Matrigel: From discovery and ECM mimicry to assays and models for cancer research

Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Volumn 79, Issue , 2014, Pages 3-18

  Benton, Gabriel ^a   Arnaoutova, Irina ^a   George, Jay ^a   Kleinman, Hynda K ^b   Koblinski, Jennifer ^c  

^a TREVIGEN INC   (United States)

^b GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^c VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

3D culture; Angiogenesis; Basement membrane; Dormancy assay; Extracellular matrix; Invasion assay; Spheroids; Xenograft

Indexed keywords

CELL CULTURE; TUMORS;

3-D CULTURES; ANGIOGENESIS; BASEMENT MEMBRANE; EXTRACELLULAR MATRICES; SPHEROIDS; XENOGRAFT;

BUILDINGS;

CATHEPSIN K; COLLAGEN TYPE 4; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR 1; ENTACTIN; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR; FIBROBLAST GROWTH FACTOR; FLUOROURACIL; INTERLEUKIN 1ALPHA; IRINOTECAN; LAMININ 1; MATRIGEL; NOTCH1 RECEPTOR; PLATELET DERIVED GROWTH FACTOR; PROLIFERIN; SOMATOMEDIN C; SONOLISIB; TRANSFORMING GROWTH FACTOR BETA; TRASTUZUMAB; VASCULOTROPIN RECEPTOR 1; WORTMANNIN; COLLAGEN; DRUG COMBINATION; LAMININ; PROTEOGLYCAN;

ANGIOGENESIS ASSAY; BASEMENT MEMBRANE; CANCER RESEARCH; CARCINOGENESIS; CELL ADHESION; CELL CULTURE; CELL CYCLE REGULATION; CELL MIGRATION; CELL SURVIVAL; DIRECTED IN VIVO ANGIOGENESIS ASSAY; DISEASE MODEL; DRUG SENSITIVITY; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; FIBROBLAST; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HUMAN; HYDROGEL; IMMUNOASSAY; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; MICROFLUIDICS; MULTICELLULAR SPHEROID; NONHUMAN; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; REVIEW; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; TISSUE REGENERATION; TISSUE SPECIFICITY; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT; TUMOR SPHEROID; TUMOR XENOGRAFT; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CHEMISTRY; CULTURE TECHNIQUE; DRUG COMBINATION; DRUG SCREENING; METABOLISM; NEOPLASM; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; BASEMENT MEMBRANE; CELL CULTURE TECHNIQUES; COLLAGEN; DRUG COMBINATIONS; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; HUMANS; LAMININ; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NEOPLASMS; PROTEOGLYCANS; XENOGRAFT MODEL ANTITUMOR ASSAYS;

EID: 84919694551     PISSN: 0169409X     EISSN: 18728294     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2014.06.005     Document Type: Review

References (189)

1. Albini A., Noonan D.M. The 'chemoinvasion' assay, 25years and still going strong: the use of reconstituted basement membranes to study cell invasion and angiogenesis. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2014, (in press, Corrected Proof).
2. Benton G., et al. Multiple uses of basement membrane-like matrix (BME/Matrigel) in vitro and in vivo with cancer cells. Int. J. Cancer 2011, 128(8):1751-1757.
3. Kleinman H.K., Martin G.R. Matrigel: basement membrane matrix with biological activity. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2005, 15(5):378-386.
4. Kikkawa Y., et al. Laminin-111-derived peptides and cancer. Cell Adhes. Migr. 2013, 7(1):150-256.
5. Fiordalisi J.J., et al. Src-mediated phosphorylation of the tyrosine phosphatase PRL-3 is required for PRL-3 promotion of Rho activation, motility and invasion. PLoS One 2013, 8(5):e64309.
6. Box C., et al. Tumour-microenvironmental interactions: paths to progression and targets for treatment. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2010, 20(3):128-138.
7. Yousif L.F., Di Russo J., Sorokin L. Laminin isoforms in endothelial and perivascular basement membranes. Cell Adhes. Migr. 2013, 7(1):101-110.
8. Miner J.H. The glomerular basement membrane. Exp. Cell Res. 2012, 318(9):973-978.
9. Vukicevic S., et al. Reconstituted basement membrane (Matrigel) promotes the survival and influences the growth of murine tumors. Int. J. Cancer 1992, 50(5):791-795.
10. MacKay A.R., et al. Identification of the 72-kDa (MMP-2) and 92-kDa (MMP-9) gelatinase/type IV collagenase in preparations of laminin and Matrigel™. Biotechniques 1993, 15(6).
11. Vukicevic S., et al. Differentiation of canalicular cell processes in bone cells by basement membrane matrix components: regulation by discrete domains of laminin. Cell 1990, 63(2):437-445.
12. Kang B.J., et al. Effect of Matrigel on the osteogenic potential of canine adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2012, 74(7):827-836.
13. Lewis M.T.M.T. A mystery wrapped in an enigma: Matrigel enhancement of mammary cell growth and morphogenesis. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 2012.
14. Mroue R., Bissell M.J. Three-dimensional cultures of mouse mammary epithelial cells. Methods Mol. Biol. 2013, 945:221-250.
15. Jechlinger M., Podsypanina K., Varmus H. Regulation of transgenes in three-dimensional cultures of primary mouse mammary cells demonstrates oncogene dependence and identifies cells that survive deinduction. Genes Dev. 2009, 23(14):1677-1688.
16. Albini A., et al. A rapid in vitro assay for quantitating the invasive potential of tumor cells. Cancer Res. 1987, 47(12):3239-3245.
17. Benton G., et al. Advancing science and technology via 3D culture on basement membrane matrix. J. Cell. Physiol. 2009, 221(1):18-25.
18. Barkan D., Green J.E., Chambers A.F. Extracellular matrix: a gatekeeper in the transition from dormancy to metastatic growth. Eur. J. Cancer 2010, 46(7):1181-1188.
19. Barkan D., et al. Inhibition of metastatic outgrowth from single dormant tumor cells by targeting the cytoskeleton. Cancer Res. 2008, 68(15):6241-6250.
20. Fridman R., et al. Increased initiation and growth of tumor cell lines, cancer stem cells and biopsy material in mice using basement membrane matrix protein (Cultrex or Matrigel) co-injection. Nat. Protoc. 2012, 7(6):1138-1144.
21. Quintana E., et al. Efficient tumour formation by single human melanoma cells. Nature 2008, 456(7222):593-598.
22. Rackham C.L., Jones P.M., King A.J. Maintenance of islet morphology is beneficial for transplantation outcome in diabetic mice. PLoS One 2013, 8(2):e57844.
23. Jin K., et al. Transplantation of human neural precursor cells in Matrigel scaffolding improves outcome from focal cerebral ischemia after delayed postischemic treatment in rats. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 2010, 30(3):534-544.
24. Park S.S., et al. Functional recovery after spinal cord injury in dogs treated with a combination of Matrigel and neural-induced adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Cytotherapy 2012, 14(5):584-597.
25. Hughes C.S., Postovit L.M., Lajoie G.A. Matrigel: a complex protein mixture required for optimal growth of cell culture. Proteomics 2010, 10(9):1886-1890.
26. Basic N., et al. TGF-beta and basement membrane matrigel stimulate the chondrogenic phenotype in osteoblastic cells derived from fetal rat calvaria. J. Bone Miner. Res. 1996, 11(3):384-391.
27. Taub M., et al. Epidermal growth factor or transforming growth factor alpha is required for kidney tubulogenesis in matrigel cultures in serum-free medium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1990, 87(10):4002-4006.
28. Casazza A., et al. Tumor stroma: a complexity dictated by the hypoxic tumor microenvironment. Oncogene 2013.
29. Parks S.K., et al. Hypoxia promotes tumor cell survival in acidic conditions by preserving ATP levels. J. Cell. Physiol. 2013, 228(9):1854-1862.
30. Arnaoutova I., et al. The endothelial cell tube formation assay on basement membrane turns 20: state of the science and the art. Angiogenesis 2009, 12(3):267-274.
31. Mettouchi A. The role of extracellular matrix in vascular branching morphogenesis. Cell Adhes. Migr. 2012, 6(6):528-534.
32. Marcelo K.L., Goldie L.C., Hirschi K.K. Regulation of endothelial cell differentiation and specification. Circ. Res. 2013, 112(9):1272-1287.
33. Arnaoutova I., Kleinman H.K. In vitro angiogenesis: endothelial cell tube formation on gelled basement membrane extract. Nat. Protoc. 2010, 5(4):628-635.
34. Auerbach R., et al. Angiogenesis assays: a critical overview. Clin. Chem. 2003, 49(1):32-40.
35. Cid M.C., et al. Identification of haptoglobin as an angiogenic factor in sera from patients with systemic vasculitis. J. Clin. Invest. 1993, 91(3):977-985.
36. Noonan D.M., Benelli R., Albini A. Angiogenesis and cancer prevention: a vision. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2007, 174:219-224.
37. Kang Z., et al. Cornin induces angiogenesis through PI3K-Akt-eNOS-VEGF signaling pathway. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2013, 58(0):340-346.
38. Pratheeshkumar P., et al. Luteolin inhibits human prostate tumor growth by suppressing vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2-mediated angiogenesis. PLoS One 2012, 7(12):e52279.
39. Banerjee A., et al. ARTEMIN promotes de novo angiogenesis in ER negative mammary carcinoma through activation of TWIST1-VEGF-A signalling. PLoS One 2012, 7(11):e50098.
40. Han J., Yuan Z., Yan H. Inhibitory effect of adenoviral vector-mediated delivery of p21WAF1/CIP1 on retinal vascular endothelial cell proliferation and tube formation in cultured Rhesus monkey cells (RF/6A). Curr. Eye Res. 2013, 38(6):670-673.
41. Arderiu G., et al. Tissue factor-Akt signaling triggers microvessel formation. J. Thromb. Haemost. 2012, 10(9):1895-1905.
42. Yang X., et al. Angiogenesis induced by signal transducer and activator of transcription 5A (STAT5A) is dependent on autocrine activity of proliferin. J. Biol. Chem. 2012, 287(9):6490-6502.
43. Gao W., et al. Notch signalling pathways mediate synovial angiogenesis in response to vascular endothelial growth factor and angiopoietin 2. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2013, 72(6):1080-1088.
44. Janeczek Portalska K., et al. Endothelial differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells. PLoS One 2012, 7(10):e46842.
45. Deng X., et al. Comparative study on circulating endothelial progenitor cells in systemic lupus erythematosus patients at active stage. Rheumatol. Int. 2010, 30(11):1429-1436.
46. Vishnubalaji R., et al. In vitro differentiation of human skin-derived multipotent stromal cells into putative endothelial-like cells. BMC Dev. Biol. 2012, 12(1):7.
47. Shi Z., et al. Enhanced endothelial differentiation of adipose-derived stem cells by substrate nanotopography. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 2012, (p. n/a-n/a).
48. Yao Y., et al. Tissue kallikrein promotes cardiac neovascularization by enhancing endothelial progenitor cell functional capacity. Hum. Gene Ther. 2012, 23(8):859-870.
49. Gomes S.A., et al. S-nitrosoglutathione reductase (GSNOR) enhances vasculogenesis by mesenchymal stem cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2013, 110(8):2834-2839.
50. Rahbarghazi R., et al. Juxtacrine and paracrine interactions of rat marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells, muscle-derived satellite cells, and neonatal cardiomyocytes with endothelial cells in angiogenesis dynamics. Stem Cells Dev. 2013, 22(6):855-865.
51. Mukai N., et al. A comparison of the tube forming potentials of early and late endothelial progenitor cells. Exp. Cell Res. 2008, 314(3):430-440.
52. Lugassy C., et al. Pilot study on pericytic mimicry and potential embryonic/stem cell properties of angiotropic melanoma cells interacting with the abluminal vascular surface. Cancer Microenviron. 2013, 6(1):19-29.
53. Cheng L., et al. Glioblastoma stem cells generate vascular pericytes to support vessel function and tumor growth. Cell 2013, 153(1):139-152.
54. Azzarello J., et al. Age-dependent vascular endothelial growth factor expression and angiogenic capability of bladder smooth muscle cells: implications for cell-seeded technology in bladder tissue engineering. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 2009, 3(8):579-589.
55. Lo A., et al. Constructing three-dimensional models to study mammary gland branching morphogenesis and functional differentiation. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 2012, 1-8.
56. Kenny P.A., et al. The morphologies of breast cancer cell lines in three-dimensional assays correlate with their profiles of gene expression. Mol. Oncol. 2007, 1(1):84-96.
57. Amatangelo M.D., et al. Three-dimensional culture sensitizes epithelial ovarian cancer cells to EZH2 methyltransferase inhibition. Cell Cycle 2013, 12(13):2113-2119.
58. Yeung T.M., et al. Cancer stem cells from colorectal cancer-derived cell lines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2010, 107(8):3722-3727.
59. Franco O.E., Hayward S.W., Keiran S.M.S. Chapter nine - targeting the tumor stroma as a novel therapeutic approach for prostate cancer. Advances in Pharmacology 2012, 267-313. Academic Press.
60. Conklin M.W., Keely P.J. Why the stroma matters in breast cancer: insights into breast cancer patient outcomes through the examination of stromal biomarkers. Cell Adhes. Migr. 2012, 6(3):249-260.
61. Sasser A.K., et al. Human bone marrow stromal cells enhance breast cancer cell growth rates in a cell line-dependent manner when evaluated in 3D tumor environments. Cancer Lett. 2007, 254(2):255-264.
62. Olsen C., et al. Human mammary fibroblasts stimulate invasion of breast cancer cells in a three-dimensional culture and increase stroma development in mouse xenografts. BMC Cancer 2010, 10(1):1-16.
63. Gil Z., et al. Paracrine regulation of pancreatic cancer cell invasion by peripheral nerves. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2010, 102(2):107-118.
64. Ludwig K., Tse E., Wang J. Colon cancer cells adopt an invasive phenotype without mesenchymal transition in 3-D but not 2-D culture upon combined stimulation with EGF and crypt growth factors. BMC Cancer 2013, 13(1):221.
65. Jacob K., et al. Osteonectin promotes prostate cancer cell migration and invasion: a possible mechanism for metastasis to bone. Cancer Res. 1999, 59(17):4453-4457.
66. Eberlein C., et al. A human monoclonal antibody 264RAD targeting alphavbeta6 integrin reduces tumour growth and metastasis, and modulates key biomarkers in vivo. Oncogene 2013, 32(37):4406-4416.
67. Wang T., et al. RNAi targeting CXCR4 inhibits proliferation and invasion of esophageal carcinoma cells. Diagn. Pathol. 2013, 8(1):104.
68. Safaee M., et al. Overexpression of CD97 confers an invasive phenotype in glioblastoma cells and is associated with decreased survival of glioblastoma patients. PLoS One 2013, 8(4):e62765.
69. Juang H.-H., et al. Metallothionein 3: an androgen-upregulated gene enhances cell invasion and tumorigenesis of prostate carcinoma cells. Prostate 2013, 73(14):1495-1506.
70. Xie L., et al. Cathepsin K-upregulation in fibroblasts promotes matrigel invasive ability of squamous cell carcinoma cells via tumor-derived IL-1α. J. Dermatol. Sci. 2011, 61(1):45-50.
71. Achilli T.-M., et al. Multilayer spheroids to quantify drug uptake and diffusion in 3D. Mol. Pharm. 2014.
72. Grimes D.R., et al. A method for estimating the oxygen consumption rate in multicellular tumour spheroids. J. R. Soc. Interface 2014, 11(92).
73. Friedrich J., Ebner R., Kunz-Schughart L.A. Experimental anti-tumor therapy in 3-D: spheroids-old hat or new challenge?. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2007, 83(11-12):849-871.
74. Kunz-Schughart L.A., et al. The use of 3-D cultures for high-throughput screening: the multicellular spheroid model. J. Biomol. Screen. 2004, 9(4):273-285.
75. Mueller-Klieser W. Three-dimensional cell cultures: from molecular mechanisms to clinical applications. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 1997, 273(4):C1109-C1123.
76. Mueller-Klieser W. Tumor biology and experimental therapeutics. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 2000, 36(2-3):123-139.
77. Sutherland R.M. Cell and environment interactions in tumor microregions: the multicell spheroid model. Science 1988, 240(4849):177-184.
78. Thoma C.R., et al. 3D cell culture systems modeling tumor growth determinants in cancer target discovery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2014, (0).
79. Ke C., et al. Linking differential radiation responses to glioma heterogeneity 2014, 5.
80. Hirschhaeuser F., et al. Multicellular tumor spheroids: an underestimated tool is catching up again. J. Biotechnol. 2010, 148(1):3-15.
81. Laurent J., et al. Multicellular tumor spheroid models to explore cell cycle checkpoints in 3D. BMC Cancer 2013, 13(1):73.
82. Shield K., et al. Multicellular spheroids in ovarian cancer metastases: biology and pathology. Gynecol. Oncol. 2009, 113(1):143-148.
83. Rodríguez-Enríquez S., et al. Energy metabolism transition in multi-cellular human tumor spheroids. J. Cell. Physiol. 2008, 216(1):189-197.
84. Minchinton A.I., Tannock I.F. Drug penetration in solid tumours. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2006, 6(8):583-592.
85. Wenzel C., et al. 3D high-content screening for the identification of compounds that target cells in dormant tumor spheroid regions. Exp. Cell Res. 2014, 323(1):131-143.
86. Carver K., Ming X., Juliano R.L. Multicellular tumor spheroids as a model for assessing delivery of oligonucleotides in three dimensions. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2014, 3:e153.
87. Ekert J.E., et al. Three-dimensional lung tumor microenvironment modulates therapeutic compound responsiveness in vitro - implication for drug development. PLoS One 2014, 9(3):e92248.
88. Timmins N.E.N.E. Hanging-drop multicellular spheroids as a model of tumour angiogenesis. Angiogenesis 2004, 7(2):97.
89. Gaedtke L., et al. Proteomic analysis reveals differences in protein expression in spheroid versus monolayer cultures of low-passage colon carcinoma cells. J. Proteome Res. 2007, 6(11):4111-4118.
90. Chang T.T., Hughes-Fulford M. Monolayer and spheroid culture of human liver hepatocellular carcinoma cell line cells demonstrate distinct global gene expression patterns and functional phenotypes. Tissue Eng. A 2009, 15(3):559-567.
91. Cody N., et al. Influence of monolayer, spheroid, and tumor growth conditions on chromosome 3 gene expression in tumorigenic epithelial ovarian cancer cell lines. BMC Med. Genet. 2008, 1(1):34.
92. Zietarska M., et al. Molecular description of a 3D in vitro model for the study of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Mol. Carcinog. 2007, 46(10):872-885.
93. Colley H.E., et al. Polymersome-mediated delivery of combination anticancer therapy to head and neck cancer cells: 2D and 3D in vitro evaluation. Mol. Pharm. 2014, 11(4):1176-1188.
94. De Witt Hamer P.C., et al. Organotypic glioma spheroids for screening of experimental therapies: how many spheroids and sections are required?. Cytometry A 2009, 75A(6):528-534.
95. Friedrich J., et al. A reliable tool to determine cell viability in complex 3-D culture: the acid phosphatase assay. J. Biomol. Screen. 2007, 12(7):925-937.
96. Howes A.L., et al. The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor, PX-866, is a potent inhibitor of cancer cell motility and growth in three-dimensional cultures. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2007, 6(9):2505-2514.
97. Pickl M., Ries C.H. Comparison of 3D and 2D tumor models reveals enhanced HER2 activation in 3D associated with an increased response to trastuzumab. Oncogene 2009, 28(3):461-468.
98. Friedrich J., et al. Spheroid-based drug screen: considerations and practical approach. Nat. Protoc. 2009, 4(3):309-324.
99. Ivascu A., Kubbies M. Rapid generation of single-tumor spheroids for high-throughput cell function and toxicity analysis. J. Biomol. Screen. 2006, 11(8):922-932.
100. Kelm J.M., et al. Method for generation of homogeneous multicellular tumor spheroids applicable to a wide variety of cell types. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2003, 83(2):173-180.
101. Nederman T., et al. Demonstration of an extracellular matrix in multicellular tumor spheroids. Cancer Res. 1984, 44(7):3090-3097.
102. Zhang M., Desai T., Ferrari M. Proteins and cells on PEG immobilized silicon surfaces. Biomaterials 1998, 19(10):953-960.
103. Frimat J.-P., et al. The network formation assay: a spatially standardized neurite outgrowth analytical display for neurotoxicity screening. Lab Chip 2010, 10(6):701-709.
104. Nakazawa K., Izumi Y., Mori R. Morphological and functional studies of rat hepatocytes on a hydrophobic or hydrophilic polydimethylsiloxane surface. Acta Biomater. 2009, 5(2):613-620.
105. Ungrin M.D., et al. Reproducible, ultra high-throughput formation of multicellular organization from single cell suspension-derived human embryonic stem cell aggregates. PLoS One 2008, 3(2):e1565.
106. Fukuda J., Sakai Y., Nakazawa K. Novel hepatocyte culture system developed using microfabrication and collagen/polyethylene glycol microcontact printing. Biomaterials 2006, 27(7):1061-1070.
107. Tamura T., Sakai Y., Nakazawa K. Two-dimensional microarray of HepG2 spheroids using collagen/polyethylene glycol micropatterned chip. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2008, 19(5):2071-2077.
108. Liu T., et al. Advanced micromachining of concave microwells for long term on-chip culture of multicellular tumour spheroids. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014.
109. Ruppen J., et al. A microfluidic platform for chemoresistive testing of multicellular pleural cancer spheroids. Lab Chip 2014, 14(6):1198-1205.
110. Hsiao A.Y., et al. Microfluidic system for formation of PC-3 prostate cancer co-culture spheroids. Biomaterials 2009, 30(16):3020-3027.
111. Ehsan S.M., et al. A three-dimensional in vitro model of tumor cell intravasation. Integr. Biol. 2014.
112. Lambert B., et al. Assessment of supra-additive effects of cytotoxic drugs and low dose rate irradiation in an in vitro model for hepatocellular carcinoma. Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2006, 84(10):1021-1028.
113. Hirschberg H., et al. Effects of ALA-mediated photodynamic therapy on the invasiveness of human glioma cells. Lasers Surg. Med. 2006, 38(10):939-945.
114. Weiss M.B., et al. TWIST1 is an ERK1/2 effector that promotes invasion and regulates MMP-1 expression in human melanoma cells. Cancer Res. 2012, 72(24):6382-6392.
115. Konstantinovsky S., Davidson B., Reich R. Ezrin and BCAR1/p130Cas mediate breast cancer growth as 3-D spheroids. Clin. Exp. Metastasis 2012, 29(6):527-540.
116. Lam C.R.I., et al. A 3D biomimetic model of tissue stiffness interface for cancer drug testing. Mol. Pharm. 2014.
117. Charoen K.M., et al. Embedded multicellular spheroids as a biomimetic 3D cancer model for evaluating drug and drug-device combinations. Biomaterials 2014, 35(7):2264-2271.
118. Nguyen-Ngoc K.-V., et al. ECM microenvironment regulates collective migration and local dissemination in normal and malignant mammary epithelium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2012, 109(39):E2595-E2604.
119. Yuan X., et al. Isolation of cancer stem cells from adult glioblastoma multiforme. Oncogene 2004, 23(58):9392-9400.
120. Ricci-Vitiani L., et al. Identification and expansion of human colon-cancer-initiating cells. Nature 2007, 445(7123):111-115.
121. Gong Y., et al. Nodal promotes the self-renewal of human colon cancer stem cells via an autocrine manner through Smad2/3 signaling pathway. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014, 2014:364134.
122. Grimshaw M., et al. Mammosphere culture of metastatic breast cancer cells enriches for tumorigenic breast cancer cells. Breast Cancer Res. 2008, 10(3):R52.
123. Dubrovska A., et al. The role of PTEN/Akt/PI3K signaling in the maintenance and viability of prostate cancer stem-like cell populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2009, 106(1):268-273.
124. Wang S., et al. Enrichment of prostate cancer stem cells from primary prostate cancer cultures of biopsy samples. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Pathol. 2014, 7(1):184-193.
125. Kamohara Y., et al. The search for cancer stem cells in hepatocellular carcinoma. Surgery 2008, 144(2):119-124.
126. Chiou S.-H., et al. Positive correlations of Oct-4 and Nanog in oral cancer stem-like cells and high-grade oral squamous cell carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008, 14(13):4085-4095.
127. Kross K.W., et al. Co-culture of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma spheroids with autologous monocytes predicts prognosis. Scand. J. Immunol. 2008, 67(4):392-399.
128. Liao J., et al. Ovarian cancer spheroid cells with stem cell-like properties contribute to tumor generation, metastasis and chemotherapy resistance through hypoxia-resistant metabolism. PLoS One 2014, 9(1):e84941.
129. Paduch R., Niedziela P. TGF-beta1 influence on TNF-alpha production and sTNF-Rs shedding in a coculture of colon carcinoma cell spheroids with normal cells. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Anim. 2009, 45(7):371-377.
130. Karacali B., Vamvakidou A., Tozeren A. Automated recognition of cell phenotypes in histology images based on membrane- and nuclei-targeting biomarkers. BMC Med. Imaging 2007, 7(1):7.
131. Hoffmann T.K., et al. A novel mechanism for anti-EGFR antibody action involves chemokine-mediated leukocyte infiltration. Int. J. Cancer 2009, 124(11):2589-2596.
132. Amann A., et al. Development of an innovative 3D cell culture system to study tumour-stroma interactions in non-small cell lung cancer cells. PLoS One 2014, 9(3):e92511.
133. Krueger S., et al. Interactions between human colon carcinoma cells, fibroblasts and monocytic cells in coculture-regulation of cathepsin B expression and invasiveness. Cancer Lett. 2005, 223(2):313-322.
134. Kunz-Schughart L.A., et al. A heterologous 3-D coculture model of breast tumor cells and fibroblasts to study tumor-associated fibroblast differentiation. Exp. Cell Res. 2001, 266(1):74-86.
135. Seidl P., et al. Three-dimensional fibroblast-tumor cell interaction causes downregulation of RACK1 mRNA expression in breast cancer cells in vitro. Int. J. Cancer 2002, 102(2):129-136.
136. Ghosh S., et al. Use of multicellular tumor spheroids to dissect endothelial cell-tumor cell interactions: a role for T-cadherin in tumor angiogenesis. FEBS Lett. 2007, 581(23):4523-4528.
137. Vorsmann H., et al. Development of a human three-dimensional organotypic skin-melanoma spheroid model for in vitro drug testing. Cell Death Dis. 2013, 4:e719.
138. Konur A., et al. Cytokine repertoire during maturation of monocytes to macrophages within spheroids of malignant and non-malignant urothelial cell lines. Int. J. Cancer 1998, 78(5):648-653.
139. Rama-Esendagli D., et al. Spheroid formation and invasion capacity are differentially influenced by co-cultures of fibroblast and macrophage cells in breast cancer. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2014, 1-8.
140. Hannig M., et al. Control of leucocyte differentiation from embryonic stem cells upon vasculogenesis and confrontation with tumour tissue. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2010, 14(1-2):303-312.
141. Passaniti A., et al. A simple, quantitative method for assessing angiogenesis and antiangiogenic agents using reconstituted basement membrane, heparin, and fibroblast growth factor. Lab. Investig. 1992, 67(4):519-528.
142. Coltrini D., et al. Matrigel plug assay: evaluation of the angiogenic response by reverse transcription-quantitative PCR. Angiogenesis 2013, 16(2):469-477.
143. Doorn J., et al. A small molecule approach to engineering vascularized tissue. Biomaterials 2013, 34(12):3053-3063.
144. Pierce A.D., et al. Glucose-activated RUNX2 phosphorylation promotes endothelial cell proliferation and an angiogenic phenotype. J. Cell. Biochem. 2012, 113(1):282-292.
145. Elkin M., Orgel A., Kleinman H.K. An angiogenic switch in breast cancer involves estrogen and soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004, 96(11):875-878.
146. Wang Z.Y., et al. Primary tumorectomy promotes angiogenesis and pulmonary metastasis in osteosarcoma-bearing nude mice. Acta Cir. Bras. 2013, 28(3):190-194.
147. Fernandez-Perianez R., et al. Basement membrane-rich organoids with functional human blood vessels are permissive niches for human breast cancer metastasis. PLoS One 2013, 8(8):e72957.
148. Hur J., et al. Highly angiogenic CXCR4+CD31+ monocyte subset derived from 3D culture of human peripheral blood. Biomaterials 2013, 34(8):1929-1941.
149. Fadini G.P., et al. Diabetes impairs stem cell and proangiogenic cell mobilization in humans. Diabetes Care 2013, 36(4):943-949.
150. Zhou J., et al. Rosuvastatin enhances angiogenesis via eNOS-dependent mobilization of endothelial progenitor cells. PLoS One 2013, 8(5):e63126.
151. Guedez L., et al. Quantitative assessment of angiogenic responses by the directed in vivo angiogenesis assay. Am. J. Pathol. 2003, 162(5):1431-1439.
152. Napoli C.C. Directed in vivo angiogenesis assay and the study of systemic neoangiogenesis in cancer. Int. J. Cancer 2011, 128(7):1505.
153. de Nigris F., et al. Deletion of Yin Yang 1 protein in osteosarcoma cells on cell invasion and CXCR4/angiogenesis and metastasis. Cancer Res. 2008, 68(6):1797-1808.
154. Chrzanowska-Wodnicka M., et al. Defective angiogenesis, endothelial migration, proliferation, and MAPK signaling in Rap1b-deficient mice. Blood 2008, 111(5):2647-2656.
155. Roldos V., et al. Identification of first proadrenomedullin N-terminal 20 peptide (PAMP) modulator by means of virtual screening and NMR interaction experiments. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2012, 55:262-272.
156. Wang T., et al. CD97, an adhesion receptor on inflammatory cells, stimulates angiogenesis through binding integrin counterreceptors on endothelial cells. Blood 2005, 105(7):2836-2844.
157. Chan Y.-K., et al. An indirubin derivative, E804, exhibits potent angiosuppressive activity. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2012, 83(5):598-607.
158. Koskimaki J., et al. Pentastatin-1, a collagen IV derived 20-mer peptide, suppresses tumor growth in a small cell lung cancer xenograft model. BMC Cancer 2010, 10(1):29.
159. Vu H.N., et al. CC-5079: a small molecule with MKP1, antiangiogenic, and antitumor activity. J. Surg. Res. 2010, 164(1):116-125.
160. Cox C.A., et al. Doxycycline's effect on ocular angiogenesis: an in vivo analysis. Ophthalmology 2010, 117(9):1782-1791.
161. Wyckoff J.B., et al. A critical step in metastasis: in vivo analysis of intravasation at the primary tumor. Cancer Res. 2000, 60:2504-2511.
162. Hernandez L., et al. In vivo assay for tumor cell invasion. Methods Mol. Biol. 2009, 571:227-238.
163. Todaro M., et al. Tumorigenic and metastatic activity of human thyroid cancer stem cells. Cancer Res. 2010, 70(21):8874-8885.
164. Di Fiore R., et al. Modeling human osteosarcoma in mice through 3AB-OS cancer stem cell xenografts. J. Cell. Biochem. 2012, 113(11):3380-3392.
165. Calcagno A.M., et al. Prolonged drug selection of breast cancer cells and enrichment of cancer stem cell characteristics. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2010, 102(21):1637-1652.
166. Inoue A., et al. Cancer stem-like cells of glioblastoma characteristically express MMP-13 and display highly invasive activity. Int. J. Oncol. 2010, 37(5):1121-1131.
167. Kibbey M.C., Grant D.S., Kleinman H.K. Role of the SIKVAV site of laminin in promotion of angiogenesis and tumor growth: an in vivo Matrigel model. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1992, 84(21):1633-1638.
168. Grigorieva E.V., et al. D-glucuronyl C5-epimerase suppresses small-cell lung cancer cell proliferation in vitro and tumour growth in vivo. Br. J. Cancer 2011, 105(1):74-82.
169. Johnson N., et al. Compromised CDK1 activity sensitizes BRCA-proficient cancers to PARP inhibition. Nat. Med. 2011, 17(7):875-882.
170. Hart S., et al. SB1518, a novel macrocyclic pyrimidine-based JAK2 inhibitor for the treatment of myeloid and lymphoid malignancies. Leukemia 2011, 25(11):1751-1759.
171. Zhang S., et al. Combating trastuzumab resistance by targeting SRC, a common node downstream of multiple resistance pathways. Nat. Med. 2011, 17(4):461-469.
172. Kim D.J., et al. Pancreatic tumor mass in a xenograft mouse model is decreased by treatment with therapeutic stem cells following introduction of therapeutic genes. Oncol. Rep. 2013.
173. Kim M.P., et al. ALDH activity selectively defines an enhanced tumor-initiating cell population relative to CD133 expression in human pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PLoS One 2011, 6(6):e20636.
174. Boiko A.D., et al. Human melanoma-initiating cells express neural crest nerve growth factor receptor CD271. Nature 2010, 466(7302):133-137.
175. Hu G., et al. Intrinsic gemcitabine resistance in a novel pancreatic cancer cell line is associated with cancer stem cell-like phenotype. Int. J. Oncol. 2012, 40(3):798-806.
176. Schober M., Fuchs E. Tumor-initiating stem cells of squamous cell carcinomas and their control by TGF-β and integrin/focal adhesion kinase (FAK) signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2011, 108(26):10544-10549.
177. Kozaki K., et al. Establishment and characterization of a human lung cancer cell line NCI-H460-LNM35 with consistent lymphogenous metastasis via both subcutaneous and orthotopic propagation. Cancer Res. 2000, 60(9):2535-2540.
178. Bao L., et al. Effects of inoculation site and Matrigel on growth and metastasis of human breast cancer cells. Br. J. Cancer 1994, 70(2):228-232.
179. Noel A., et al. Enhancement of tumorigenicity of human breast adenocarcinoma cells in nude mice by matrigel and fibroblasts. Br. J. Cancer 1993, 68(5):909-915.
180. Bagley R.G., et al. Pericytes and endothelial precursor cells: cellular interactions and contributions to malignancy. Cancer Res. 2005, 65(21):9741-9750.
181. Tuxhorn J.A., et al. Stromal cells promote angiogenesis and growth of human prostate tumors in a differential reactive stroma (DRS) xenograft model. Cancer Res. 2002, 62(11):3298-3307.
182. Xu K., et al. The role of fibroblast Tiam1 in tumor cell invasion and metastasis. Oncogene 2010, 29(50):6533-6542.
183. Alonso-Camino V., et al. Engineered human tumor xenografts with functional human vascular networks. Microvasc. Res. 2011, 81(1):18-25.
184. Lee H.L., et al. Post-transcriptionally regulated expression system in human xenogeneic transplantation models. Mol. Ther. 2011, 19(9):1645-1655.
185. Samineni S., Glackin C., Shively J.E. Role of CEACAM1, ECM, and mesenchymal stem cells in an orthotopic model of human breast cancer. Int. J. Breast Cancer 2011, 2011:381080.
186. Lewis M., et al. A mystery wrapped in an enigma: Matrigel enhancement of mammary cell growth and morphogenesis. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 2012, 17(2):99-101.
187. Lombardo Y., et al. Nicastrin regulates breast cancer stem cell properties and tumor growth in vitro and in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2012, 109(41):16558-16563.
188. Chen X., et al. Dissociated primary human prostate cancer cells coinjected with the immortalized Hs5 bone marrow stromal cells generate undifferentiated tumors in NOD/SCID-γ mice. PLoS One 2013, 8(2):e56903.
189. Gorelik B., et al. Efficacy of weekly docetaxel and bevacizumab in mesenchymal chondrosarcoma: a new theranostic method combining xenografted biopsies with a mathematical model. Cancer Res. 2008, 68(21):9033-9040.