Table 3 Comparison of advantages and disadvantages of common cancer models
| Â | Cell model | Â | Animal model | Â | Organoid model | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Primary cells | Cell lines | Â | Cell-derived xenograft | Patient-derived xenograft | Â | |
Methods | Cells isolated directly from animal or human tissue. | Cells that converge in function, metabolism, and morphology. Infinite proliferation and immortalization. | Â | The tumour cells cultured in vitro were inoculated subcutaneously into immunodeficient mice. | Patient-derived tumour tissue was implanted into immunodeficient mice. | Â | Derived from embryonic stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). Derived from tumour tissue of patients. |
Advantages | Similar characteristics to animal or human cells. | Less interference factors, easy synchronization, easier control of experimental conditions and easy gene manipulation. |  | The effect on the host is similar. Tumour morphology, growth rate, drug sensitivity, and death time of animals were very similar. | Preserve the microenvironment of parental tumour growth. High tumour similarity. Preserve tumour heterogeneity. |  | Simulate the complexity of tumour microenvironments. High plasticity. The cultivation time is short. There are no ethical issues. |
Disadvantages | Poor uniformity. The proliferative ability is low and cannot be passaged. The transfection efficiency is low. | Partial or complete loss of the characteristics of primary cells. Mutations may occur during long-term passage. | Â | The growth rate is fast, the proliferation ratio is high, and the volume doubling time is short, which is significantly different from human tumours. | The in vivo microenvironment cannot be fully simulated. Model building takes a long time. The success rate of model building is low. | Â | Lack of innate immune cells. No endocrine and neural regulation. The technology is not yet mature. |