2010
DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.68
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Of mice and (wo)men: Mouse models of breast cancer metastasis to bone

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Impedance of entry into the brain by the BBB may contribute to the apparent extended dormancy period of the metastatic cells present in the brain, in combination with other influencing factors. Overall, the long duration from the time of detection of cancer cells in the organs (by PCR and/or histological staining) to the development of visual macrometastasis in mouse organs was similar to the delay in development of measurable metastasis in breast cancer patients following diagnosis of primary breast tumors [46,47]. The extended latency between the injection of tumorspheres and the development of macroscopic metastatic lesions is a limitation of this model.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Impedance of entry into the brain by the BBB may contribute to the apparent extended dormancy period of the metastatic cells present in the brain, in combination with other influencing factors. Overall, the long duration from the time of detection of cancer cells in the organs (by PCR and/or histological staining) to the development of visual macrometastasis in mouse organs was similar to the delay in development of measurable metastasis in breast cancer patients following diagnosis of primary breast tumors [46,47]. The extended latency between the injection of tumorspheres and the development of macroscopic metastatic lesions is a limitation of this model.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Although in vivo mouse models enable study of the metastatic process within the context of whole body physiology, drawbacks include the prolonged time course and relative inefficiency of metastatic colonization of human breast cancer cells into the murine skeletal system, coupled with the inability to perturb and monitor detailed events at the cellular level within the microenvironment [3-6]. In vitro models based on the co-culture of breast cancer cells with bone marrow-derived stromal cells or osteoblasts facilitate the analysis of specific cell interactions, but exclude many critical components of the bone microenvironment [7-17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, in the case of cancer cell extravasation, in vivo video microscopy of tail-vein injected cancer cells to mouse has been the primary means of investigation [21,44]. Moreover, advanced in vivo models were developed to study metastasis through direct injection of breast cancer cells either intravenously or directly to specific organs [45,46], and intravital video microscopy was used to visualize the interactions of cancer cells in the circulatory system and the metastatic site in a more physiologically relevant manner. However, the main disadvantages of in vivo models are that they make it difficult to perform tightly regulated, parametric studies and quantification is limited [47].…”
Section: In Vivo and In Vitro Cancer Models For Invasion Migration mentioning
confidence: 99%