Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 6;14(3):829. doi: 10.3390/cancers14030829

Table 1.

Comparison of tumor engraftment and tumor growth rate according to the development of patient-derived xenograft models.

Successful Engraftment
Diagnosis Case Successful Engraftment Failed Engraftment Successful Engraftment Rate (%) p Value a Duration b (Month) p Value c Tumor Growth Rate b p Value d
Ovarian cancer, n <0.0001 0.0021
P1 130 61 69 46.92 6.70 ± 3.95 319.3 ± 319.7 reference
P2 61 55 6 90.16 4.93 ± 3.55 575.1 ± 613.3 0.0145
P3 55 52 3 94.55 4.09 ± 2.85 527.5 ± 457.9 0.0168
Cervical and Vaginal cancer, n 0.0004 0.0007
P1 45 29 16 64.44 5.42 ± 2.74 606.7 ± 527.0 reference
P2 29 26 3 89.66 3.19 ± 1.57 558.7 ± 594.6 0.7828
P3 26 26 0 100 3.10 ± 1.61 525.2 ± 394.5 0.5891
Uterine cancer, n 0.014 0.08
P1 32 18 14 56.25 6.04 ± 4.13 427.3 ± 507.2 reference
P2 18 17 1 94.44 4.11 ± 3.15 449.8 ± 339.0 0.8992
P3 17 13 4 76.47 2.80 ± 1.48 1208 ± 1204 0.0341

a Chi-square test values for success and failure. b Values are mean ± standard derivation. c One-way ANOVA test among P1, P2, and P3. d Unpaired t-test values for growth rate of P2 or P3 compared to P1.