Modèles alternatifs
Open Access
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 38, Number 10, Octobre 2022
Modèles alternatifs
Page(s) 795 - 799
Section M/S Revues
Published online 11 October 2022
  1. Murphy JB, Rous P. The behaviour of chicken sarcoma implanted in the developing embryo. J Exp Med 1912 ; 15 : 119–132. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen L, Wang S, Feng Y, et al. Utilisation of chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane as a model platform for imaging-navigated biomedical research. Cells 2021; 10 : 463. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Fraguas-Sánchez AI, Martín-Sabroso C, Torres-Suárez AI. The chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane model : a research approach for ex vivo and in vivo experiments. Curr Med Chem 2022; 29 : 1702–17. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Leupold JH, Patil N, Allgayer H. The chicken egg chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model as an in vivo method for the investigation of the invasion and metastasis cascade of malignant tumor cells. Methods Mol Biol 2021; 2294 : 17–26. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Pawlikowska P, Tayoun T, Oulhen M, et al. Exploitation of the chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) as a platform for anti-metastatic drug testing. Sci Rep 2020; 10 : 16876. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Schneider-Stock R, Ribatti D. The CAM assay as an alternative in vivo model for drug testing. Handb Exp Parmacol 2021; 265 : 303–23. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Mapanao AK, Che PP, Sarogni P, et al. Tumor grafted - chick chorioallantoic membrane as an alternative model for biological cancer research and conventional/nanomaterial-based theranostics evaluation. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2021; 17 : 947–68. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Mangir N, Raza A, Haycock JW, et al. An improved in vivo methodology to visualise tumour induced changes in vasculature using the chick chorionic allantoic membrane assay. In vivo 2018 ; 32 : 461–472. [Google Scholar]
  9. Janković BD, Isaković K, Lukić ML, et al. Immunological capacity of the chicken embryo. I. Relationship between the maturation of lymphoid tissues and the occurrence of cell-mediated immunity in the developing chicken embryo. Immunology 1975; 29 : 497–508. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fellah JS, Jaffredo T, Nagy N, Dunon N. In: Chapter 3 - Development of the Avian Immune System. Editors: Schat KA, Kaspers B, Kaiser P. Avian Immunology (Second Edition). Cambridge (États-Unis) : Academic Press, 2014 : pp 45–63. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Maacha S, Saule S. Evaluation of tumor cell invasiveness in vivo: The chick chorioallantoic membrane assay. Methods Mol Biol 2018 ; 1749 : 71–77. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Ribatti D. The CAM assay in the study of the metastatic process. Exp Cell Res 2021; 400 : 112510. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Rovithi M, Avan A, Funel Net al. Development of bioluminescent chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) models for primary pancreatic cancer cells: a platform for drug testing. Sci Rep 2017 ; 7 : 44686. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Jefferies B, Lenze F, Sathe Aet al. Non-invasive imaging of engineered human tumors in the living chicken embryo. Sci Rep 2017 ; 7 : 4991. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Eckrich J, Kugler P, Buhr CR, et al. Monitoring of tumor growth and vascularization with repetitive ultrasonography in the chicken chorioallantoic-membrane-assay. Sci Rep 2020; 10 : 18585. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Cassidy JW, Caldas C, Bruna A. Maintaining tumor heterogeneity in patient-derived tumor xenografts. Cancer Res 2015 ; 75 : 2963–2968. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Ben-David U, Ha G, Tseng YYet al. Patient-derived xenografts undergo murine-specific tumor evolution. Nat Genet 2017 ; 49 : 1567–1575. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. DeBord LC, Pathak RR, Villaneuva Met al. The chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) as a versatile patient-derived xenograft (PDX) platform for precision medicine and preclinical research. Am J Cancer Res 2018 ; 8 : 1642–1660. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Komatsu A, Matsumoto K, Saito Tet al. Patient derived chicken egg tumor model (PDcE Model): Current status and critical issues. Cells 2019 ; 8 : 440. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Chu PY, Pei-Fern Koh A, Antony J, Yun-Ju Huang R. Applications of the chick chorioallantoic membrane as an alternative model for cancer studies. Cells Tissues Organs 2022; 211 : 222–37. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hanahan D, Coussens LM. Accessories to the crime: functions of cells recruited to the tumor. microenvironment. Cancer Cell 2012 ; 21 : 309–322. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Tyner JW, Haderk F, Kumaraswamy A, et al. Understanding drug sensitivity and tackling resistance in cancer. Cancer Res 2022; 82 : 1448–60. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Ireson CR, Alavijeh MS, Palmer AM, Fowler ER, Jones HJ. The role of mouse tumour models in the discovery and development of anticancer drugs. Br J Cancer 2019 ; 121 : 101–108. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Al-Asmakh M, Bawadi H, Hamdan M, et al. Dasatinib and PD-L1 inhibitors provoke toxicity and inhibit angiogenesis in the embryo. Biomed Pharmacother 2021; 134 : 111134. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Garcia P, Wang Y, Viallet J, Macek Jilkova Z. The chicken embryo model: A novel and relevant model for immune-based studies. Front Immunol 2021; 12 : 791081. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Ribatti D.. The chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM). A multifaceted experimental model. Mech Dev 2016 ; 141 : 70–77. [Google Scholar]
  27. Klingenberg M, Becker J, Eberth Set al. The chick chorioallantoic membrane as an in vivo xenograft model for Burkitt lymphoma. BMC Cancer 2014 ; 14 : 339. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.