The potential of a spheroid tumor model composed of cells in different proliferative and metabolic states for the development of new anticancer strategies has been amply demonstrated. However, there is little or no information in the literature on the problems of reproducibility of data originating from experiments using 3D models. Our analyses, carried out using a novel open source software capable of performing an automatic image analysis of 3D tumor colonies, showed that a number of morphology parameters affect the response of large spheroids to treatment. In particular, we found that both spheroid volume and shape may be a source of variability. We also compared some commercially available viability assays specifically designed for 3D models. In conclusion, our data indicate the need for a pre-selection of tumor spheroids of homogeneous volume and shape to reduce data variability to a minimum before use in a cytotoxicity test. In addition, we identified and validated a cytotoxicity test capable of providing meaningful data on the damage induced in large tumor spheroids of up to diameter in 650 μm by different kinds of treatments.

/pdf/3d-tumor-spheroid-models-for-in-vitro-therapeutic-screening-2rhyqqniu0.pdf

3D tumor spheroid models for in vitro therapeutic screening: a systematic approach to enhance the biological relevance of data obtained

Cell culture is a widely used in vitro tool for improving our understanding of cell biology, tissue morphology, and mechanisms of diseases, drug action, protein production and the development of tissue engineering. Most research regarding cancer biology is based on experiments using two-dimensional (2D) cell cultures in vitro. However, 2D cultures have many limitations, such as the disturbance of interactions between the cellular and extracellular environments, changes in cell morphology, polarity, and method of division. These disadvantages led to the creation of models which are more closely able to mimic conditions in vivo. One such method is three-dimensional culture (3D). Optimisation of the culture conditions may allow for a better understanding of cancer biology and facilitate the study of biomarkers and targeting therapies. In this review, we compare 2D and 3D cultures in vitro as well as different versions of 3D cultures.

https://www.archivesofmedicalscience.com/pdf-63906-57842?filename=2D and 3D cell cultures _.pdf

2D and 3D cell cultures - a comparison of different types of cancer cell cultures.

Phenotypic drug discovery (PDD) approaches do not rely on knowledge of the identity of a specific drug target or a hypothesis about its role in disease, in contrast to the target-based strategies that have been widely used in the pharmaceutical industry in the past three decades. However, in recent years, there has been a resurgence in interest in PDD approaches based on their potential to address the incompletely understood complexity of diseases and their promise of delivering first-in-class drugs, as well as major advances in the tools for cell-based phenotypic screening. Nevertheless, PDD approaches also have considerable challenges, such as hit validation and target deconvolution. This article focuses on the lessons learned by researchers engaged in PDD in the pharmaceutical industry and considers the impact of 'omics' knowledge in defining a cellular disease phenotype in the era of precision medicine, introducing the concept of a chain of translatability. We particularly aim to identify features and areas in which PDD can best deliver value to drug discovery portfolios and can contribute to the identification and the development of novel medicines, and to illustrate the challenges and uncertainties that are associated with PDD in order to help set realistic expectations with regard to its benefits and costs.

/pdf/opportunities-and-challenges-in-phenotypic-drug-discovery-an-2luh3w6atr.pdf

Opportunities and challenges in phenotypic drug discovery: an industry perspective

Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are subpopulations of cancer cells sharing similar characteristics as normal stem or progenitor cells such as self-renewal ability and multi-lineage differentiation to drive tumour growth and heterogeneity. Throughout the cancer progression, CSC can further be induced from differentiated cancer cells via the adaptation and cross-talks with the tumour microenvironment as well as a response from therapeutic pressures, therefore contributes to their heterogeneous phenotypes. Challengingly, conventional cancer treatments target the bulk of the tumour and are unable to target CSCs due to their highly resistance nature, leading to metastasis and tumour recurrence. This review highlights the roles of CSCs in tumour initiation, progression and metastasis with a focus on the cellular and molecular regulators that influence their phenotypical changes and behaviours in the different stages of cancer progression. We delineate the cross-talks between CSCs with the tumour microenvironment that support their intrinsic properties including survival, stemness, quiescence and their cellular and molecular adaptation in response to therapeutic pressure. An insight into the distinct roles of CSCs in promoting angiogenesis and metastasis has been captured based on in vitro and in vivo evidences. Given dynamic cellular events along the cancer progression and contributions of resistance nature by CSCs, understanding their molecular and cellular regulatory mechanism in a heterogeneous nature, provides significant cornerstone for the development of CSC-specific therapeutics.

/pdf/cancer-stem-cells-as-key-drivers-of-tumour-progression-3jl1nsw5aw.pdf

Cancer stem cells as key drivers of tumour progression

The past decades have witnessed significant efforts toward the development of three-dimensional (3D) cell cultures as systems that better mimic in vivo physiology. Today, 3D cell cultures are emerging, not only as a new tool in early drug discovery but also as potential therapeutics to treat disease. In this review, we assess leading 3D cell culture technologies and their impact on drug discovery, including spheroids, organoids, scaffolds, hydrogels, organs-on-chips, and 3D bioprinting. We also discuss the implementation of these technologies in compound identification, screening, and development, ranging from disease modeling to assessment of efficacy and safety profiles.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1087057117696795

Louis Bastien Weiswald

Papers

Spherical cancer models in tumor biology.