ArticleCancers2023
Nano-Electrochemical Characterization of a 3D Bioprinted Cervical Tumor Model.
Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconstructing the female reproductive system using 3D bioprinting in tissue engineering.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- 3D bioprinting technology innovation in female reproductive system.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- The Role of 3D Printing in Revolutionizing Pharmaceuticals and Medicine.Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- The cutting-edge progress in bioprinting for biomedicine: principles, applications, and future perspectives.MedComm · 2024Review
- Patterned PVA Hydrogels with 3D Petri DishGels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Nongenetic Optical Modulation of Pluripotent Stem Cells Derived Cardiomyocytes Function in the Red Spectral Range.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- 3D Bioprinting: An Important Tool for Tumor Microenvironment Research.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Current cancer research is limited by the availability of reliable in vivo and in vitro models that are able to reproduce the fundamental hallmarks of cancer. Animal experimentation is of paramount importance in the progress of research, but it is becoming more evident that it has several limitations due to the numerous differences between animal tissues and real, in vivo human tissues. 3D bioprinting techniques have become an attractive tool for many basic and applied research fields. Concerning cancer, this technology has enabled the development of three-dimensional in vitro tumor models that recreate the characteristics of real tissues and look extremely promising for studying cancer cell biology. As 3D bioprinting is a relatively recently developed technique, there is still a lack of characterization of the chemical cellular microenvironment of 3D bioprinted constructs. In this work, we fabricated a cervical tumor model obtained by 3D bioprinting of HeLa cells in an alginate-based matrix. Characterization of the spheroid population obtained as a function of culturing time was performed by phase-contrast and confocal fluorescence microscopies. Scanning electrochemical microscopy and platinum nanoelectrodes were employed to characterize oxygen concentrations-a fundamental characteristic of the cellular microenvironment-with a high spatial resolution within the 3D bioprinted cervical tumor model; we also demonstrated that the diffusion of a molecular model of drugs in the 3D bioprinted construct, in which the spheroids were embedded, could be measured quantitatively over time using scanning electrochemical microscopy.
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.