LumeNEXT: A Practical Method to Pattern Luminal Structures in ECM Gels

Jiménez-Torres, José A.; Peery, Stephen L.; Sung, Kyung Eun; Beebe, David J.

doi:10.1002/adhm.201500608

Cited by 104 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, reagents that readout diverse physiologies and are compatible with live cell assays have been developed, enabling researchers to multiplex several readouts in one model (Butterick et al, 2014; Hooper, 2011). The emergence of 3D, spheroid, and other organotypic cultures allows the analysis of tissue level changes (Bischel, Young, Mader, & Beebe, 2013; Jimenez-Torres, Peery, Sung, & Beebe, 2015; Zervantonakis et al, 2012). The term “3D model” has been used interchangeably with “organotypic model”.…”

Section: The Current State Of Primary Cell Based In Vitro Models: mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, the integration of microfluidics with organotypic models enables the generation of tissue structures, such as a circular shaped lumen system, with enhanced controls and throughput (Bischel, et al, 2013). Organotypic models enable researchers to evaluate changes that were previously difficult to quantify in vitro , including key events in cancer progression, such as invasion, angiogenesis, intravasation, and extravasation (Bischel, Beebe, & Sung, 2015; Jeon et al, 2015; Jimenez-Torres, et al, 2015; Zervantonakis, et al, 2012). Evaluating responses from functional assays in addition to the molecular signatures of a given tumor would offer valuable insight into optimal drug options for the individual patient.…”

Section: The Current State Of Primary Cell Based In Vitro Models: mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Personalized in vitro cancer models to predict therapeutic response: Challenges and a framework for improvement

Morgan

Johnson

Livingston

et al. 2016

Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personalized cancer therapy focuses on characterizing the relevant phenotypes of the patient, as well as the patient’s tumor, to predict the most effective cancer therapy. Historically, these methods have not proven predictive in regards to predicting therapeutic response. Emerging culture platforms are designed to better recapitulate the in vivo environment, thus, there is renewed interest in integrating patient samples into in vitro cancer models to assess therapeutic response. Successful examples of translating in vitro response to clinical relevance are limited due to issues with patient sample acquisition, variability and culture. We will review traditional and emerging in vitro models for personalized medicine, focusing on the technologies, microenvironmental components, and readouts utilized. We will then offer our perspective on how to apply a framework derived from toxicology and ecology towards designing improved personalized in vitro models of cancer. The framework serves as a tool for identifying optimal readouts and culture conditions, thus maximizing the information gained from each patient sample.

show abstract

Section: The Current State Of Primary Cell Based In Vitro Models: mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Current State Of Primary Cell Based In Vitro Models: mentioning

confidence: 99%

Personalized in vitro cancer models to predict therapeutic response: Challenges and a framework for improvement

Morgan

Johnson

Livingston

et al. 2016

Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this work, we developed a tumor‐lymphatic microfluidic device for coculturing tubular lymphatic vessels and breast cancer cells to study their crosstalk. The design of the device was based on previous methods for making endothelial vessels in natural extracellular matrix (ECM) hydrogel and for coculturing these vessels with breast cancer cells . The device comprised a chamber to inject an unpolymerized collagen type I hydrogel and two adjacent PDMS rods suspended in the chamber ( Figure A).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Tumor‐Lymphatic Microfluidic Model Reveals Differential Conditioning of Lymphatic Vessels by Breast Cancer Cells

Ayuso

Gong

Skala

et al. 2020

Adv Healthcare Materials

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast tumor progression is a complex process involving intricate crosstalk between the primary tumor and its microenvironment. In the context of breast tumor‐lymphatic interactions, it is unclear how breast cancer cells alter the gene expression of lymphatic endothelial cells and how these transcriptional changes potentiate lymphatic dysfunction. Thus, there is a need for in vitro lymphatic vessel models to study these interactions. In this work, a tumor‐lymphatic microfluidic model is developed to study the differential conditioning of lymphatic vessels by estrogen receptor‐positive (i.e., MCF7) and triple‐negative (i.e., MDA‐MB‐231) breast cancer cells. The model consists of a lymphatic endothelial vessel cultured adjacently to either MCF7 or MDA‐MB‐231 cells. Quantitative transcriptional analysis reveals expression changes in genes related to vessel growth, permeability, metabolism, hypoxia, and apoptosis in lymphatic endothelial cells cocultured with breast cancer cells. Interestingly, these changes are different in the MCF7‐lymphatic cocultures as compared to the 231‐lymphatic cocultures. Importantly, these changes in gene expression correlate to functional responses, such as endothelial barrier dysfunction. These results collectively demonstrate the utility of this model for studying breast tumor‐lymphatic crosstalk for multiple breast cancer subtypes.

show abstract

“…Microdevice fabrication is described in more detail in. 33 Briefly, the template was designed in illustrator and fabricated using SU-8 based lithography. Next, PDMS-based microdevices were fabricated using the SU-8 template and the microdevices were treated with oxygen plasma and bonded to a 60mm glass bottom Petri dish.…”

Section: Microdevice Design and Fabricationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[29][30][31] Different microfluidic models have been used to recreate the tumor microenvironment and key processes including tumorinduced angiogenesis during cancer metastasis. [32][33][34][35] Recently, some models have been proposed to study the interaction between immune cells and solid tumors; focusing on the effect of hypoxia on immune migration or T cell receptor modification. [36][37][38] In this work, we present a microfluidic model to study NK cell immunotherapies and ADCC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating natural killer cell cytotoxicity against solid tumors using a microfluidic model

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2019) Evaluating natural killer cell cytotoxicity against solid tumors using a microfluidic model, OncoImmunology, 8:3, 1553477, ABSTRACT Immunotherapies against solid tumors face additional challenges compared with hematological cancers. In solid tumors, immune cells and antibodies need to extravasate from vasculature, find the tumor, and migrate through a dense mass of cells. These multiple steps pose significant obstacles for solid tumor immunotherapy and their study has remained difficult using classic in vitro models based on Petri dishes. In this work, a microfluidic model has been developed to study natural killer cell response. The model includes a 3D breast cancer spheroid in a 3D extracellular matrix, and two flanking lumens lined with endothelial cells, replicating key structures and components during the immune response. Natural Killer cells and antibodies targeting the tumor cells were either embedded in the matrix or perfused through the lateral blood vessels. Antibodies that were perfused through the lateral lumens extravasated out of the blood vessels and rapidly diffused through the matrix. However, tumor cell-cell junctions hindered antibody penetration within the spheroid. On the other hand, natural killer cells were able to detect the presence of the tumor spheroid several hundreds of microns away and penetrate the spheroid faster than the antibodies. Once inside the spheroid, natural killer cells were able to destroy tumor cells at the spheroid periphery and, importantly, also at the innermost layers. Finally, the combination of antibody-cytokine conjugates and natural killer cells led to an enhanced cytotoxicity located mostly at the spheroid periphery. Overall, these results demonstrate the utility of the model for informing immunotherapy of solid tumors. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

LumeNEXT: A Practical Method to Pattern Luminal Structures in ECM Gels

Cited by 104 publications

References 40 publications

Personalized in vitro cancer models to predict therapeutic response: Challenges and a framework for improvement

Personalized in vitro cancer models to predict therapeutic response: Challenges and a framework for improvement

Human Tumor‐Lymphatic Microfluidic Model Reveals Differential Conditioning of Lymphatic Vessels by Breast Cancer Cells

Evaluating natural killer cell cytotoxicity against solid tumors using a microfluidic model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About