» Articles » PMID: 38201591

Enhanced Biomimetics of Three-Dimensional Osteosarcoma Models: A Scoping Review

Overview
Journal Cancers (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Oncology
Date 2024 Jan 11
PMID 38201591
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This scoping review evaluated 3D osteosarcoma (OS) models' biomimicry, examining their ability to mimic the tumour microenvironment (TME) and their drug sensitivity. Adhering to PRISMA-ScR guidelines, the systematic search revealed 293 studies, with 70 selected for final analysis. Overall, 64% of 3D OS models were scaffold-based, compared to self-generated spheroid models. Scaffolds generated using native matrix were most common (42%) with collagen I/hydroxyapatite predominating. Both scaffold-based and scaffold-free models were used equally for drug screening. The sensitivity of cancer cells in 3D was reported to be lower than that of cells in 2D in ~90% of the drug screening studies. This correlates with the observed upregulation of drug resistance. OS cells cultured in extracellular matrix (ECM)-mimetic scaffolds and native biomaterials were more resistant than cells in 2D. Co-cultures of OS and stromal cells in 3D models enhanced osteogenic differentiation, ECM remodelling, mineralisation, and angiogenesis, suggesting that tumour-stroma crosstalk promotes disease progression. Seven studies demonstrated selective toxicity of chemotherapeutics towards OS cells while sparing stromal cells, providing useful evidence for developing biomimetic tumour-stroma models to test selective drug toxicity. In conclusion, this review highlights the need to enhance biomimicry in 3D OS models for TME recapitulation, especially in testing novel therapeutics. Future research should explore innovative 3D biomimetic models, biomaterials, and advancements in personalised medicine.

Citing Articles

Prognostic risk modeling of endometrial cancer using programmed cell death-related genes: a comprehensive machine learning approach.

Chen T, Yang Y, Huang Z, Pan F, Xiao Z, Gong K Discov Oncol. 2025; 16(1):280.

PMID: 40056247 PMC: 11890841. DOI: 10.1007/s12672-025-02039-8.


Decellularized extracellular matrix-based disease models for drug screening.

Chen Z, Wang J, Kankala R, Jiang M, Long L, Li W Mater Today Bio. 2024; 29:101280.

PMID: 39399243 PMC: 11470555. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101280.

References
1.
Sitarski A, Fairfield H, Falank C, Reagan M . 3d Tissue Engineered In Vitro Models Of Cancer In Bone. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2018; 4(2):324-336. PMC: 5945209. DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.7b00097. View

2.
Sarkar S, Peng C, Tung Y . Comparison of VEGF-A secretion from tumor cells under cellular stresses in conventional monolayer culture and microfluidic three-dimensional spheroid models. PLoS One. 2020; 15(11):e0240833. PMC: 7657494. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240833. View

3.
Gregor A, Filova E, Novak M, Kronek J, Chlup H, Buzgo M . Designing of PLA scaffolds for bone tissue replacement fabricated by ordinary commercial 3D printer. J Biol Eng. 2017; 11:31. PMC: 5641988. DOI: 10.1186/s13036-017-0074-3. View

4.
Gao S, Shen J, Hornicek F, Duan Z . Three-dimensional (3D) culture in sarcoma research and the clinical significance. Biofabrication. 2017; 9(3):032003. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/aa7fdb. View

5.
Boedtkjer E, Pedersen S . The Acidic Tumor Microenvironment as a Driver of Cancer. Annu Rev Physiol. 2019; 82:103-126. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-physiol-021119-034627. View