Challenges and opportunities toward enabling phenotypic screening of complex and 3D cell models

Future Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 513-525

  Horman, Shane R ^a   Hogan, Christopher ^b   Reyes, Karlo Delos ^a   Lo, Frederick ^a   Antczak, Christophe ^b  

^a GENOMICS INSTITUTE OF THE NOVARTIS RESEARCH FOUNDATION   (United States)

^b NOVARTIS INSTITUTES FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPLEX CELL MODEL; GENOMICS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; MICROFLUIDICS; NONHUMAN; ONCOLOGY; PHENOTYPE; PHENOTYPIC SCREENING; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCREENING; SENSOR; ANIMAL; CELLS; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ANIMALS; CELLS; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DISCOVERY; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING ASSAYS; HUMANS; INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHENOTYPE;

EID: 84928102258     PISSN: 17568919     EISSN: 17568927     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4155/fmc.14.163     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Hait WN. Anticancer drug development: the grand challenges. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 9(4), 253-254 (2010).
2. Paul SM, Mytelka DS, Dunwiddie CT et al. How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 9(3), 203-214 (2010).
3. Arrowsmith J. Trial watch: Phase II failures: 2008-2010. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 10(5), 328-329 (2011).
4. Westhouse RA. Safety assessment considerations and strategies for targeted small molecule cancer therapeutics in drug discovery. Toxicol. Pathol. 38(1), 165-168 (2010).
5. Conway JR, Carragher NO, Timpson P. Developments in preclinical cancer imaging: innovating the discovery of therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Cancer 14(5), 314-328 (2014).
6. Swinney DC. Phenotypic vs. target-based drug discovery for first-in-class medicines. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 93(4), 299-301 (2013).
7. Eder J, Sedrani R, Wiesmann C. The discovery of first-in-class drugs: origins and evolution. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 13(8), 577-587 (2014).
8. Moffat JG, Rudolph J, Bailey D. Phenotypic screening in cancer drug discovery - past, present and future. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 13(8), 588-602 (2014).
9. Swinney DC. The contribution of mechanistic understanding to phenotypic screening for first-in-class medicines. J. Biomol. Screen. 18(10), 1186-1192 (2013).
10. Breslin S, O'driscoll L. Three-dimensional cell culture: the missing link in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 18(5-6), 240-249 (2013).
11. Kamb A. What's wrong with our cancer models? Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 4(2), 161-165 (2005).
12. Edmondson R, Broglie JJ, Adcock AF, Yang L. Threedimensional cell culture systems and their applications in drug discovery and cell-based biosensors. Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 12(4), 207-218 (2014).
13. Lovitt CJ, Shelper TB, Avery VM. Miniaturized threedimensional cancer model for drug evaluation. Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 11, 435-448 (2013).
14. O'brien LE, Zegers MM, Mostov KE. Opinion: Building epithelial architecture: insights from three-dimensional culture models. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 3(7), 531-537 (2002).
15. Longati P, Jia X, Eimer J et al. 3D pancreatic carcinoma spheroids induce a matrix-rich, chemoresistant phenotype offering a better model for drug testing. BMC Cancer 13, 95 (2013).
16. Hongisto V, Jernstrom S, Fey V et al. High-throughput 3D screening reveals differences in drug sensitivities between culture models of JIMT1 breast cancer cells. PloS ONE 8(10), e77232 (2013).
17. Courtenay VD. A soft agar colony assay for Lewis lung tumour and B16 melanoma taken directly from the mouse. Br. J. Cancer 34(1), 39-45 (1976).
18. Sutherland RM, Inch WR, Mccredie JA, Kruuv J. A multicomponent radiation survival curve using an in vitro tumour model. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. Relat. Stud. Phys. Chem. Med. 18(5), 491-495 (1970).
19. Weaver VM, Petersen OW, Wang F et al. Reversion of the malignant phenotype of human breast cells in three-dimensional culture and in vivo by integrin blocking antibodies. J. Cell Biol. 137(1), 231-245 (1997).
20. Hamburger AW, Salmon SE. Primary bioassay of human tumor stem cells. Science 197(4302), 461-463 (1977).
21. Hughes CS, Postovit LM, Lajoie GA. Matrigel: a complex protein mixture required for optimal growth of cell culture. Proteomics 10(9), 1886-1890 (2010).
22. Yuan K, Kucik D, Singh RK, Listinsky CM, Listinsky JJ, Siegal GP. Alterations in human breast cancer adhesionmotility in response to changes in cell surface glycoproteins displaying alpha-L-fucose moieties. Int. J. Oncol. 32(4), 797-807 (2008).
23. Anderson SN, Towne DL, Burns DJ, Warrior U. A highthroughput soft agar assay for identification of anticancer compound. J. Biomol. Screen. 12(7), 938-945 (2007).
24. Horman SR, To J, Orth AP. An HTS-compatible 3D colony formation assay to identify tumor-specific chemotherapeutics. J. Biomol. Screen. 18(10), 1298-1308 (2013).
25. Soda M, Choi YL, Enomoto M et al. Identification of the transforming EML4-ALK fusion gene in non-small-cell lung cancer. Nature 448(7153), 561-566 (2007).
26. Menrad H, Werno C, Schmid T et al. Roles of hypoxiainducible factor-1alpha (HIF-1alpha) versus HIF-2alpha in the survival of hepatocellular tumor spheroids. Hepatology 51(6), 2183-2192 (2010).
27. Kunz-Schughart LA, Freyer JP, Hofstaedter F, Ebner R. The use of 3-D cultures for high-throughput screening: the multicellular spheroid model. J. Biomol. Screen. 9(4), 273-285 (2004).
28. Hirschhaeuser F, Menne H, Dittfeld C, West J, Mueller- Klieser W, Kunz-Schughart LA. Multicellular tumor spheroids: an underestimated tool is catching up again. J. Biotechnol. 148(1), 3-15 (2010).
29. Labarbera DV, Reid BG, Yoo BH. The multicellular tumor spheroid model for high-throughput cancer drug discovery. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 7(9), 819-830 (2012).
30. Ho WY, Yeap SK, Ho CL, Rahim RA, Alitheen NB. Development of multicellular tumor spheroid (MCTS) culture from breast cancer cell and a high throughput screening method using the MTT assay. PloS ONE 7(9), e44640 (2012).
31. Schlabach MR, Luo J, Solimini NL et al. Cancer proliferation gene discovery through functional genomics. Science 319(5863), 620-624 (2008).
32. Koh MY, Lemos R Jr, Liu X, Powis G. The hypoxia-associated factor switches cells from HIF-1alpha- to HIF-2alpha-dependent signaling promoting stem cell characteristics, aggressive tumor growth and invasion. Cancer Res. 71(11), 4015-4027 (2011).
33. Uchida Y, Tanaka S, Aihara A et al. Analogy between sphere forming ability and stemness of human hepatoma cells. Oncol. Rep. 24(5), 1147-1151 (2010).
34. Friedrich J, Seidel C, Ebner R, Kunz-Schughart LA. Spheroid-based drug screen: considerations and practical approach. Nat. Protoc. 4(3), 309-324 (2009).
35. Walzl A, Unger C, Kramer N et al. The Resazurin reduction assay can distinguish cytotoxic from cytostatic compounds in spheroid screening assays. J. Biomol. Screen. 19(7), 1047-1059 (2014).
36. Zhang JH, Chung TD, Oldenburg KR. A simple statistical parameter for use in evaluation and validation of high throughput screening assays. J. Biomol. Screen. 4(2), 67-73 (1999).
37. Bray MA, Carpenter A. Advanced assay development guidelines for image-based high content screening and analysis. In: Assay Guidance Manual, Sittampalam GS, Gal- Edd N, Arkin M et al. (Eds). Bethesda, MD, USA (2004).
38. Isherwood B, Timpson P, Mcghee EJ et al. Live cell in vitro and in vivo imaging applications: accelerating drug discovery. Pharmaceutics 3(2), 141-170 (2011).
39. Antczak C, Bermingham A, Calder P et al. Domain-based biosensor assay to screen for epidermal growth factor receptor modulators in live cells. Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 10(1), 24-36 (2012).
40. Antczak C, Mahida JP, Bhinder B, Calder PA, Djaballah H. A high-content biosensor-based screen identifies cellpermeable activators and inhibitors of EGFR function: implications in drug discovery. J. Biomol. Screen. 17(7), 885-899 (2012).
41. Antczak C, Takagi T, Ramirez CN, Radu C, Djaballah H. Live-cell imaging of caspase activation for high-content screening. J. Biomol. Screen. 14(8), 956-969 (2009).
42. Ramirez CN, Antczak C, Djaballah H. Cell viability assessment: toward content-rich platforms. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 5(3), 223-233 (2010).
43. Lukinavicius G, Reymond L, D'este E et al. Fluorogenic probes for live-cell imaging of the cytoskeleton. Nat. Methods 11(7), 731-733 (2014).
44. Hirata N, Nakagawa M, Fujibayashi Y et al. A chemical probe that labels human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Rep. 6(6), 1165-1174 (2014).
45. Chang PV, Bertozzi CR. Imaging beyond the proteome. Chem. Commun. (Cambridge) 48(71), 8864-8879 (2012).
46. Dean KM, Palmer AE. Advances in fluorescence labeling strategies for dynamic cellular imaging. Nat. Chem. Biol. 10(7), 512-523 (2014).
47. Lavis LD, Raines RT. Bright building blocks for chemical biology. ACS Chem. Biol. 9(4), 855-866 (2014).
48. Bowen WP, Wylie PG. Application of laser-scanning fluorescence microplate cytometry in high content screening. Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 4(2), 209-221 (2006).
49. Hulkower KI, Herber RL. Cell migration and invasion assays as tools for drug discovery. Pharmaceutics 3(1), 107-124 (2011).
50. Gassmann K, Baumann J, Giersiefer S et al. Automated neurosphere sorting and plating by the COPAS large particle sorter is a suitable method for high-throughput 3D in vitro applications. Toxicol. In vitro 26(6), 993-1000 (2012).
51. Li CY, Wood DK, Huang JH, Bhatia SN. Flow-based pipeline for systematic modulation and analysis of 3D tumor microenvironments. Lab. Chip 13(10), 1969-1978 (2013).
52. An R, Merrill D, Avramova L et al. Phenotypic profiling of Raf inhibitors and mitochondrial toxicity in 3D tissue using biodynamic imaging. J. Biomol. Screen. 19(4), 526-537 (2014).
53. Dittrich PS, Manz A. Lab-on-a-chip: microfluidics in drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 5(3), 210-218 (2006).
54. Laser DJ, Santiago JG. A review of micropumps. J. Micromech. Microeng. 14, R35-R64 (2004).
55. Nguyen N-T, Wu Z. Micromixers - a review. J. Micromech. Microeng. 15, R1-R16 (2005).
56. Huh D, Matthews BD, Mammoto A, Montoya-Zavala M, Hsin HY, Ingber DE. Reconstituting organ-level lung functions on a chip. Science 328(5986), 1662-1668 (2010).
57. Kimura H, Yamamoto T, Sakai H, Sakai Y, Fujii T. An integrated microfluidic system for long-term perfusion culture and on-line monitoring of intestinal tissue models. Lab. Chip 8(5), 741-746 (2008).
58. Tsai M, Kita A, Leach J et al. In vitro modeling of the microvascular occlusion and thrombosis that occur in hematologic diseases using microfluidic technology. J. Clin. Invest. 122(1), 408-418 (2012).
59. Ebrahimkhani MR, Neiman JA, Raredon MS, Hughes DJ, Griffith LG. Bioreactor technologies to support liver function in vitro. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 69-70, 132-157 (2014).
60. Walsh CL, Babin BM, Kasinskas RW, Foster JA, Mcgarry MJ, Forbes NS. A multipurpose microfluidic device designed to mimic microenvironment gradients and develop targeted cancer therapeutics. Lab. Chip 9(4), 545-554 (2009).
61. Heilker R, Traub S, Reinhardt P, Scholer HR, Sterneckert J. iPS cell derived neuronal cells for drug discovery. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 35(10), 510-519 (2014).
62. Inoue H, Yamanaka S. The use of induced pluripotent stem cells in drug development. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 89(5), 655-661 (2011).
63. Lancaster MA, Renner M, Martin CA et al. Cerebral organoids model human brain development and microcephaly. Nature 501(7467), 373-379 (2013).
64. Mayr LM, Bojanic D. Novel trends in high-throughput screening. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 9(5), 580-588 (2009).
65. Wassermann AM, Camargo LM, Auld DS. Composition and applications of focus libraries to phenotypic assays. Front. Pharmacol. 5, 164 (2014).