The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating cell lines as tumour models by comparison of genomic profiles
Open accessAbstract
Cancer cell lines are frequently used as in vitro tumour models. Recent molecular profiles of hundreds of cell lines from The Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia and thousands of tumour samples from the Cancer Genome Atlas now allow a systematic genomic comparison of cell lines and tumours. Here we analyse a panel of 47 ovarian cancer cell lines and identify those that have the highest genetic similarity to ovarian tumours. Our comparison of copy-number changes, mutations and mRNA expression profiles reveals pronounced differences in molecular profiles between commonly used ovarian cancer cell lines and high-grade serous ovarian cancer tumour samples. We identify several rarely used cell lines that more closely resemble cognate tumour profiles than commonly used cell lines, and we propose these lines as the most suitable models of ovarian cancer. Our results indicate that the gap between cell lines and tumours can be bridged by genomically informed choices of cell line models for all tumour types.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cerami, E., Gao, J., Dogrusoz, U., Gross, B. E., Sumer, S. O., Aksoy, B. A., Jacobsen, A., Byrne, C. J., Heuer, M. L., Larsson, E., et al. (2012) · Cancer Discovery · doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-12-0095 · Cited by 17,455
Self-citationJemal, A., Siegel, R., Xu, J., & Ward, E. (2010) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.20073 · Cited by 12,596
The Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia enables predictive modelling of anticancer drug sensitivity
Barretina, J., Caponigro, G., Stransky, N., Venkatesan, K., Margolin, A. A., Kim, S., Wilson, C. J., Lehár, J., Kryukov, G. V., Sonkin, D., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11003 · Cited by 7,950
ARID1A Mutations in Endometriosis-Associated Ovarian Carcinomas
Wiegand, K. C., Shah, S. P., Al-Agha, O. M., Zhao, Y., Tse, K., Zeng, T., Senz, J., McConechy, M. K., Anglesio, M. S., Kalloger, S. E., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1008433 · Cited by 1,712
Gillet, J.-P., Calcagno, A. M., Varma, S., Marino, M., Green, L. J., Vora, M. I., Patel, C., Orina, J. N., Eliseeva, T. A., Singal, V., et al. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1111840108 · Cited by 477 · cited 2×
“Top right panels: neighbourhoods (1) of the top cell lines in our analysis, (2) of cell line IGROV1, and (3) of cell line A2780.”
Background
Cited by
Cholangiocarcinoma 2020: the next horizon in mechanisms and management
Banales, J. M., Marin, J. J. G., Lamarca, A., Rodrigues, P. M., Khan, S. A., Roberts, L. R., Cardinale, V., Carpino, G., Andersen, J. B., Braconi, C., et al. (2020) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/s41575-020-0310-z · Cited by 2,411
Chiappinelli, K. B., Strissel, P. L., Desrichard, A., Li, H., Henke, C., Akman, B., Hein, A., Rote, N. S., Cope, L. M., Snyder, A., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.07.011 · Cited by 2,022
An organoid platform for ovarian cancer captures intra- and interpatient heterogeneity
Kopper, O., de Witte, C. J., Lõhmussaar, K., Valle-Inclan, J. E., Hami, N., Kester, L., Balgobind, A. V., Korving, J., Proost, N., Begthel, H., et al. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0422-6 · Cited by 834
In Vitro Tumor Models: Advantages, Disadvantages, Variables, and Selecting the Right Platform
Katt, M. E., Placone, A. L., Wong, A. D., Xu, Z. S., & Searson, P. C. (2016) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2016.00012 · Cited by 754
A survey of current trends in computational drug repositioning
Li, J., Zheng, S., Chen, B., Butte, A. J., Swamidass, S. J., & Lu, Z. (2016) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbv020 · Cited by 555
Metadata
- Authors
- Domcke, S., Sinha, R., Levine, D. A., Sander, C., & Schultz, N.
- Venue
- Nature Communications
- Published
- 2013-07-09
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2126-2126
- ISSN
- 2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1997338647
- Cited by
- 1,418
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 106.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluating cell lines as tumour models by comparison of genomic profiles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ncomms3126
- The paper
- Domcke, S., Sinha, R., Levine, D. A., Sander, C., & Schultz, N. (2013). Evaluating cell lines as tumour models by comparison of genomic profiles. Nature Communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3126
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
