Cancer Cell Culture: The Basics and Two-Dimensional Cultures.

Despite significant advances in investigative and therapeutic methodologies for cancer, 2D cell culture remains an essential and evolving competency in this fast-paced industry. From basic monolayer cultures and functional assays to more recent and ever-advancing cell-based cancer interventions, 2D cell culture plays a crucial role in cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Research and development in this field call for a great deal of optimization, while the heterogenous nature of cancer itself demands personalized precision for its intervention. In this way, 2D cell culture is ideal, providing a highly adaptive and responsive platform, where skills can be honed and techniques modified. Furthermore, it is arguably the most efficient, economical, and sustainable methodology available to researchers and clinicians alike.In this chapter, we discuss the history of cell culture and the varying types of cell and cell lines used today, the techniques used to characterize and authenticate them, the applications of 2D cell culture in cancer diagnosis and prognosis, and more recent developments in the area of cell-based cancer interventions and vaccines.

Three-Dimensional Spheroids for Cancer Research.

In vitro cell culture is one of the most widely used tools used today for increasing our understanding of various things such as protein production, mechanisms of drug action, tissue engineering, and overall cellular biology. For the past decades, however, cancer researchers have relied heavily on conventional two-dimensional (2D) monolayer culture techniques to test a variety of aspects of cancer research ranging from the cytotoxic effects of antitumor drugs to the toxicity of diagnostic dyes and contact tracers. However, many promising cancer therapies have either weak or no efficacy in real-life conditions, therefore delaying or stopping altogether their translating to the clinic. This is, in part, due to the reductionist 2D cultures used to test these materials, which lack appropriate cell-cell contacts, have altered signaling, do not represent the natural tumor microenvironment, and have different drug responses, due to their reduced malignant phenotype when compared to real in vivo tumors. With the most recent advances, cancer research has moved into 3D biological investigation. Three-dimensional (3D) cultures of cancer cells not only recapitulate the in vivo environment better than their 2D counterparts, but they have, in recent years, emerged as a relatively low-cost and scientifically accurate methodology for studying cancer. In this chapter, we highlight the importance of 3D culture, specifically 3D spheroid culture, reviewing some key methodologies for forming 3D spheroids, discussing the experimental tools that can be used in conjunction with 3D spheroids and finally their applications in cancer research.

A Method for the In Vitro Cytotoxicity Assessment of Anti-cancer Compounds and Materials Using High Content Screening Analysis.

To date, there is a large bottleneck associated with cancer drug design and development: a lack of appropriate methodologies for screening their potential toxicity. This issue not only causes a high attrition rate for these compounds but also slows down the drug discovery process in general. To overcome this problem, robust, accurate, and reproducible methodologies for assessing anti-cancer compounds are essential. Multiparametric technique and high-throughput analysis, in particular, are favored due to the time- and cost-effective way in which they assess large panels of materials, and due to their large informational output. Following extensive work within our group, we have developed a protocol for assessing the toxicity of anti-cancer compounds using a high-content screening and analysis (HCSA) platform, which is both time-effective and reproducible.

Pre-clinical 2D and 3D toxicity response to a panel of nanomaterials; comparative assessment of NBM-induced liver toxicity.

Nanobiomaterials, or NBMs, have been used in medicine and bioimaging for decades, with wide-reaching applications ranging from their uses as carriers of genes and drugs, to acting as sensors and probes. When developing nanomedicine products, it is vitally important to evaluate their safety, ensuring that both biocompatibility and efficacy are achieved so their applications in these areas can be safe and effective. When discussing the safety of nanomedicine in general terms, it is foolish to make generalised statements due to the vast array of different manufactured nanomaterials, formulated from a multitude of different materials, in many shapes and sizes; therefore, NBM pre-clinical screening can be a significant challenge. Outside of their distribution in the various tissues, organs and cells in the body, a key area of interest is the impact of NBMs on the liver. A considerable issue for researchers today is accurately predicting human-specific liver toxicity prior to clinical trials, with hepatotoxicity not only the most cited reasons for withdrawal of approved drugs, but also a primary cause of attrition in pre-launched drug candidates. To date, no simple solution to adequately predict these adverse effects exists prior to entering human experimentation. The limitations of the current pre-clinical toolkit are believed to be one of the main reasons for this, with questions being raised on the relevance of animal models in pre-clinical assessment, and over the ability of conventional, simplified in vitro cell-based assays to adequately assess new drug candidates or NBMs. Common 2D cell cultures are unable to adequately represent the functions of 3D tissues and their complex cell-cell and cell-matrix interactions, as well as differences found in diffusion and transport conditions. Therefore, testing NBM toxicity in conventional 2D models may not be an accurate reflection of the actual toxicity these materials impart on the body. One such method of overcoming these issues is the use of 3D cultures, such as cell spheroids, to more accurately assess NBM-tissue interaction. In this study, we introduce a 3D hepatocellular carcinoma model cultured from HepG2 cells to assess both the cytotoxicity and viability observed following treatment with a variety of NBMs, namely a nanostructured lipid carrier (in the specific technical name = LipImage™ 815), a gold nanoparticle (AuNP) and a panel of polymeric (in the specific technical name = PACA) NBMs. This model is also in compliance with the 3Rs policy of reduction, refinement and replacement in animal experimentation [1], and meets the critical need for more advanced in vitro models for pre-clinical nanotoxicity assessment. Pipeline for the pre-clinical assessment of NBMs in liver spheroid model.

Evaluating nanobiomaterial-induced DNA strand breaks using the alkaline comet assay.

Due to their unique chemical and physical properties, nanobiomaterials (NBMs) are extensively studied for applications in medicine and drug delivery. Despite these exciting properties, their small sizes also make them susceptible to toxicity. Whilst nanomaterial immunotoxicity and cytotoxicity are studied in great depth, there is still limited data on their potential genotoxicity or ability to cause DNA damage. In the past years, new medical device regulations, which came into place in 2020, were developed, which require the assessment of long-term NBM exposure; therefore, in recent years, increased attention is being paid to genotoxicity screening of these materials. In this article, and through an interlaboratory comparison (ILC) study conducted within the Horizon 2020 REFINE project, we assess five different NBM formulations, each with different uses, namely, a bio-persistent gold nanoparticle (AuNP), an IR-780 dye-loaded liposome which is used in deep tissue imaging (LipImage™815), an unloaded PACA polymeric nanoparticle used as a drug delivery system (PACA), and two loaded PACA NBMs, i.e. the cabazitaxel drug-loaded PACA (CBZ-PACA) and the NR668 dye-loaded PACA (NR668 PACA) for their potential to cause DNA strand breaks using the alkaline comet assay and discuss the current state of genotoxicity testing for nanomaterials. We have found through our interlaboratory comparison that the alkaline comet assay can be suitably applied to the pre-clinical assessment of NBMs, as a reproducible and repeatable methodology for assessing NBM-induced DNA damage. Workflow for assessing the applicability of the alkaline comet assay to determine nanobiomaterial (NBM)-induced DNA strand breaks, through an interlaboratory comparison study (ILC).

Three-dimensional (3D) liver cell models - a tool for bridging the gap between animal studies and clinical trials when screening liver accumulation and toxicity of nanobiomaterials.

Despite the exciting properties and wide-reaching applications of nanobiomaterials (NBMs) in human health and medicine, their translation from bench to bedside is slow, with a predominant issue being liver accumulation and toxicity following systemic administration. In vitro 2D cell-based assays and in vivo testing are the most popular and widely used methods for assessing liver toxicity at pre-clinical stages; however, these fall short in predicting toxicity for NBMs. Focusing on in vitro and in vivo assessment, the accurate prediction of human-specific hepatotoxicity is still a significant challenge to researchers. This review describes the relationship between NBMs and the liver, and the methods for assessing toxicity, focusing on the limitations they bring in the assessment of NBM hepatotoxicity as one of the reasons defining the poor translation for NBMs. We will then present some of the most recent advances towards the development of more biologically relevant in vitro liver methods based on tissue-mimetic 3D cell models and how these could facilitate the translation of NBMs going forward. Finally, we also discuss the low public acceptance and limited uptake of tissue-mimetic 3D models in pre-clinical assessment, despite the demonstrated technical and ethical advantages associated with them. 3D culture models for use as in vitro alternatives to traditional methods and conventional in vivo animal testing for testing liver accumulation and toxicity of nanobiomaterials.

Towards More Predictive, Physiological and Animal-free In Vitro Models: Advances in Cell and Tissue Culture 2020 Conference Proceedings.

Experimental systems that faithfully replicate human physiology at cellular, tissue and organ level are crucial to the development of efficacious and safe therapies with high success rates and low cost. The development of such systems is challenging and requires skills, expertise and inputs from a diverse range of experts, such as biologists, physicists, engineers, clinicians and regulatory bodies. Kirkstall Limited, a biotechnology company based in York, UK, organised the annual conference, Advances in Cell and Tissue Culture (ACTC), which brought together people having a variety of expertise and interests, to present and discuss the latest developments in the field of cell and tissue culture and in vitro modelling. The conference has also been influential in engaging animal welfare organisations in the promotion of research, collaborative projects and funding opportunities. This report describes the proceedings of the latest ACTC conference, which was held virtually on 30th September and 1st October 2020, and included sessions on in vitro models in the following areas: advanced skin and respiratory models, neurological disease, cancer research, advanced models including 3-D, fluid flow and co-cultures, diabetes and other age-related disorders, and animal-free research. The roundtable session on the second day was very interactive and drew huge interest, with intriguing discussion taking place among all participants on the theme of replacement of animal models of disease.