Cited by 2313D Printing in Biomedical ResearchCancer Cells and MetastasisCellular Mechanics and Interactions

Three-Dimensional In Vitro Co-Culture Model of Breast Tumor using Magnetic Levitation

Open access
Jaganathan, Hamsa, Gage, Jacob, Leonard, Fransisca, Srinivasan, Srimeenakshi, Souza, Glauco R., Dave, Bhuvanesh, Godin, Biana·2014·Scientific Reports

Abstract

In this study, we investigate a novel in vitro model to mimic heterogeneous breast tumors without the use of a scaffold while allowing for cell-cell and tumor-fibroblast interactions. Previous studies have shown that magnetic levitation system under conventional culturing conditions results in the formation of three-dimensional (3D) structures, closely resembling in vivo tissues (fat tissue, vasculature, etc.). Three-dimensional heterogeneous tumor models for breast cancer were designed to effectively model the influences of the tumor microenvironment on drug efficiency. Various breast cancer cells were co-cultured with fibroblasts and then magnetically levitated. Size and cell density of the resulting tumors were measured. The model was phenotypically compared to in vivo tumors and examined for the presence of ECM proteins. Lastly, the effects of tumor stroma in the 3D in vitro model on drug transport and efficiency were assessed. Our data suggest that the proposed 3D in vitro breast tumor is advantageous due to the ability to: (1) form large-sized (millimeter in diameter) breast tumor models within 24 h; (2) control tumor cell composition and density; (3) accurately mimic the in vivo tumor microenvironment; and (4) test drug efficiency in an in vitro model that is comparable to in vivo tumors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/srep06468

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In breast tumor models, spheroids with higher fibroblast content exhibited decreased diffusion of dextran dye and diminished cytotoxicity following doxorubicin exposure.

    “In breast tumor models, spheroids generated with higher fibroblast content exhibited decreased diffusion of dextran dye and diminished cytotoxicity following doxorubicin exposure [208].”

    From Modeling Tumor Microenvironment Complexity In Vitro: Spheroids as Physiologically Relevant Tumor Models and Strategies for Their Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [208]

    The Results (page not provided) report about 10% greater dextran penetration in tumors with 30% fibroblasts than in those with 70% fibroblasts. The doxorubicin Results and Discussion compare drug effects across 2D and 3D cultures and between doxorubicin and Doxil, but do not show diminished doxorubicin cytotoxicity specifically as fibroblast content increases. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. de Kruijf E. M. et al. Tumor-stroma ratio in the primary tumor is a prognostic factor in early breast cancer patients, especially in triple-negative carcinoma patients. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 125, 687– 696 (2011). 20361254

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jaganathan, H., Gage, J., Leonard, F., Srinivasan, S., Souza, G. R., Dave, B., & Godin, B.
Affiliations
  • Houston Methodist (US)
  • Nano3D Biosciences (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Godin, Biana
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2014-10-01
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
6468-6468
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2041636145
Cited by
231
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1
FWCI
9.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (U54CA151668, U54CA143837)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Cells and Metastasis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Cellular Mechanics and Interactions
Keywords
breast cancer, 3D tumor models, magnetic levitation, co-culture, tumor microenvironment, tumor stroma, extracellular matrix, drug transport, drug efficacy testing, scaffold-free culture
MeSH terms
Antineoplastic Agents, Breast Neoplasms, Cells, Cultured, Extracellular Matrix, Female, Fibroblasts, Humans, Lung, Stromal Cells, Spheroids, Cellular, Coculture Techniques, Tumor Microenvironment, Magnetic Phenomena, In Vitro Techniques

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review