3D bioprinting of engineered breast cancer constructs for personalized and targeted cancer therapy

3D bioprinted tumor model: a prompt and convenient platform for overcoming immunotherapy resistance by recapitulating the tumor microenvironment

BACKGROUND

Cancer immunotherapy is receiving worldwide attention for its induction of an anti-tumor response. However, it has had limited efficacy in some patients who acquired resistance. The dynamic and sophisticated complexity of the tumor microenvironment (TME) is the leading contributor to this clinical dilemma. Through recapitulating the physiological features of the TME, 3D bioprinting is a promising research tool for cancer immunotherapy, which preserves in vivo malignant aggressiveness, heterogeneity, and the cell-cell/matrix interactions. It has been reported that application of 3D bioprinting holds potential to address the challenges of immunotherapy resistance and facilitate personalized medication.

CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES

In this review, we briefly summarize the contributions of cellular and noncellular components of the TME in the development of immunotherapy resistance, and introduce recent advances in 3D bioprinted tumor models that served as platforms to study the interactions between tumor cells and the TME. By constructing multicellular 3D bioprinted tumor models, cellular and noncellular crosstalk is reproduced between tumor cells, immune cells, fibroblasts, adipocytes, and the extracellular matrix (ECM) within the TME. In the future, by quickly preparing 3D bioprinted tumor models with patient-derived components, information on tumor immunotherapy resistance can be obtained timely for clinical reference. The combined application with tumoroid or other 3D culture technologies will also help to better simulate the complexity and dynamics of tumor microenvironment in vitro. We aim to provide new perspectives for overcoming cancer immunotherapy resistance and inspire multidisciplinary research to improve the clinical application of 3D bioprinting technology.

Current Advances in the Use of Tissue Engineering for Cancer Metastasis Therapeutics

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide and results in nearly 10 million deaths each year. The global economic burden of cancer from 2020 to 2050 is estimated to be USD 25.2 trillion. The spread of cancer to distant organs through metastasis is the leading cause of death due to cancer. However, as of today, there is no cure for metastasis. Tissue engineering is a promising field for regenerative medicine that is likely to be able to provide rehabilitation procedures to patients who have undergone surgeries, such as mastectomy and other reconstructive procedures. Another important use of tissue engineering has emerged recently that involves the development of realistic and robust in vitro models of cancer metastasis, to aid in drug discovery and new metastasis therapeutics, as well as evaluate cancer biology at metastasis. This review covers the current studies in developing tissue-engineered metastasis structures. This article reports recent developments in in vitro models for breast, prostate, colon, and pancreatic cancer. The review also identifies challenges and opportunities in the use of tissue engineering toward new, clinically relevant therapies that aim to reduce the cancer burden.

Controlled tumor heterogeneity in a co-culture system by 3D bio-printed tumor-on-chip model

Cancer treatment resistance is a caused by presence of various types of cells and heterogeneity within the tumor. Tumor cell-cell and cell-microenvironment interactions play a significant role in the tumor progression and invasion, which have important implications for diagnosis, and resistance to chemotherapy. In this study, we develop 3D bioprinted in vitro models of the breast cancer tumor microenvironment made of co-cultured cells distributed in a hydrogel matrix with controlled architecture to model tumor heterogeneity. We hypothesize that the tumor could be represented by a cancer cell-laden co-culture hydrogel construct, whereas its microenvironment can be modeled in a microfluidic chip capable of producing a chemical gradient. Breast cancer cells (MCF7 and MDA-MB-231) and non-tumorigenic mammary epithelial cells (MCF10A) were embedded in the alginate-gelatine hydrogels and printed using a multi-cartridge extrusion bioprinter. Our approach allows for precise control over position and arrangements of cells in a co-culture system, enabling the design of various tumor architectures. We created samples with two different types of cells at specific initial locations, where the density of each cell type was carefully controlled. The cells were either randomly mixed or positioned in sequential layers to create cellular heterogeneity. To study cell migration toward chemoattractant, we developed a chemical microenvironment in a chamber with a gradual chemical gradient. As a proof of concept, we studied different migration patterns of MDA-MB-231 cells toward the epithelial growth factor gradient in presence of MCF10A cells in different ratios using this device. Our approach involves the integration of 3D bioprinting and microfluidic devices to create diverse tumor architectures that are representative of those found in various patients. This provides an excellent tool for studying the behavior of cancer cells with high spatial and temporal resolution.

Breast cancer cells interact with tumor-derived extracellular matrix in a molecular subtype-specific manner

Mimicking the native microenvironment is vital for tumor engineering. Breast cancer is a highly heterogeneous disease with various molecular subtypes exhibiting distinct biological behaviors and treatment responsiveness. The heterogeneity of extracellular matrix (ECM) of breast cancer has remained largely unexplored and underestimated. The present study addressed this issue by comparing the composition, architecture, and functional roles of ECMs derived from breast cancers of two molecular subtypes, which are luminal-A breast cancer (less aggressive, ERα+)-derived ECM (LA-ECM) and triple-negative breast cancer (high aggressive, ERα-)-derived ECM (TN-ECM). Compared with normal breast tissue-derived ECMs (B-ECM), tumor-derived ECMs showed higher contents of pro-collagen I, fibronectin, and laminin, in addition with a significantly altered architecture. Transcriptome sequencing revealed that, compared with those cultured with B-ECM, MCF7 cells (an estrogen receptor (ER)α + luminal-A breast cancer cell line) cultured with LA-ECM and TN-ECM showed approximately 9.65 % and 9.04 % changes in the expression of all detected genes, respectively. The TN-ECM induced proliferation, promoted epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, downregulated ERα expression, and reduced endocrine treatment sensitivity of MCF7. Above results have elucidated the role of phenotype-specific tumor ECM in cell phenotype maintenance, treatment sensitivity, and cancer progression, which highlighted the importance of ECM heterogeneity as well as its role in tumor microenvironment engineering and drug screening.

Predicting and elucidating the post-printing behavior of 3D printed cancer cells in hydrogel structures by integrating in-vitro and in-silico experiments

A key feature distinguishing 3D bioprinting from other 3D cell culture techniques is its precise control over created structures. This property allows for the high-resolution fabrication of biomimetic structures with controlled structural and mechanical properties such as porosity, permeability, and stiffness. However, analyzing post-printing cellular dynamics and optimizing their functions within the 3D fabricated environment is only possible through trial and error and replicating several experiments. This issue motivated the development of a cellular automata model for the first time to simulate post-printing cell behaviour within the 3D bioprinted construct. To improve our model, we bioprinted a 3D construct using MDA-MB-231 cell-laden hydrogel and evaluated cellular functions, including viability and proliferation in 11 days. The results showed that our model successfully simulated the 3D bioprinted structure and captured in-vitro observations. We demonstrated that in-silico model could predict and elucidate post-printing biological functions for different initial cell numbers in bioink and different bioink formulations with gelatine and alginate, without replicating several costly and time-consuming in-vitro measurements. We believe such a computational framework will substantially impact 3D bioprinting's future application. We hope this study inspires researchers to further realize how an in-silico model might be utilized to advance in-vitro 3D bioprinting research.

3D printed PLGA implants: APF DDM vs. FDM

3D Printing offers a considerable potential for personalized medicines. This is especially true for customized biodegradable implants, matching the specific needs of each patient. Poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) is frequently used as matrix former in biodegradable implants. However, yet relatively little is known on the technologies, which can be used for the 3D printing of PLGA implants. The aim of this study was to compare: (i) Arburg Plastic Freeforming Droplet Deposition Modeling (APF DDM), and (ii) Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) to print mesh-shaped, ibuprofen-loaded PLGA implants. During APF DDM, individual drug-polymer droplets are deposited, fusing together to form filaments, which build up the implants. During FDM, continuous drug-polymer filaments are deposited to form the meshes. The implants were thoroughly characterized before and after exposure to phosphate buffer pH 7.4 using optical and scanning electron microscopy, GPC, DSC, drug release measurements and monitoring dynamic changes in the systems' dry & wet mass and pH of the bulk fluid. Interestingly, the mesh structures were significantly different, although the device design (composition & theoretical geometry) were the same. This could be explained by the fact that the deposition of individual droplets during APF DDM led to curved and rather thick filaments, resulting in a much lower mesh porosity. In contrast, FDM printing generated straight and thinner filaments: The open spaces between them were much larger and allowed convective mass transport during drug release. Consequently, most of the drug was already released after 4 d, when substantial PLGA set on. In the case of APF DDM printed implants, most of the drug was still entrapped at that time point and substantial polymer swelling transformed the meshes into more or less continuous PLGA gels. Hence, the diffusion pathways became much longer and ibuprofen release was controlled over 2 weeks.

3D bioprinted cancer models: from basic biology to drug development

Effort invested in the development of new drugs often fails to be translated into meaningful clinical benefits for patients with cancer. The development of more effective anticancer therapeutics and accurate prediction of their clinical merit remain urgent unmet medical needs. As solid cancers have complex and heterogeneous structures composed of different cell types and extracellular matrices, three-dimensional (3D) cancer models hold great potential for advancing our understanding of cancer biology, which has been historically investigated in tumour cell cultures on rigid plastic plates. Advanced 3D bioprinted cancer models have the potential to revolutionize the way we discover therapeutic targets, develop new drugs and personalize anticancer therapies in an accurate, reproducible, clinically translatable and robust manner. These ex vivo cancer models are already replacing existing in vitro systems and could, in the future, diminish or even replace the use of animal models. Therefore, profound understanding of the differences in tumorigenesis between 2D, 3D and animal models of cancer is essential. This Review presents the state of the art of 3D bioprinted cancer modelling, focusing on the biological processes that underlie the molecular mechanisms involved in cancer progression and treatment response as well as on proteomic and genomic signatures.

Criteria, Challenges, and Opportunities for Acellularized Allogeneic/Xenogeneic Bone Grafts in Bone Repairing

As bone grafts become more commonly needed by patients and as donors become scarcer, acellularized bone grafts (ABGs) are becoming more popular for restorative purposes. While autogeneic grafts are reliable as a gold standard, allogeneic and xenogeneic ABGs have been shown to be of particular interest due to the limited availability of autogeneic resources and reduced patient well-being in long-term surgeries. Because of the complete similarity of their structures with native bone, excellent mechanical properties, high biocompatibility, and similarities of biological behaviors (osteoinductive and osteoconductive) with local bones, successful outcomes of allogeneic and xenogeneic ABGs in both in vitro and in vivo research have raised hopes of repairing patients' bone injuries in clinical applications. However, clinical trials have been delayed due to a lack of standardized protocols pertaining to acellularization, cell seeding, maintenance, and diversity of ABG evaluation criteria. This study sought to uncover these factors by exploring the bone structures, ossification properties of ABGs, sources, benefits, and challenges of acellularization approaches (physical, chemical, and enzymatic), cell loading, and type of cells used and effects of each of the above items on the regenerative technologies. To gain a perspective on the repair and commercialization of products before implementing new research activities, this study describes the differences between ABGs created by various techniques and methods applied to them. With a comprehensive understanding of ABG behavior, future research focused on treating bone defects could provide a better way to combine the treatment approaches needed to treat bone defects.

Bioprinting Decellularized Breast Tissue for the Development of Three-Dimensional Breast Cancer Models

The tumor extracellular matrix (ECM) plays a vital role in tumor progression and drug resistance. Previous studies have shown that breast tissue-derived matrices could be an important biomaterial to recreate the complexity of the tumor ECM. We have developed a method for decellularizing and delipidating a porcine breast tissue (TDM) compatible with hydrogel formation. The addition of gelatin methacrylamide and alginate allows this TDM to be bioprinted by itself with good printability, shape fidelity, and cytocompatibility. Furthermore, this bioink has been tuned to more closely recreate the breast tumor by incorporating collagen type I (Col1). Breast cancer cells (BCCs) proliferate in both TDM bioinks forming cell clusters and spheroids. The addition of Col1 improves the printability of the bioink as well as increases BCC proliferation and reduces doxorubicin sensitivity due to a downregulation of HSP90. TDM bioinks also allow a precise three-dimensional printing of scaffolds containing BCCs and stromal cells and could be used to fabricate artificial tumors. Taken together, we have proven that these novel bioinks are good candidates for biofabricating breast cancer models.

An Updated Review on EPR-Based Solid Tumor Targeting Nanocarriers for Cancer Treatment

Simple Summary

One of the important efforts in the treatment of cancers is to achieve targeted drug delivery by nanocarriers to be more effective and reduce adverse effects. However, due to the adverse responses of nanocarriers in clinical trials due to the very weak EPR effects, doubts have been raised in this regard. In this study, an attempt has been made to take a critical look at EPR approaches to enable the convergence of previous papers and the EPR critics to reach an appropriate therapeutic path. Although the effectiveness of EPR is highly variable due to the complex microenvironment of the tumor, there is high hope for cancer treatment by describing new strategies to overcome the challenges of EPR effect. Furthermore, in this paper an attempt was made to provide a reliable path for future to develop cancer therapeutics based on EPR effect.

Abstract

The enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect in cancer treatment is one of the key mechanisms that enables drug accumulation at the tumor site. However, despite a plethora of virus/inorganic/organic-based nanocarriers designed to rely on the EPR effect to effectively target tumors, most have failed in the clinic. It seems that the non-compliance of research activities with clinical trials, goals unrelated to the EPR effect, and lack of awareness of the impact of solid tumor structure and interactions on the performance of drug nanocarriers have intensified this dissatisfaction. As such, the asymmetric growth and structural complexity of solid tumors, physicochemical properties of drug nanocarriers, EPR analytical combination tools, and EPR description goals should be considered to improve EPR-based cancer therapeutics. This review provides valuable insights into the limitations of the EPR effect in therapeutic efficacy and reports crucial perspectives on how the EPR effect can be modulated to improve the therapeutic effects of nanomedicine.

Current Advances in 3D Bioprinting for Cancer Modeling and Personalized Medicine

Tumor cells evolve in a complex and heterogeneous environment composed of different cell types and an extracellular matrix. Current 2D culture methods are very limited in their ability to mimic the cancer cell environment. In recent years, various 3D models of cancer cells have been developed, notably in the form of spheroids/organoids, using scaffold or cancer-on-chip devices. However, these models have the disadvantage of not being able to precisely control the organization of multiple cell types in complex architecture and are sometimes not very reproducible in their production, and this is especially true for spheroids. Three-dimensional bioprinting can produce complex, multi-cellular, and reproducible constructs in which the matrix composition and rigidity can be adapted locally or globally to the tumor model studied. For these reasons, 3D bioprinting seems to be the technique of choice to mimic the tumor microenvironment in vivo as closely as possible. In this review, we discuss different 3D-bioprinting technologies, including bioinks and crosslinkers that can be used for in vitro cancer models and the techniques used to study cells grown in hydrogels; finally, we provide some applications of bioprinted cancer models.

Engineering Breast Cancer On-chip-Moving Toward Subtype Specific Models

Breast cancer is the second leading cause of death among women worldwide, and while hormone receptor positive subtypes have a clear and effective treatment strategy, other subtypes, such as triple negative breast cancers, do not. Development of new drugs, antibodies, or immune targets requires significant re-consideration of current preclinical models, which frequently fail to mimic the nuances of patient-specific breast cancer subtypes. Each subtype, together with the expression of different markers, genetic and epigenetic profiles, presents a unique tumor microenvironment, which promotes tumor development and progression. For this reason, personalized treatments targeting components of the tumor microenvironment have been proposed to mitigate breast cancer progression, particularly for aggressive triple negative subtypes. To-date, animal models remain the gold standard for examining new therapeutic targets; however, there is room for in vitro tools to bridge the biological gap with humans. Tumor-on-chip technologies allow for precise control and examination of the tumor microenvironment and may add to the toolbox of current preclinical models. These new models include key aspects of the tumor microenvironment (stroma, vasculature and immune cells) which have been employed to understand metastases, multi-organ interactions, and, importantly, to evaluate drug efficacy and toxicity in humanized physiologic systems. This review provides insight into advanced in vitro tumor models specific to breast cancer, and discusses their potential and limitations for use as future preclinical patient-specific tools.