Mice were randomized into different treatment groups and therapy started when evidence of tumor growth was visible in the target organ of killed scout animals (days indicated in figure legends). All treatments were administered IV. The termination criterion for sacrificing animals was sickness with locomotion impairment, and median OS was defined as the experimental day by which 50% of animals had been killed. Kaplan–Meier survival curves and the Pairwise Log-Rank test were used to compare survival between animals.
Evaluating CEA-IL2v Efficacy in Preclinical Cancer Models
Mice were randomized into different treatment groups and therapy started when evidence of tumor growth was visible in the target organ of killed scout animals (days indicated in figure legends). All treatments were administered IV. The termination criterion for sacrificing animals was sickness with locomotion impairment, and median OS was defined as the experimental day by which 50% of animals had been killed. Kaplan–Meier survival curves and the Pairwise Log-Rank test were used to compare survival between animals.
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol.
The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Corresponding Organization :
Other organizations : Roche (Switzerland), Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Roche (Netherlands), Roche Pharma AG (Germany)
Protocol cited in 3 other protocols
Variable analysis
- Combinations of treatments
- Administration route (IV)
- Tumor growth
- Median overall survival (OS)
- Sex of mice (female)
- Mouse strains (human CD16-transgenic SCID, CEA-transgenic C57BL/6-CEA)
- Cell lines (A549, LS174T, N87, KPL-4, Panc02-CEA)
- Inoculation sites (intravenous, intrasplenic, subcutaneous, mammary fat pad, intrapancreatic)
- Inoculation cell numbers
- Housing conditions (specific-pathogen-free, 12 h light/darkness cycles, ad libitum food and water)
- Health monitoring and experimental protocol approval
- No positive controls mentioned
- No negative controls mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!