Cited by 341Cancer Cells and MetastasisCellular Mechanics and Interactions3D Printing in Biomedical Research

Impact of the 3D Microenvironment on Phenotype, Gene Expression, and EGFR Inhibition of Colorectal Cancer Cell Lines

Open access
Luca, Anna C., Mersch, Sabrina, Deenen, René, Schmidt, Stephan, Messner, Isabelle, Schäfer, Karl-Ludwig, Baldus, Stephan E., Huckenbeck, Wolfgang +4 more·2013·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) tumor cell cultures grown in laminin-rich-extracellular matrix (lrECM) are considered to reflect human tumors more realistic as compared to cells grown as monolayer on plastic. Here, we systematically investigated the impact of ECM on phenotype, gene expression, EGFR signaling pathway, and on EGFR inhibition in commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) cell lines. LrECM on-top (3D) culture assays were performed with the CRC cell lines SW-480, HT-29, DLD-1, LOVO, CACO-2, COLO-205 and COLO-206F. Morphology of lrECM cultivated CRC cell lines was determined by phase contrast and confocal laser scanning fluorescence microscopy. Proliferation of cells was examined by MTT assay, invasive capacity of the cell lines was assayed using Matrigel-coated Boyden chambers, and migratory activity was determined employing the Fence assay. Differential gene expression was analyzed at the transcriptional level by the Agilent array platform. EGFR was inhibited by using the specific small molecule inhibitor AG1478. A specific spheroid growth pattern was observed for all investigated CRC cell lines. DLD-1, HT-29 and SW-480 and CACO-2 exhibited a clear solid tumor cell formation, while LOVO, COLO-205 and COLO-206F were characterized by forming grape-like structures. Although the occurrence of a spheroid morphology did not correlate with an altered migratory, invasive, or proliferative capacity of CRC cell lines, gene expression was clearly altered in cells grown on lrECM as compared to 2D cultures. Interestingly, in KRAS wild-type cell lines, inhibition of EGFR was less effective in lrECM (3D) cultures as compared to 2D cell cultures. Thus, comparing both 2D and 3D cell culture models, our data support the influence of the ECM on cancer growth. Compared to conventional 2D cell culture, the lrECM (3D) cell culture model offers the opportunity to investigate permanent CRC cell lines under more physiological conditions, i.e. in the context of molecular therapeutic targets and their pharmacological inhibition.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0059689

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • Proliferation rates of cells cultured in 3D and 2D are usually different and are cell line and matrix dependent.

    “The proliferation rates of cells cultured in 3D and 2D are usually different, and are cell line and matrix dependent.”

    From Three-dimensional cell culture systems and their applications in drug discovery and cell-based biosensors (2014) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Results section (page unavailable) reports significantly lower proliferation in 3D lrECM culture than in 2D culture, and the Discussion says this occurred in all CRC cell lines tested. The paper compares one 3D matrix with plastic; it does not establish that the difference is usually present across cell types or depends on the cell line or matrix used. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Overall, the morphological appearance of 3D spheroids is primarily cell line dependent.

    “Overall, the morphological appearance of 3D spheroids is primarily cell line dependent. 29,35,37”
  • A variety of cell lines showed reduced proliferation rate in 3D cultures compared to those cultured in 2D.

    “A variety of cell lines showed reduced proliferation rate in 3D cultures compared to those cultured in 2D. 17,27-31”
  • In hepatocellular carcinoma models, monolayers showed enrichment in structural gene expression, whereas spheroids upregulated genes related to metabolism and biosynthesis.

    “A similar trend was observed in hepatocellular carcinoma models, where monolayers showed enrichment in structural gene expression, whereas spheroids upregulated genes related to metabolism and biosynthesis [196,197,198].”

    From Modeling Tumor Microenvironment Complexity In Vitro: Spheroids as Physiologically Relevant Tumor Models and Strategies for Their Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [197]

    The Results section, “Gene Expression is Altered in lrECM 3D ‘On-top’ Cultivated CRC Cells” (page unavailable), compares 2D and 3D colorectal cancer cultures and reports differential gene expression, including genes in a metabolic pathway. It does not address hepatocellular carcinoma models or establish the claimed direction of structural-gene enrichment and metabolism/biosynthesis upregulation. Searches for hepatocellular carcinoma and those gene categories found no passage supporting the specific claim. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luca, A. C., Mersch, S., Deenen, R., Schmidt, S., Messner, I., Schäfer, K.-L., Baldus, S. E., Huckenbeck, W., Piekorz, R. P., Knoefel, W. T., Krieg, A., & Stoecklein, N. H.
Affiliations
  • Düsseldorf University Hospital (DE)
  • Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Krieg, Andreas
  • Stoecklein, Nikolas H.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2013-03-26
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
e59689
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1983051794
Cited by
341
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 4
FWCI
13.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Univ. Duesseldorf: Duesseldorfer Dokumenten- und Publikationsserver (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB728)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Cells and Metastasis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Cellular Mechanics and Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Keywords
colorectal cancer, 3D cell culture, tumor microenvironment, EGFR signaling, EGFR inhibition, AG1478, gene expression, cell morphology, spheroid formation, cell invasion, cell migration, KRAS wild-type, 2D vs 3D culture comparison, colorectal cancer cell lines
MeSH terms
Extracellular Matrix, Humans, Laminin, Phenotype, Colorectal Neoplasms, Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic, Spheroids, Cellular, Cell Culture Techniques, Cell Line, Tumor, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Cell Proliferation, Tumor Microenvironment, ErbB Receptors

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