首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Comparative Study of Multicellular Tumor Spheroid Formation Methods and Implications for Drug Screening
【2h】

Comparative Study of Multicellular Tumor Spheroid Formation Methods and Implications for Drug Screening

机译:多细胞肿瘤球体形成方法的比较研究及药物筛选的意义

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Improved in vitro models are needed to better understand cancer progression and bridge the gap between in vitro proof-of-concept studies, in vivo validation, and clinical application. Multicellular tumor spheroids (MCTS) are a popular method for three-dimensional (3D) cell culture, because they capture some aspects of the dimensionality, cell–cell contact, and cell–matrix interactions seen in vivo. Many approaches exist to create MCTS from cell lines, and they have been used to study tumor cell invasion, growth, and how cells respond to drugs in physiologically relevant 3D microenvironments. However, there are several discrepancies in the observations made of cell behaviors when comparing between MCTS formation methods. To resolve these inconsistencies, we created and compared the behavior of breast, prostate, and ovarian cancer cells across three MCTS formation methods: in polyNIPAAM gels, in microwells, or in suspension culture. These methods formed MCTS via proliferation from single cells or passive aggregation, and therefore showed differential reliance on genes important for cell–cell or cell–matrix interactions. We also found that the MCTS formation method dictated drug sensitivity, where MCTS formed over longer periods of time via clonal growth were more resistant to treatment. Toward clinical application, we compared an ovarian cancer cell line MCTS formed in polyNIPAAM with cells from patient-derived malignant ascites. The method that relied on clonal growth (PolyNIPAAM gel) was more time and cost intensive, but yielded MCTS that were uniformly spherical, and exhibited the most reproducible drug responses. Conversely, MCTS methods that relied on aggregation were faster, but yielded MCTS with grapelike, lobular structures. These three MCTS formation methods differed in culture time requirements and complexity, and had distinct drug response profiles, suggesting the choice of MCTS formation method should be carefully chosen based on the application required.
机译:需要改进的体外模型来更好地了解癌症的进展并弥合体外概念验证研究,体内验证和临床应用之间的差距。多细胞肿瘤球体(MCTS)是三维(3D)细胞培养的一种流行方法,因为它们捕获了体内观察到的尺寸,细胞间接触和细胞与基质相互作用的某些方面。存在许多从细胞系创建MCTS的方法,它们已被用于研究肿瘤细胞的侵袭,生长以及在生理相关的3D微环境中细胞如何响应药物。但是,在比较MCTS形成方法时,细胞行为的观察结果存在一些差异。为了解决这些不一致的问题,我们创建并比较了三种MCTS形成方法(在polyNIPAAM凝胶,微孔或悬浮培养中)中乳腺癌,前列腺癌和卵巢癌细胞的行为。这些方法通过单细胞增殖或被动聚集形成MCTS,因此显示出对细胞-细胞或细胞-基质相互作用重要基因的不同依赖性。我们还发现,MCTS形成方法决定了药物敏感性,其中通过克隆生长在较长时间内形成的MCTS对治疗的抵抗力更高。在临床应用方面,我们将polyNIPAAM中形成的卵巢癌细胞系MCTS与来自患者的恶性腹水的细胞进行了比较。依靠克隆生长的方法(PolyNIPAAM凝胶)需要更多的时间和成本,但是产生的MCTS呈球形,显示出最可重复的药物反应。相反,依赖于聚集的MCTS方法速度更快,但产生的MCTS具有葡萄状的小叶结构。这三种MCTS形成方法在培养时间要求和复杂性方面有所不同,并且具有不同的药物反应曲线,这表明应根据所需应用谨慎选择MCTS形成方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号