly the history of anticancer drug screening, consider the changes that have been made throughout that history, and reflect on the suitability of current screening practices and the models employed. A major change in emphasis in drug discovery has influenced the development and selection of new model tumor systems as well as screening practices. This new direction, a search for drugs that are selective for particular tumor histotypes, especially solid tumors, was stimulated by the paucity of drugs that have clinical solid tumor activity. The new approach to drug discovery and screening is in itself an experiment. Only time will tell if this approach is successful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Random House College Dictionary, 1975

  2. Schabel FMJr: Animal models as predictive systems. In: Cancer Chemotherapy — Fundamental Concepts and Recent Advances (19th Annual Clinical Conference on Cancer, The University of Texas MD Anderson Hospital and Tumor Institute, Houston, 1974). Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, 1975, pp 323–355

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zubrod CG, Schepartz S, Leiter J, Endicott KM, Carrese LM, Baker CG: The chemotherapy program of the National Cancer Institute: History, analysis, and plans. Cancer Chemother Rep 50(7): 349–540, 1966

    Google Scholar 

  4. Burchenal JH: The historical development of cancer chemotherapy. In: Berkarda B, Karrer K, Mathé G (eds) Antineoplastic Chemotherapy. Thieme-Stratton Inc, New York, 1984, pp 3–15

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pratt WB, Ruddon RW: The Anticancer Drugs. Oxford University Press, 1979, pp 12–19

  6. Zubrod CG: Origins and development of chemotherapy research at the National Cancer Institute. Cancer Treat Rep 68(1): 9–19, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schoenberg BS, Schoenberg DG: Of mice and men, of triumph and tragedy, of murine models of malignant disease. Surg Gyn Obstr 141: 933–937, 1975

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sugiura K: Tumor transplantation. In: Gay WI (ed) Methods of Animal Experimentation. Academic Press, New York, 1965, pp 171–222

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zubrod CG: Historic milestone in curative chemotherapy. Semin Oncol 6(4): 490–505, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gilman A: The initial clinical trial of nitrogen mustard. Am J Surg 105: 574–578, 1963

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goldin A, Serpick AA, Mantel N: A commentary, experimental screening procedures and clinical predictability value. Cancer Chemother Rep 50(4): 173–218, 1966

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gellhorn A, Hirschberg E: Investigations of diverse systems for cancer chemotherapy screening. Cancer Res Suppl 3: 125, 1955

    Google Scholar 

  13. Carter S: Anticancer drug development progress: A comparison of approaches in the United States, the Soviet Union, Japan, and Western Europe. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 40: 31–42, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  14. Goldin A, Venditti JM, Muggia FM, Rozencweig M, DeVita VT: New animal models in cancer chemotherapy. In: Fox BW (ed) Advances in Medical Oncology, Research and Education. Vol 5. Basis for Cancer Therapy 1. Pergamon Press, New York, 1979, pp 113–122

    Google Scholar 

  15. Corbett TH, Valeriote FA, Baker LH: Is the P388 murine tumor no longer adequate as a drug discovery model? Invest New Drugs 5: 3–20, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  16. Trader MW, Harrison SDJr, Laster WRJr, Griswold DPJr: Cross-resistance and collateral sensitivity of drug-resistant P388 and L1210 leukemias to flavone acetic acid (FAA, NSC 347512) in vivo (Abstr). Proc AACR 28: 312, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wilkoff LJ, Dulmadge EA: Sensitivity of proliferating cultured murine pancreatic tumor cells to selected antitumor agents. J Natl Cancer Inst 77(5): 1163–1169, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schabel FMJr, Skipper HE, Fortner JG, Thomson JR, Laster WRJr, Moore JH, Kelley CA, Farnell DR: Experimental evaluation of potential anticancer agents. II. Studies on the growth characteristics, metastases, and drug response of hamster neoplasms of diverse ‘sites of origin’. Cancer Res 21(6): 235–339, 1961

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fortner JG, Mahy AG, Schrodt GR: Transplantable tumors of the Syrian golden hamster. Part I. Tumors of the alimentary tract, endocrine glands and melanomas. Cancer Res 21(6): 161–198, 1961

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fortner JG, Mahy AG, Cotran RS: Transplantable tumors of the Syrian golden hamster. Part II. Tumors of the hematopoietic tissues, genitourinary organs, mammary glands and sarcomas. Cancer Res 21(6): 199–234, 1961

    Google Scholar 

  21. Badiner GJ, Hamilton RD, Li LH, Bhuyan BK: Drug sensitivity of ten human tumor cell lines compared to mouse leukemia (L1210) cells. Invest New Drugs 5: 219–229, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  22. Phillips RM, Bibby MC, Double JA: A critical appraisal of the predictive value of in vitro chemosensitivity assays. J Natl Cancer Inst 82(18): 1457–1468, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  23. Simpson-Herren L, Noker PE, Wagoner SD: Variability of tumor response to chemotherapy. II. Contribution of tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 22: 131–136, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jain RK: Transport of molecules across tumor vasculature. Cancer Metastasis Rev 6: 559–593, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  25. Corbett TH: A selective two-tumor soft agar assay for drug discovery (Abstract). Proc AACR 25: 325, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  26. LoRusso PM, Biernat L, Mandesir JM, Gros P, Corbett T: Antitumor efficacy of SR95325B against murine tumor models (Abstract). Proc AACR 32: 406, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hamburger AW, Salmon SE: Primary bioassay of human tumor stem cells. Science 197: 461–463, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  28. Shoemaker RH: New approaches to antitumor drug screening: The human tumor colony forming assay. Cancer Treat Rep 70(1): 9–12, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  29. Alley MC, Scudiero DA, Monks A, Hursey ML, Czerwinski MJ, Fine DL, Abbott BJ, Mayo JG, Shoemaker RH, Boyd MR: Feasibility of drug screening with panels of human tumor cell lines using a microculture tetrazolium assay. Cancer Res 48: 589–601, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  30. Paull KD, Shoemaker RH, Hodes L, Monks A, Scudiero DA, Rubinstein L, Plowman J, Boyd MR: Display and analysis of patterns of differential activity of drugs against human tumor cell lines: Development of mean graph and COMPARE algorithm. J Natl Cancer Inst 81(14): 1088–1092, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  31. Steel GG, Peckham MJ: Human tumor xenografts: A critical appraisal. Br J Cancer 41: 133–141, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mattern J, Bak M, Hahn EW, Volm M: Human tumor xenografts as model for drug testing. Cancer Metastasis Rev 7: 263–284, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  33. Fujita F, Fujita M, Taguchi T, Shimozuma K, Sakamoto Y, Kimoto Y, Hirai T: Multifactorial analysis of parameters influencing chemosensitivity of human cancer xenografts in nude mice. Int J Cancer 43: 637–644, 1989

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southern Research Institute, Birmingham, Alabama, USA

    Daniel P. Griswold Jr. & Steadman D. Harrison Jr.

Authors
  1. Daniel P. Griswold Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steadman D. Harrison Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Griswold, D.P., Harrison, S.D. Tumor models in drug development. Cancer Metast Rev 10, 255–261 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00050796

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00050796

Key words

Search

Navigation