4.5 Article

A novel 3D in vitro model of glioblastoma reveals resistance to temozolomide which was potentiated by hypoxia

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
Volume 142, Issue 2, Pages 231-240

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-019-03107-0

Keywords

Glioblastoma; 3D; Chemoresistance; Temozolomide; Hypoxia; CD133; OCT4

Funding

  1. National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research [G0900765/1]
  2. TETFund Nigeria via Niger Delta University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeGlioblastoma (GBM) is the most common invasive malignant brain tumour in adults. It is traditionally investigated in vitro by culturing cells as a monolayer (2D culture) or as neurospheres (clusters enriched in cancer stem cells) but neither system accurately reflects the complexity of the three-dimensional (3D) chemoresistant microenvironment of GBM.Materials and methodsUsing three GBM cell-lines (U87, U251, and SNB19), the effect of culturing cells in a Cultrex-based basement membrane extract (BME) [3D Tumour Growth Assay (TGA)] on morphology, gene expression, metabolism, and temozolomide chemoresistance was investigated.ResultsCells were easily harvested from the 3D model and cultured as a monolayer (2D) and neurospheres. Indeed, the SNB19 cells formed neurospheres only after they were first cultured in the 3D model. The expression of CD133 and OCT4 was upregulated in the neurosphere and 3D assays respectively. Compared with cells cultured in the 2D model, cells were more resistant to temozolomide in the 3D model and this resistance was potentiated by hypoxia.ConclusionTaken together, these results suggest that micro-environmental factors influence GBM sensitivity to temozolomide. Knowledge of the mechanisms involved in temozolomide resistance in this 3D model might lead to the identification of new strategies that enable the more effective use of the current standard of care agents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available