This review demonstrates the role of tumor models in studying oral cancer biology and improving drug development.
Relevance. Oral cancer is one of the most common cancers among neoplasms of the head and neck. Oral cancer is characterized by a poor prognosis, a lack of specific biomarkers and highly effective targeted treatment. Experimental model systems are needed to study oral cancer pathogenesis and develop new treatments. Understanding the molecular features of oral cancer represents one of the key steps in developing new therapeutic strategies. A wide range of biological models is currently available, but their versatility is limited. Experimental models for studying oral cancer have evolved from cell cultures to in vivo systems that mimic pathological processes and the tumor-stroma interactions. Here, we summarized the available information on the current state of experimental oral cancer systems. In vitro models include immortalized and primary cell lines, spheroids and organoids, whereas in vivo models are represented by syngeneic and xenogeneic models, immunocompromised, immunocompetent, humanized, and genetically engineered animals. In vitro models are effective in studying the biology of oral tumors and evaluating the effectiveness of therapy due to high reproducibility and speed of obtaining results. Existing cell lines are widely used for fundamental and translational research and serve as a crucial component in preclinical trials. In vivo models are used in phase II of preclinical research in drug development and thus represent a transitional stage to clinical trials. Conclusion. Despite significant progress in the development of variousexperimental models, each of them has its own advantages and limitations. There is no universal model that allows for the complete extrapolation of the obtained results to the human body. Therefore, when planning research, it is crucial to select carefully the most suitable biological models based on the objectives at hand.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tretyakova et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: