| Literature DB >> 35214418 |
Arianna Fedi1,2, Chiara Vitale1,3, Paolo Giannoni3, Guido Caluori4,5, Alessandra Marrella1.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) culture models have gained relevant interest in tissue engineering and drug discovery owing to their suitability to reproduce in vitro some key aspects of human tissues and to provide predictive information for in vivo tests. In this context, the use of hydrogels as artificial extracellular matrices is of paramount relevance, since they allow closer recapitulation of (patho)physiological features of human tissues. However, most of the analyses aimed at characterizing these models are based on time-consuming and endpoint assays, which can provide only static and limited data on cellular behavior. On the other hand, biosensing systems could be adopted to measure on-line cellular activity, as currently performed in bi-dimensional, i.e., monolayer, cell culture systems; however, their translation and integration within 3D hydrogel-based systems is not straight forward, due to the geometry and materials properties of these advanced cell culturing approaches. Therefore, researchers have adopted different strategies, through the development of biochemical, electrochemical and optical sensors, but challenges still remain in employing these devices. In this review, after examining recent advances in adapting existing biosensors from traditional cell monolayers to polymeric 3D cells cultures, we will focus on novel designs and outcomes of a range of biosensors specifically developed to provide real-time analysis of hydrogel-based cultures.Entities:
Keywords: 3D models; biosensors; hydrogels; in vitro cell cultures
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35214418 PMCID: PMC8879987 DOI: 10.3390/s22041517
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Main advantages and disadvantages of the main pre-clinical tissue models.
| Pre-Clinical Model | Main Advantages | Main Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| 2D cell cultures | Simple to use | Limited or altered cell–cell and cell–extracellular matrix (ECM) interactions |
| Cheap | Altered cell morphology, proliferation, and differentiation | |
| Standard | Overestimated drugs response | |
| Lack of metabolic gradients | ||
| Oversimplified | ||
| Animal models | High complexity | Time-consuming, laborious, expensive |
| Species-specific responses | ||
| Ethical issues | ||
| 3D cellular spheroids | Cheap | Lack of surrounding ECM |
| Metabolic gradients | Susceptibility to physical deterioration | |
| Proper cell–cell interactions | ||
| In vivo-like cell morphology and proliferation | ||
| 3D hydrogel-based tissue models | Surrounding ECM with tunable properties | Batch-to-batch variability |
| Reproduction of key mechanical and biochemical features of human tissues | Difficult to monitor cell activity with traditional tools | |
| Proper cell–cell and cell–ECM interactions |
Figure 1pH monitoring. (a) Representative illustration of the sensing culture platform containing the pH-sensing film assembled with a paper-based cell culture. (b) Fluorescence images of the engineered breast cancer cells cultured in delimited regions of the paper-based scaffold and corresponding heat maps showing the pH values spatial distribution. Scale bars are 250 μm. (c) Average pH profiles within the cell culture system over 48h, represented as mean and standard deviation of three different cell cultures. The dotted lines indicate the cells-seeded areas in the paper-based system. (d) Brightfield (top) and fluorescence images (bottom) of polyethylene glycol (PEG) microgels encapsulating HeLa cells and carbon dots pH nanoprobes over time; fluorescent signal intensity increasing over time indicate a decrease in pH level within the hydrogel cultures. Scale bar is 500 μm. (e) Representation of HeLa cells provided with surface-anchored lipid-DNA pH sensing probes embedded in a 3D collagen hydrogel (left); fluorescence signal emission in various pH extracellular levels. Signal intensifies with the increasing of pH values (right). (a–c) Adapted and reprinted with permission from [107]. Copyright (2018) American Chemical Society; (d) Adapted and reprinted with permission from [108]. Copyright (2017) American Chemical Society; (e) Reprinted with permission from [112]. Copyright (2014) American Chemical Society.
Figure 2Glucose monitoring. (a) Schematic representation of the cellularized PHF scaffold integrated with the enzyme-based glucose sensor. Human lung cancer cells (PC9) adhere on the outer wall of the structure working as a permeable barrier for the glucose diffusion, whereas the enzyme is immobilized in the lumen. Here, electrochemical reactions occur through the sensing system composed of multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWNT), glucose oxidases (Gox) and Prussian blue (PB). (b) Glucose consumption per day by PC9 cells cultured over the PHF upon different Osimertinib concentrations. (c) Scheme of the experimental set up: Matrigel-based HEK293T cells spheroids expressing the glucose FRET biosensor gene were seeded in a 96-well plate; different experimental conditions were tested and observed with the OPM technique, which is capable of orienting the light sheet towards the samples [130]. (d) Spatial glucose distribution within the Matrigel-coated spheroids at different depths (z-axis). Color scale and brightness determine the expressed FRET ratio and the emission intensity, respectively [130]. (a,b) Adapted and reprinted from [123], Copyright (2020), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 3O2 detection. (a) The optical fiber-based sensor set up composed of a micromanipulator and an optical needle microsensor to investigate O2 concentration within 3D cell-laden hydrogel (left); O2 levels measured at different depths (bottom, middle position, top) after 24h of bioprinting in the following tested conditions: “Microchannels”, indicating the presence of microchannels within the hydrogel without perfusion; “Microchannels + Perfusion”, indicating the presence of microchannels within the hydrogel with perfusion; “Bulk”, indicating the absence of microchannels within the hydrogel. Stagnant culture media were used as control (right) ** p < 0.01 when compared to culture media [156]. (b) Schematic illustration of the 3D millimeter-scale cellularized PEG hydrogel: hydrogel-based microparticles biosensor incorporating O2-sensitive fluorescent dyes (left) were encapsulated within cell-seeded PEG hydrogel (right). (c) Side-view representation of the cell-free (Region 1) and the cell-laden (Region 2) collagen hydrogel. Polydimethylsiloxane PDMS O2 sensing microbeads were distributed in the entire polymeric matrix. Dotted lines delimit the computational domain. Boundaries “a” and “d” represent PDMS– and polystyrene–hydrogel interfaces, respectively. Boundary “b” represents cell culture media–air interface. Boundary “c” represents the z-axis at a radial position of 0, in the disk-shaped hydrogel. Regions 1 and 2 represent the cell-free hydrogel plus cell culture media, and cell-laden hydrogel regions, respectively. (d) Experimental data of O2 concentrations and their best fitting within the 3D hydrogel versus the distance from the center of the hydrogel. (e) Spatial map of the simulated O2 concentration within the selected computational domain. (b) Adapted and reprinted with permission from [153]. Copyright (2019) American Chemical Society; (c–e) Reproduced from Ref. [169] with permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry.
Figure 4Impedance sensors. (a) Scheme of the 3D impedance biosensor single-unit composed of two vertical gold electrodes assembled with the PET culture chamber and the glass substrate. (b) Eight-channel 3D impedance biosensor. (c) 3D electric cell/matrigel-substrate detection platform containing the 3D impedance biosensor, a signal-conditioning module and a computer-controlled data acquisition card. (d) Illustration of the 3D single impedance biosensor before (left) and after (right) culturing HepG2 embedded in Matrigel hydrogel. (e) Image of the multi-layer impedance sensor consisting of an indium tin oxide (ITO) glass slide for the ground electrode, a PDMS layer composed of nine independent 3D cylindrical chambers able to host 3D cell-laden hydrogels, and a glass substrate provided with nine Cr/Au electrodes. (f) Illustrative design of the experimental set-up and the equivalent circuit to monitor impedance in cancer colonies within 3D hydrogels between the parallel plate electrodes. (a–d) Reprinted from [188], Copyright (2019), with permission from Elsevier; (e,f) Reprinted from [190], Copyright (2015), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 5Cell-secreted molecules detection. (a) Illustration of the microfluidic chip composed of two chambers for human primary hepatocytes cultivation and cell-produced growth factors (GFs) quantification, respectively. The chambers are separated by a 3D PEG hydrogel barrier, which allows cell-released molecules to diffuse towards the sensing region, where polystyrene Ab-modified microbeads are injected to monitor local GFs concentrations [237]. (b) Scheme of the aptasensor design. Aptamer-modified Au electrodes are fabricated on glass slides provided with T-cell-specific Abs. PEG hydrogels surrounding the electrodes define cell attachment sites in the proximity of the sensing domains (top); T cells are captured on Ab-functionalized glass regions next to the aptasensors which detect leukocytes-released IFNγ (bottom). (c) Arrays of Au microelectrodes modified with a mixture of aptamers for IFNγ or TNFα binding labelled with thraquinone (AQ) and methylene blue (MB), respectively. T-cells or monocytes are bound next to aptasensors, changing their conformation after cytokines binding. (d) Cross-sectional image of the sensor/3D cell culture set-up. A commercial PMMA holder assembled on a glass surface contains a three-electrodes system directly interfaced with a 3D collagen hydrogel for astrocytes cultivation and stimulation inducing ATP production (top); Aptamers immobilized on the sensing electrode surface switch their structure upon ATP binding, resulting in a quantitative electrical signal change (bottom). (b) Adapted and reprinted with permission from [258]. Copyright (2011) American Chemical Society; (c) Adapted and reprinted from [260], Copyright (2015), with permission from Elsevier; (d) Reprinted with permission from [272]. Copyright (2019) American Chemical Society.
Summary of the biosensors analyzed in the current review with their main advantages and disadvantages.
| Biosensors to Monitor Cell Activity in 3D Hydrogel-Based Tissue Models | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typology | Method or Technology of Detection | Advantages | Disadvantages | Ref |
| pH | Electrochemical | Fast and accurate | Require large sample volume and physical contact; provide only an average value | [ |
| ISFETs and LAPs | Sensitive and repetitive measurements; small sample volume | Require physical contact; limited applicability with 3D scaffolds | [ | |
| Optical | Low costs; absence of immune and electrical interference; non-invasive sensing method; consistent, reliable, real-time, 3D measurements | Intrinsic cytotoxicity and photobleaching (fluorescent molecules); | [ | |
| Glucose | Electrochemical | High selectivity and sensitivity; low costs | Chemical and thermal instability of the enzymes, low versatility (enzyme-based); measure only culture medium concentration; limited lifetime, invasive, single-point measurement (microneedles) | [ |
| Optical | Real-time; 3D measurements | Limited applicability | [ | |
| Oxygen | Electrochemical | Real-time measurements; low costs | Susceptibility to contaminations (non-Clark-type); measure only culture medium concentration | [ |
| Optical | Effective; reliable; real-time; 3D measurements | Invasive and single-point measurement (optical fiber); provide only planar measurements (sensing film); laborious (fluorophores with micro- or nano-particles) | [ | |
| Impedance | - | Automation-compatible, label-free, real-time technology; versatility; non- invasive | May require multiparametric approach to for the interpretation of the data obtained (cause of impedance variations, such as hydrogel matrix degradation or cell migration, not detected) | [ |
| Secreted molecules | Antibody-based | High specificity; quantification of molecules; small sample volume | Fast saturation limiting continuous analyses (need of reconfigurable systems or washing processes) | [ |
| Aptamer-based | Real-time; high specificity; quantification of molecules; small sample volume; high thermal and chemical stability; high sensibility; easily editable; simple conjugation with different labels | Sensibility to serum proteins of culture media (need of samples or aptamers pretreatments) | [ | |