4.4 Article

Imaging- and Flow Cytometry-based Analysis of Cell Position and the Cell Cycle in 3D Melanoma Spheroids

Journal

JOVE-JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS
Volume -, Issue 106, Pages -

Publisher

JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS
DOI: 10.3791/53486

Keywords

Medicine; Issue 106; Melanoma; spheroid; cell cycle; image analysis; flow cytometry analysis; 3D; cancer therapy; cancer cell biology; hypoxia; tumor sub-populations; vibratome sectioning; multicellular

Funding

  1. Cancer Council New South Wales [RG 09-08, RG 13-06]
  2. Priority-driven collaborative cancer research scheme/Cancer Australia/Cure Cancer Australia Foundation [570778, 1051996]
  3. Cancer Institute New South Wales [08/RFG/1-27]
  4. National Health and Medical Research Council [APP1003637, APP1084893]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Three-dimensional (3D) tumor spheroids are utilized in cancer research as a more accurate model of the in vivo tumor microenvironment, compared to traditional two-dimensional (2D) cell culture. The spheroid model is able to mimic the effects of cell-cell interaction, hypoxia and nutrient deprivation, and drug penetration. One characteristic of this model is the development of a necrotic core, surrounded by a ring of G1 arrested cells, with proliferating cells on the outer layers of the spheroid. Of interest in the cancer field is how different regions of the spheroid respond to drug therapies as well as genetic or environmental manipulation. We describe here the use of the fluorescence ubiquitination cell cycle indicator (FUCCI) system along with cytometry and image analysis using commercial software to characterize the cell cycle status of cells with respect to their position inside melanoma spheroids. These methods may be used to track changes in cell cycle status, gene/protein expression or cell viability in different sub-regions of tumor spheroids over time and under different conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available