How to Cite
Abstract
Introduction. 3D printing is a promising new method for building 3D cell constructs for all kinds of biomedical research. The advantages of using 3D bioprinting in the biomedical field include high precision, the opportunity to generate patient-specific tissue and to build complex structures. The main component of the 3D bioprinting is the bioink that ensures biocompatibility, mechanical stability, and high resolution during and after printing.
Aim. To study the effect of curing method of gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) and alginate bioink on the microstructure of the resulting 3D construct and on the morphological features of the encapsulated into bioink BT20 breast cancer cells.
Materials and methods. In our study, we used the extrusion based 3D printing on a BIO X bioprinter (Cellink, USA) with gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA)-alginate bioinks mixed with BT-20 breast cancer cells in a ratio of 2:1. The printed constructs were polymerized in two ways, either chemically or by photo-curing. After curing, the constructs with cells were placed in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% FBS and cultured at 37°C and 5.5% CO2. The samples were then observed and visualized using a microscope (Ti-S, Nikon, Japan). After one and two weeks of cultivation, some of the constructs were fixed and encased in paraffin blocks. Then, according to the standard procedure, sections were prepared and stained with hematoxylin and eosin.
Results. As a result, we constructed square, 3-layer constructs with encapsulated breast cancer cells. When creating 3D models of breast cancer growth using GelMA and alginate-based bioinks, in our opinion, photo-curing is preferable, as it allows to create a spongy microstructure of intercommunicating pores.
Conclusion. This structure supports cell migration and helps to preserve similar to observed in vivo cell morphology.
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660.
Asghar W, El Assal R, Shafiee H, et al. Engineering cancer microenvironments for in vitro 3-D tumor models. Mater Today (Kidlington). 2015;18(10):539-553. doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2015.05.002.
Imamura Y, Mukohara T, Shimono Y, et al. Comparison of 2D- and 3D-culture models as drug-testing platforms in breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2015;33(4):1837-43. doi:10.3892/or.2015.3767.
Тимофеева С.В., Шамова Т.В., Ситковская А.О. 3D-биопринтинг микроокружения опухоли: последние достижения. Журнал общей биологии. 2021;82(5):389-400 [Timofeeva SV, Shamova TV, Sitkovskaya AO. 3D bioprinting of the tumor microenvironment: recent advances. Zh Obshch Biol. 2021;82(5):389-400 (In Russ).] doi:10.31857/S0044459621050067.
Breslin S, O'Driscoll L. The relevance of using 3D cell cultures, in addition to 2D monolayer cultures, when evaluating breast cancer drug sensitivity and resistance. Oncotarget. 2016;7(29):45745-45756. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.9935.
Swaminathan S, Hamid Q, Sun W, et al. Bioprinting of 3D breast epithelial spheroids for human cancer models. Biofabrication. 2019;11(2):025003. doi:10.1088/1758-5090/aafc49.
Wang Y, Shi W, Kuss M, et al. 3D Bioprinting of Breast Cancer Models for Drug Resistance Study. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2018;4(12):4401-4411. doi:10.1021/acsbiomaterials.8b01277.
Grolman JM, Zhang D, Smith AM, et al. Rapid 3D Extrusion of Synthetic Tumor Microenvironments. Adv Mater. 2015;27(37):5512-7. doi:10.1002/adma.201501729.
Tarassoli SP, Jessop ZM, Jovic T, et al. Candidate Bioinks for Extrusion 3D Bioprinting-A Systematic Review of the Literature. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9:616753. doi:10.3389/fbioe.2021.616753.
Gopinathan J, Noh I. Recent trends in bioinks for 3D printing. Biomater Res. 2018;22:11. doi:10.1186/s40824-018-0122-1.
Ozbolat IT, Peng W, Ozbolat V. Application areas of 3D bioprinting. Drug Discov Today. 2016;21(8):1257-71. doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2016.04.006.
Yue K, Trujillo-de Santiago G, Alvarez MM, et al. Synthesis, properties, and biomedical applications of gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) hydrogels. Biomaterials. 2015;73:254-71. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.08.045.
Mirani B, Stefanek E, Godau B, et al. microfluidic 3d printing of a photo-cross-linkable bioink using insights from computational modeling. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2021;7(7):3269–3280. doi:10.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c00084.
Yin J, Yan M, Wang Y, et al. 3D bioprinting of low-concentration cell-laden gelatin methacrylate (GelMA) bioinks with a two-step cross-linking strategy. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(8):6849-6857. doi:10.1021/acsami.7b16059.
Munaz A, Vadivelu RK, St. John J, et al. Three-dimensional printing of biological matters. J Sci-Adv Mater Dev. 2016;1(1):1-17. doi:10.1016/j.jsamd.2016.04.001.
Hospodiuk M, Dey M, Sosnoski D, et al. The bioink: A comprehensive review on bioprintable materials. Biotechnol Adv. 2017;35(2):217-239. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.12.006.
Daly AC, Critchley SE, Rencsok EM, et al. A comparison of different bioinks for 3D bioprinting of fibrocartilage and hyaline cartilage. Biofabrication. 2016;8(4):045002. doi:10.1088/1758-5090/8/4/045002.
Jia W, Gungor-Ozkerim PS, Zhang YS, et al. Direct 3D bioprinting of perfusable vascular constructs using a blend bioink. Biomaterials. 2016;106:58-68. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.07.038.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
© АННМО «Вопросы онкологии», Copyright (c) 2023