ReviewCancer medicine2026
Beyond the Monolayer: Leveraging 3D Culture Systems to Decode Mechanisms of Drug Resistance and Therapeutic Vulnerabilities in Colorectal Cancer.
Review in Cancer medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Two-dimensional (2D) monolayer cultures remain the workhorse of colorectal cancer (CRC) research and high-throughput screening (HTS), yet they poorly recapitulate tissue architecture, extracellular matrix (ECM) cues, metabolic gradients, and multicellular heterogeneity that govern drug response in vivo. Over the past decade, three-dimensional (3D) culture systems-including spheroids, patient-derived organoids (PDOs), tissue-originated spheroids (CTOS), and collagen-embedded models-have revealed striking 2D vs. 3D discordance in proliferation, signaling, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), plasticity, and sensitivity to standard chemo- and targeted therapies. This review synthesizes how 3D CRC models are used to decode mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to anti-CRC therapies, from metabolic phenotypes and ECM remodeling to EMT, polarity loss, and rare invasive trajectories identified by imaging and quantification of morphologic features of CRC cells grown in 3D. Parallel advances in PDO-based functional precision oncology demonstrate that organoid drug screens can prospectively predict patient response in advanced CRC, while 3D combination screens uncover format-specific synergies that are invisible in 2D. Building on this foundation, we highlight recent technical innovations and discuss how integrating morphometric, metabolic, and trajectory-level readouts can move CRC drug discovery "beyond live/dead." Rather than propose a single best model, we outline practical guidelines for matching 3D platform choice (cell lines vs. PDO/CTOS, collagen vs. Matrigel, static vs. live-imaging HTS) to mechanistic questions and therapeutic goals in CRC. We propose an integrated roadmap-matrix-embedded 3D cultures, high-content morphological endpoints, trajectory analytics, and rigorous HTS validation-to decode resistance mechanisms and prioritize clinically actionable combinations in CRC.
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.