ArticleScientific reports2024
Characterization of two different alginate-based bioinks and the influence of melanoma growth within.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biofabrication of Endothelialized, Intrinsically Vascularized 3D-Printed Recombinant Spider Silk Scaffolds.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Engineering Resilience: How Irradiation Strategies Influence 3D-Bioprinted Adipose Stem Cells.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- 3D bioprinted melanoma models: a novel paradigm for the assessment of anticancer strategies combining PDT and drug delivery systems.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Review
- On the Rheological Properties and Printability of Sodium Alginate-Carboxymethyl Chitosan Composite Solutions for Tissue Scaffold Printing.Biopolymers · 2025Article
- Biofabrication of 3D-printed, pre-cross-linked alginate dialdehyde-gelatin (ADA-GEL) scaffolds for anFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extrusion-based bioprinting is an established method in biofabrication. Suitable bioinks have fundamentally different compositions and characteristics, which should be examined, in order to find a perfect model system. Here, we investigate the effect of two alginate-based, yet unalike 3D-printed bioinks, pre-crosslinked alginate-dialdehyde gelatin (ADA-GEL) and a mixture of alginate, hyaluronic acid, and gelatin (Alg/HA/Gel), on the melanoma cell line Mel Im and vice versa in terms of stiffness, shrinkage, cellular behavior and colony formation over 15 days. Rheological stiffness measurements revealed two soft gels with similar storage moduli. The cells did not have a significant impact on the overall stiffness, whereas ADA-GEL (2.5/2.5%) was significantly stiffer than Alg/HA/Gel (0.5/0.1/3%). Regarding the shrinkage of printed constructs, cells had a significant influence, especially in ADA-GEL, which has covalent bonds between the oxidized alginate and gelatin. Multi-photon microscopy exhibited proliferation, cell spreading and migration in ADA-GEL with cell-cell and cell-matrix interaction, dissimilarly to Alg/HA/Gel, in which cells formed spherical, encapsulated colonies. Scanning electron microscopy and histology showed degradation and multi-layered growth on ADA-GEL and fewer examples of escaped cells on Alg/HA/Gel. Both gels serve as proliferation bioink for melanoma with more necrosis in deeper Alg/HA/Gel colonies and differences in spreading and matrix interaction. These findings show the importance of proper characterization of the bioinks for different applications.
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.