ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021
3D Cell Culture Systems: Tumor Application, Advantages, and Disadvantages.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 282 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
282 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Unlocking the Potential of Spheroids in Personalized Medicine: A Systematic Review of Seeding Methodologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Experimental Tumor Induction and Evaluation of Its Treatment in the Chicken Embryo Chorioallantoic Membrane Model: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Beyond the Monolayer: Leveraging 3D Culture Systems to Decode Mechanisms of Drug Resistance and Therapeutic Vulnerabilities in Colorectal Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- Multimodal Biophysical Analysis of Morpho-Phenotypic and Morpho-Functional Dynamics in Normal and Cancer Spheroids within Engineered Microenvironments.Chemical & biomedical imaging · 2026Article
- Phase-Separated Nanoarchitecture of Adhesion-Cytoskeleton Force Coupling Reforms Nuclear Spatiotemporal Posture Conformation and Mechanotransduction of Osteosarcoma on Biofunctional Microarrays.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Three-dimensional spheroid models in breast cancer: tumor microenvironment complexity, cancer stem cell-driven resistance, and translational model integration.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Advancing photocytotoxicity evaluation of nitric oxide derivative-ruthenium complex in 3D biofabricated breast cancer models.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- The hypoxic and acidic microenvironment created by GelMA hydrogels enhances the stem-like characteristics of lung cancer cells by inhibiting the MAPK signaling pathway.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2026Article
- Adaptation of Non-Invasive Cancer Cells to 3D Collagen I Microenvironment Induces Transcriptional Reprogramming Accompanied by a More Complex RNA Landscape.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Hippo Pathway Regulation and Microenvironmental Cues Governing Human MSC Transition to Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts.Journal of cellular physiology · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of the effects of Silymarin on the metastatic characteristics of MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells with two-dimensional and three-dimensional culture methods.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2026Article
- Review
- Nanoparticle-Based Biomaterials in Cancer Research: From Mechanistic Insights to Therapeutic Innovation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- 3D bioprinting for cancer modeling and drug screening.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- Aquaporin-3 and aquaporin-5 impact the development of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma spheroids.FEBS open bio · 2026Article
- New Insights into the Development of Papillary Thyroid Cancer: The Roles of miR-1179 and ELF3.Cells · 2026Article
- Impact of culture dimensionality and matrix composition on morphology, phenotype and drug response in pancreatic cancer models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Indenting multicellular spheroids with various tip geometries.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2026Article
- Micro Pattern-Based 3D Cell Culture Platform: An Overview of Technologies and Applications.Exploration (Beijing, China) · 2026Review
- Application of 3D Cell Culture Techniques in Nanotoxicology: How Far Are We?Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Review
222 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 traditional two-dimensional (2D) in vitro cell culture system (on a flat support) has long been used in cancer research. However, this system cannot be fully translated into clinical trials to ideally represent physiological conditions. This culture cannot mimic the natural tumor microenvironment due to the lack of cellular communication (cell-cell) and interaction (cell-cell and cell-matrix). To overcome these limitations, three-dimensional (3D) culture systems are increasingly developed in research and have become essential for tumor research, tissue engineering, and basic biology research. 3D culture has received much attention in the field of biomedicine due to its ability to mimic tissue structure and function. The 3D matrix presents a highly dynamic framework where its components are deposited, degraded, or modified to delineate functions and provide a platform where cells attach to perform their specific functions, including adhesion, proliferation, communication, and apoptosis. So far, various types of models belong to this culture: either the culture based on natural or synthetic adherent matrices used to design 3D scaffolds as biomaterials to form a 3D matrix or based on non-adherent and/or matrix-free matrices to form the spheroids. In this review, we first summarize a comparison between 2D and 3D cultures. Then, we focus on the different components of the natural extracellular matrix that can be used as supports in 3D culture. Then we detail different types of natural supports such as matrigel, hydrogels, hard supports, and different synthetic strategies of 3D matrices such as lyophilization, electrospiding, stereolithography, microfluid by citing the advantages and disadvantages of each of them. Finally, we summarize the different methods of generating normal and tumor spheroids, citing their respective advantages and disadvantages in order to obtain an ideal 3D model (matrix) that retains the following characteristics: better biocompatibility, good mechanical properties corresponding to the tumor tissue, degradability, controllable microstructure and chemical components like the tumor tissue, favorable nutrient exchange and easy separation of the cells from the matrix.
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.