Abstract 2979: 3D systems to study pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Comparison of the most referenced models using a bibliometric approach
Authors: Ponz-Sarvise Mariano , de Carvajal Carmen 
Published: July 2021

Abstract
Introduction: The use of 3D models to study pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has evolved in the last years. There are several described models all of which may seem to be equally relevant. However, which of these methodologies is preferred in pancreatic cancer research has not been clarified. There is no head-to-head comparison described so far and no data to prove which may better reflect the full spectrum of a patient's tumor and exhibit disease stage-specific characteristics. Our hypothesis is that if a model is useful it should be adopted and therefore referenced in the literature. Although there may be some concerns to this approach, we tried to show the most referenced models of 3D cultures in PDAC by different methodologies.
Material and Methods: We performed a PubMed search using the following mesh terms ‘pancreatic ductal organoids', ‘human pancreatic ductal cancer organoids', ‘mouse pancreatic ductal cancer organoids' and ‘pancreatic ductal cancer organoids'. Using PubMed and Web Of Science we analyzed the citation network with regards to number of citations, impact factor and where in the article was the reference included. If it was included in the material and methods section, we confirmed they used that model for the article and not for other reasons. In that way, we tried to define the use of the model based on published literature. We defined this as the MM references.
Results: According to our mesh terms, we identified 4 organoid models: Skala (Pancreas, July 2016), Muthuswamy (Nature, November 2015), Kuo (Nature, July 2014) and Tuveson (Cell, January 2015). They were cited 1062 times from the date of publication to October 5, 2020. Skala's methodology had the lowest number of citations (43), while Kuo ranked third (161), followed by Muthuswamy (217) and Tuveson (641). While examining the citation network of each model, we excluded reviews and book chapters and found that Skala's citations included 19 articles, Kuo's 62, Muthuswamy's 101 and Tuveson's 348. After analyzing the MM references we found that Skala's methodology had 5, Kuo's 8, Muthuswamy's 6 and Tuveson's had 79. We then identified the papers in which the authors were part of the original contributors for the purpose of identifying how extended the use of the method was. Taking this into consideration, Skala accounted for 1 out of 5 MM references (16.7% ), Kuo for 7 out of 8 (87.5%), Muthuswamy for 2 out of 6 (33.3%) and Tuveson for 58 out of 79 (73.4%). One caveat from our work is that not every published paper includes the original methodological reference in their publication and, if that is the case, it will not be reflected in our data.
Conclusion: Tuveson's methodology is widely adopted, not only by the Tuveson Lab but also by the rest of the PDAC research community.
Citation Format: Mariano Ponz-Sarvise, Carmen de Carvajal. 3D systems to study pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Comparison of the most referenced models using a bibliometric approach [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 2979.