ReviewPloS one2016
3D Cell Culture in a Self-Assembled Nanofiber Environment.
Review in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential Effects of Wheat Bran Antioxidants on the Growth Dynamics of Human Cancer Cells.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A biocompatible supramolecular hydrogel mesh for sample stabilization in light microscopy and nanoscopy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Spontaneous Formation of 3D Breast Cancer Tissues on Electrospun Chitosan/Poly(ethylene oxide) Nanofibrous Scaffolds.ACS omega · 2022Article
- Three-dimensional culture and clinical drug responses of a highly metastatic human ovarian cancer HO-8910PM cells in nanofibrous microenvironments of three hydrogel biomaterials.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2020Article
- Enhanced Pharmacological Ascorbate Oxidation Radiosensitizes Pancreatic Cancer.Radiation research · 2019Article
- Oriented Nanofibrous Polymer Scaffolds Containing Protein-Loaded Porous Silicon Generated by Spray Nebulization.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development and utilization of three-dimensional cell culture platforms has been gaining more traction. Three-dimensional culture platforms are capable of mimicking in vivo microenvironments, which provide greater physiological relevance in comparison to conventional two-dimensional cultures. The majority of three-dimensional culture platforms are challenged by the lack of cell attachment, long polymerization times, and inclusion of undefined xenobiotics, and cytotoxic cross-linkers. In this study, we review the use of a highly defined material composed of naturally occurring compounds, hyaluronic acid and chitosan, known as Cell-Mate3DTM. Moreover, we provide an original measurement of Young's modulus using a uniaxial unconfined compression method to elucidate the difference in microenvironment rigidity for acellular and cellular conditions. When hydrated into a tissue-like hybrid hydrocolloid/hydrogel, Cell-Mate3DTM is a highly versatile three-dimensional culture platform that enables downstream applications such as flow cytometry, immunostaining, histological staining, and functional studies to be applied with relative ease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.