@article{FecherHofmannBucketal.2016,
  author    = {Fecher, David and Hofmann, Elisabeth and Buck, Andreas and Bundschuh, Ralph and Nietzer, Sarah and Dandekar, Gudrun and Walles, Thorsten and Walles, Heike and L{\"u}ckerath, Katharina and Steinke, Maria},
  title     = {Human Organotypic Lung Tumor Models: Suitable For Preclinical \(^{18}\)F-FDG PET-Imaging},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {8},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0160282},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-179678},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Development of predictable in vitro tumor models is a challenging task due to the enormous complexity of tumors in vivo. The closer the resemblance of these models to human tumor characteristics, the more suitable they are for drug-development and -testing. In the present study, we generated a complex 3D lung tumor test system based on acellular rat lungs. A decellularization protocol was established preserving the architecture, important ECM components and the basement membrane of the lung. Human lung tumor cells cultured on the scaffold formed cluster and exhibited an up-regulation of the carcinoma-associated marker mucin1 as well as a reduced proliferation rate compared to respective 2D culture. Additionally, employing functional imaging with 2-deoxy-2-[\(^{18}\)F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) these tumor cell cluster could be detected and tracked over time. This approach allowed monitoring of a targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment in the in vitro lung tumor model non-destructively. Surprisingly, FDG-PET assessment of single tumor cell cluster on the same scaffold exhibited differences in their response to therapy, indicating heterogeneity in the lung tumor model. In conclusion, our complex lung tumor test system features important characteristics of tumors and its microenvironment and allows monitoring of tumor growth and -metabolism in combination with functional imaging. In longitudinal studies, new therapeutic approaches and their long-term effects can be evaluated to adapt treatment regimes in future.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DiessnerWischnewskyBlettneretal.2016,
  author    = {Diessner, Joachim and Wischnewsky, Manfred and Blettner, Maria and H{\"a}usler, Sebastian and Janni, Wolfgang and Kreienberg, Rolf and Stein, Roland and St{\"u}ber, Tanja and Schwentner, Lukas and Bartmann, Catharina and W{\"o}ckel, Achim},
  title     = {Do Patients with Luminal A Breast Cancer Profit from Adjuvant Systemic Therapy? A Retrospective Multicenter Study},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {12},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0168730},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-178217},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background Luminal A breast cancers respond well to anti-hormonal therapy (HT), are associated with a generally favorable prognosis and constitute the majority of breast cancer subtypes. HT is the mainstay of treatment of these patients, accompanied by an acceptable profile of side effects, whereas the added benefit of chemotherapy (CHT), including anthracycline and taxane-based programs, is less clear-cut and has undergone a process of critical revision. Methods In the framework of the BRENDA collective, we analyzed the benefits of CHT compared to HT in 4570 luminal A patients (pts) with primary diagnosis between 2001 and 2008. The results were adjusted by nodal status, age, tumor size and grading. Results There has been a progressive reduction in the use of CHT in luminal A patients during the last decade. Neither univariate nor multivariate analyses showed any statistically significant differences in relapse free survival (RFS) with the addition of CHT to adjuvant HT, independent of the nodal status, age, tumor size or grading. Even for patients with more than 3 affected lymph nodes, there was no significant difference (univariate: p = 0.865; HR 0.94; 95\% CI: 0.46-1.93; multivariate: p = 0.812; HR 0.92; 95\% CI: 0.45-1.88). Conclusions The addition of CHT to HT provides minimal or no clinical benefit at all to patients with luminal A breast cancer, independent of the RFS-risk. Consequently, risk estimation cannot be the initial step in the decisional process. These findings-that are in line with several publications-should encourage the critical evaluation of applying adjuvant CHT to patients with luminal A breast cancer.},
  language  = {en}
}