| Literature DB >> 34830897 |
Ana Karen Mendoza-Martinez1,2, Daniela Loessner3,4,5,6, Alvaro Mata7,8,9, Helena S Azevedo1,2.
Abstract
Ovarian cancer (OvCa) is one of the leading causes of gynecologic malignancies. Despite treatment with surgery and chemotherapy, OvCa disseminates and recurs frequently, reducing the survival rate for patients. There is an urgent need to develop more effective treatment options for women diagnosed with OvCa. The tumor microenvironment (TME) is a key driver of disease progression, metastasis and resistance to treatment. For this reason, 3D models have been designed to represent this specific niche and allow more realistic cell behaviors compared to conventional 2D approaches. In particular, self-assembling peptides represent a promising biomaterial platform to study tumor biology. They form nanofiber networks that resemble the architecture of the extracellular matrix and can be designed to display mechanical properties and biochemical motifs representative of the TME. In this review, we highlight the properties and benefits of emerging 3D platforms used to model the ovarian TME. We also outline the challenges associated with using these 3D systems and provide suggestions for future studies and developments. We conclude that our understanding of OvCa and advances in materials science will progress the engineering of novel 3D approaches, which will enable the development of more effective therapies.Entities:
Keywords: 3D models; biomaterial; extracellular matrix; mechanical properties; ovarian cancer; peptides; self-assembly; tumor microenvironment
Year: 2021 PMID: 34830897 PMCID: PMC8616551 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13225745
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1Schematic representation of the main cellular components and extracellular matrix composition of the ovarian tumor microenvironment depending on the disease site. (A) In the primary tumor, cancer cells recruit tumor-associated macrophages, cancer-associated fibroblasts, T-cells and endothelial cells. Many extracellular matrix components, such as fibronectin, hyaluronan, tenascin, versican, matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and lysyl oxidase (LOX) are upregulated. Collagen progressively remodels into thick fibrils and is randomly oriented. Laminin and collagen IV are underexpressed. (B) Detached single cells or spheroids are immersed in the ascitic fluid, which contains macrophages, fibroblasts, mesothelial cells and immune cells. Extracellular matrix components are found within the aggregated cells and the ascitic fluid. (C) Cancer cells settle onto the mesothelial lining to form secondary tumors that are rich in collagen. Laminin and collagen IV are overexpressed to promote metastasis. Levels of collagen I and III start to decrease.
Figure 2Outline of the main 3D platforms used to model the tumor microenvironment of ovarian cancer.
Three-dimensional models of the ovarian TME.
| Model | Characteristics and Advantages | Disadvantages and Limitations | Applications in Cancer Research | Cell Types | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mouse models: | Captures in vivo complexity | Ethical concerns | - | - | - |
| Costly | |||||
| Time-consuming | |||||
| Special facilities required for housing | |||||
| Requires licenses | |||||
| Murine biology and stroma different from human TME | |||||
| Xenografts | Cell lines or patient-derived | Low success rate | Analysis of cancer development and heterogeneity of tumors | HO-8910PM, from patient-derived tissue and ascites | [ |
| Resemble tumor histology, formation of ascites, gene expression, vasculature, metastatic potential and response to chemotherapy | Possibility of leakage of cancer cells after injection | ||||
| Establishment of tumor biobanks. | Possible downregulation of certain genes and replacement of human stroma by murine stroma | Evaluation of tumor responses to drugs. | |||
| Resemble patient heterogeneity | Immunodeficient host | Used in parallel with 3D in vitro studies | |||
| Syngeneic | Immunocompetent model | Lack of heterogeneity. | Evaluate tumor growth. | ID8 | [ |
| Rapid growth | |||||
| Easily manipulated | |||||
| Induce metastasis with ascites formation | |||||
| Recapitulate anoikis resistance | |||||
| Genetically | Display genetic heterogeneity | Longer time for tumor development. | Model metastasis and cancer progression | - | [ |
| Resemble tumor histology | |||||
| Genetically manipulated. | |||||
| Laying hen | Display pathological and genetical features similar to patient tumors | Ethical concerns. | Study cancer origin | - | [ |
| Lack of native TME | |||||
| Similar developmental pattern to human tumors | Lack of technology-specific for host (e.g., antibodies) | ||||
| High incidence of disease | Lack of protocols | ||||
| Spheroids | Resemble cell aggregates found in ascites | Require inclusion of vasculature, immune system components, mechanical signals and fluid dynamics | Study spheroid formation mechanisms. | Ascites-derived cells, SKOV-3, OV-90, OVCAR-3, OVCAR-8, TOV-112, TOV-21, TOV-155 | [ |
| Support different ratios of cancer and stromal cells | |||||
| Mimic nutrient transport, growth kinetics and cell–cell interactions found in solid tumors | Difficulty to image them | Evaluate tumor invasion. | |||
| Diverse spheroid production techniques | Not all cell lines are capable of forming spheroids | ||||
| Resemble chemoresistance | Different morphology depending on protocol used | Testing of drug delivery systems, drug efficacy and penetration, receptor targeting, cell recruitment abilities and tumor biology. | |||
| Low cost, ease of use, reproducible, and high-throughput | Lack of native ECM | ||||
| Organoids | Maintain histological features | Lack of immune system elements, stromal cells and vasculature. | Study carcinogenesis | Patient-derived tissue fragments, ascites-derived cells | [ |
| Mimic genetic features including intra-tumoral | |||||
| High-throughput screening | Costly. | ||||
| Derived from small pieces of tissue | Require supplemental growth factors | ||||
| Can be genetically modified | Intra-tumoral heterogeneity can be lost during passages | ||||
| Creation of biobanks | Mutations are subsequently acquired | ||||
| Maintain cell viability over long periods of time | Need of culture protocols and drug screening strategies | ||||
| Microfluidic | Commercially available or custom-made devices | Costly | Study tumor development | A2780, TOV112D, OV90, OVCAR5, SKOV-3, ascites-derived cells | [ |
| Include multiple chambers and cell populations | |||||
| Enable fluid perfusion | Special facilities required for manufacture | Resemble cancer dissemination and metastasis | |||
| Enable formation of spheroids | Predesigned devices cannot be customized | ||||
| Some platforms enable testing pharmcokinetics/dynamics of drugs | Limited recollection of spheroids | Drug screening | |||
| Variable shear stress | Complex design and use | ||||
| Include nutrient supply and waste removal | Limited material choice | Genomic analysis | |||
| Maintain cell viability over long periods of time | Lack of cell–cell and cell–matrix interactions | ||||
| Natural hydrogels: | Contains collagen, laminin, enactin, other ECM molecules and growth factors | Chemically not well-defined | Study tumor biology | SKOV-3, OVCAR-10 | [ |
| Cyto-compatible | High batch-to-batch variation | ||||
| Minimally processed | Undefined impurities | ||||
| Mimics in vivo conditions | Limited flexibility to tune the mechanical properties | ||||
| Enables cell–matrix interactions | Quick gelation time | ||||
| Promotes cell growth | Contains growth factors that can cause activation of signaling cascades | ||||
| Collagen | Primary constituent of ECM | Batch-to-batch variation | Study tumor biology | A2780, OV-NC, OV-206, SKOV-3, OVCAR-3, OvCa433, DOV13, OVSAHO | [ |
| Intrinsic cues for cell recognition | |||||
| Similar stiffness to tissues | Limited control over physical and mechanical properties | ||||
| Maintains cell viability over long periods of time | Inability to tailor its composition | ||||
| Enhances cell spheroid and invasion | TME contains different types of collagen and other ECM molecules, not only collagen of a single type | ||||
| Stimulates EMT phenotype | Low mechanical strength | ||||
| Synthetic polymer hydrogels | Biocompatible | Require cell-binding moieties due to inert nature | Study influence of matrix stiffness on spheroid formation and disease progression | OV-MZ-6, SKOV-3, HO8910, | [ |
| Tunable architecture and stiffness | |||||
| Tailorable with functional ligands | Limited cell recovery | ||||
| Functionalized with ECM proteins or proteolytic degradation sites | Drug screening | ||||
| Enable spheroid formation | Lack of nanofibrous network | Genomic analysis | |||
| Maintain cell viability over long periods of time | Spheroid formation technique | ||||
| Self-assembling peptide hydrogels | Chemically synthesized to enable tunability of properties | Costly | - | - | - |
| High design flexibility | |||||
| Reproducible | |||||
| Stable nanofiber network that resembles the ECM | |||||
| Supportive of cell proliferation, invasion and spheroid formation | |||||
| PuraMatrix™ | Commercially available | Poor mechanical strength | Model tumorigenesis and metastasis. | SKOV-3, A2780, A2780/DDP, OVCAR-5. | [ |
| Study influence of matrix stiffness on spheroid formation and disease progression. | |||||
| Drug screening. | |||||
| Peptide amphiphiles | Available through custom peptide synthesis. | Low scalability | Study tumor biology | NIH:OVCAR-4. | [ |
| Tailorable with specific signaling motifs | |||||
| Incorporation of ECM proteins | Evaluate influence of matrix stiffness on spheroid formation and disease progression | ||||
| Maintains cell viability over long periods of time | Peptide sequences not normally found in the ECM | ||||
| Supports co-cultures | Drug screening | ||||
| Minimal batch-to batch-variation |
3D, three-dimensional; ECM, extracellular matrix; EMT, epithelial–mesenchymal transition; TME, tumor microenvironment.
Figure 3Spheroid and organoid cultures to model the ovarian tumor microenvironment. (A) An example of the formation of loose and compact aggregates using OVCAR-3 and OVCAR-8 cells, respectively. Samples were stained at the end of 6 days using F-actin (red) and nuclear marker DAPI (blue) (Reprinted from [85], Copyright © (2020), with permission from Elsevier). (B) An example of the establishment of organoids derived from patient-derived xenografts from tumor deposits in the peritoneum. Organoids express the high-grade serous ovarian cancer marker Pax8 and the epithelial cell adhesion molecule EpCAM. Scale bar: 20µm (Reprinted from [93], Copyright © (2020), with permission from John Wiley and Sons).
Figure 4Microfluidic platforms to grow ovarian cancer spheroids. (A) Schematic showing a poly-HEMA-coated microfluidic channel for the formation of ovarian cancer spheroids under perfusion (Reproduced with permission from [83], Copyright © (2016), Springer Nature). (B) An example of a microfluidic chamber containing an array of microwells for spheroid formation (top). Scale bar: 5 mm. Spheroids were stained for the epithelial marker EpCAM, proliferation marker Ki-67 and nuclear marker DAPI (bottom). Scale bar: 50 µm (Reproduced with permission from [104], Copyright © (2020), Springer Nature). Poly-HEMA, poly 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate; PDMS, polydimethylsiloxane.
Figure 5Natural and synthetic hydrogels for modeling of the ovarian tumor microenvironment. (A) An example of tumor spheroids formed in 3D collagen scaffolds but not in 2D monolayer culture (reproduced from [38] with permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry). (B) An example of PEG/RGD-functionalized hydrogels that supported the formation of spheroids derived from ovarian cancer cells. SEM image demonstrated spheroids formation within the hydrogels (bottom left) Cells within spheroids were connected by the development of lamellipodia. Scale bar: 20 µm. Shape and cell spheroid formation varied with the hydrogel stiffness and RGD functionalization: compact and smaller spheroids were obtained in stiffer (G’= 1201 ± 121 Pa) hydrogels, irregular and scattered spheroids grew in softer (G’= 241 ± 19 Pa) hydrogels (right). Scale bar: 100 µm. (Reprinted from [113], Copyright © (2010) with permission from Elsevier). PEG, polyethylene glycol; RGD, arginine–glycine–aspartate.
Figure 63D culture of ovarian cancer cells in self-assembling peptide scaffolds. (A) An example of self-assembling RADA16 hydrogels with a fibrous network that supports spheroid formation and growth for up to 12 days. Transmission electron microscopy was employed to analyze the nanofiber structure of RADA16 in solution (top left). Spheroids formed in hydrogel matrices were imaged on days 6 and 12 using phalloidin (red)/DAPI (blue) staining (bottom left). Immunohistochemistry images show the cell distribution and molecular expression of integrin β1, E-cadherin and N-cadherin in cells cultured in RADA16 hydrogels for 7 days. Scale bar: 200 µm. (Reproduced with permission from [125], Copyright © (2020), Springer Nature). (B) An example of PA/KN hydrogels with an internal heterogenous nanofibrous structure that permitted spheroid formation and growth for 14 days (top) SEM images demonstrate the growth of tumor spheroids within PA-VH/KN hydrogels on day 14 (bottom left). Immunofluorescence staining of CD31, F-actin network and nuclei in PA/KN hydrogels on day 7 (bottom right). From [127]. Reprinted with permission from © (2020), AAAS. PA-VH, C16VVVAAAVPGIGH2K; KN, keratin.
Figure 7(A) Chemical structure of a representative peptide amphiphile (C15H31CONH-CCCCGGGS(P)RGD-OH) encompassing a hydrophobic alkyl tail and the peptide segment. (B) In solution, peptide amphiphile molecules self-assemble into cylindrical micelles with a hydrophobic core surrounded by the peptide segment. Color scheme: Carbon, black; Hydrogen, gray; Oxygen, red; Nitrogen, blue; Phosphorous, cyan; Sulfur, yellow.
Figure 8(A) Mechanical stimuli found within the ovarian tumor microenvironment that influence tumor progression and metastasis. Ascitic buildup within the peritoneal cavity exposes cancer cells to shear stress. Tumor growth provides radial tension and axial compression to cancer cells. (B) Stiffness characterization techniques (1) Atomic Force Microscopy, (2) Magnetic Twisting Cytometry, (3) Shear Flow, (4) Optical Tweezers, (5) Compression Test, (6) Rheology.