4.6 Article

Bioprinting of novel 3D tumor array chip for drug screening

期刊

BIO-DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING
卷 3, 期 3, 页码 175-188

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s42242-020-00078-4

关键词

3D tumor array chip (3D-TAC); Gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA); Drug screening; In vitro model; Bioprinting

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [U1609207]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFA0703000]
  3. Science Fund for Creative Research Groups of the National Natural Science Foundation of China [51521064]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biomedical field has been seeking a feasible standard drug screening system consisting of 3D tumor model array for drug researching due to providing sufficient samples and simulating actual in vivo tumor growth situation, which is still a challenge to rapidly and uniformly establish though. Here, we propose a novel drug screening system, namely 3D tumor array chip with layer cake structure, for drug screening. Accurate gelatin methacryloyl hydrogel droplets (similar to 0.1 mu L) containing tumor cells can be automatically deposited on demand with electrohydrodynamic 3D printing. Transparent conductive membrane is introduced as a chip basement for preventing charges accumulation during fabricating and convenient observing during screening. Culturing chambers formed by stainless steel and silicon interlayer is convenient to be assembled and recycled. As this chip is compatible with the existing 96-well culturing plate, the drug screening protocols could keep the same as convention. Important properties of this chip, namely printing stability, customizability, accuracy, microenvironment, tumor functionalization, are detailly examined. As a demonstration, it is applied for screening of epirubicin and paclitaxel with breast tumor cells to confirm the compatibility of the proposed screening system with the traditional screening methods. We believe this chip will potentially play a significant role in drug evaluation in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据