Zaloguj się

Aby wyświetlić tę treść, wymagana jest subskrypcja JoVE. Zaloguj się lub rozpocznij bezpłatny okres próbny.

W tym Artykule

  • Podsumowanie
  • Streszczenie
  • Wprowadzenie
  • Protokół
  • Wyniki
  • Dyskusje
  • Ujawnienia
  • Podziękowania
  • Materiały
  • Odniesienia
  • Przedruki i uprawnienia

Podsumowanie

Patient-derived organoids (PDOs) are a powerful tool in translational cancer research, reflecting both the genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity of the disease and response to personalized anti-cancer therapies. Here, a consolidated protocol to generate human primary bladder cancer PDOs in preparation for the evaluation of phenotypic analyses and drug responses is detailed.

Streszczenie

Current in vitro therapeutic testing platforms lack relevance to tumor pathophysiology, typically employing cancer cell lines established as two-dimensional (2D) cultures on tissue culture plastic. There is a critical need for more representative models of tumor complexity that can accurately predict therapeutic response and sensitivity. The development of three-dimensional (3D) ex vivo culture of patient-derived organoids (PDOs), derived from fresh tumor tissues, aims to address these shortcomings. Organoid cultures can be used as tumor surrogates in parallel to routine clinical management to inform therapeutic decisions by identifying potential effective interventions and indicating therapies that may be futile. Here, this procedure aims to describe strategies and a detailed step-by-step protocol to establish bladder cancer PDOs from fresh, viable clinical tissue. Our well-established, optimized protocols are practical to set up 3D cultures for experiments using limited and diverse starting material directly from patients or patient-derived xenograft (PDX) tumor material. This procedure can also be employed by most laboratories equipped with standard tissue culture equipment. The organoids generated using this protocol can be used as ex vivo surrogates to understand both the molecular mechanisms underpinning urological cancer pathology and to evaluate treatments to inform clinical management.

Wprowadzenie

Bladder cancer is the most prevalent urinary tract cancer and the tenth most common human malignancy worldwide1. It encompasses a genetically diverse and phenotypically complex spectrum of disease2. Urothelial non-muscle-invasive forms of bladder cancer (NMIBC) are the most common bladder cancer diagnoses (70%-80%), and these cancers display considerable biological heterogeneity and variable clinical outcomes2,3,4. Patients with NMIBC typically experience a high risk of disease recurrence (50-70%) and one-third of cancers will progress and develop into significantly more aggressive muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC)2. Although 5-year survival rates for NMIBC are high (>90%), these patients must undergo long-term clinical management5. On the other hand, locally advanced (unresectable) or metastatic MIBC is generally considered incurable6. Consequently, bladder cancer has one of the highest lifetime treatment costs within cancer care and is a significant burden for both the individual and the healthcare system3,7. The underlying genetic aberrations in advanced disease renders therapeutic management of bladder cancer a clinical challenge, and therapeutic options for invasive urothelial tumors have only recently improved since the approval of immunotherapies for both advanced and high-risk NMIBC8,9. Currently, clinical decision-making has been guided by conventional clinical and histopathological features, despite individual bladder cancer tumors showing large differences in disease aggressiveness and response to therapy10. There is an urgent need to accelerate research into clinically useful models to improve the prediction of individual patient prognosis and identification of effective treatments.

Three-dimensional (3D) organoids show great potential as tumor models due to their ability to self-organize and recapitulate the original tumor's intrinsic in vivo architecture and pharmacogenomic profile, and their capability to mirror the native cellular functionality of the original tissue from which they were derived11,12,13. Although established bladder cancer cell lines are readily available, relatively cost-effective, scalable, and simple to manipulate, the in vitro cell lines largely fail to mimic the spectrum of diverse genetic and epigenetic alterations observed in clinical bladder cancers12,14 and were all established and maintained under 2D, adherent culture conditions. Additionally, cell lines derived from primary and metastatic bladder tumors harbor significant genetic divergence from the original tumor material. 8,15.

An alternative approach is to use genetically engineered and carcinogen-induced mouse models. However, while these models recapitulate some of the natural oncogenic cascades involved in human neoplasia (reviewed in refs16,17,18), they lack tumor heterogeneity, are expensive, poorly represent invasive and metastatic bladder cancer, and are not viable for rapid term drug testing as tumors can take many months to develop14,19. Patient-derived models of cancer (including organoids, conditionally reprogrammed primary cell culture, and xenografts) provide invaluable opportunities to understand the effects of drug treatment before clinical treatment20. Despite this, few groups routinely use these patient-proximal models due to limited access to fresh primary patient tissue and the extensive optimization required to reproducibly generate patient-derived organoid (PDO) culture conditions. In an in vivo setting, oncogenic cells can interact and communicate with various compositions of the surrounding constituents, including stromal cells, tissue infiltrating immune cells, and matrix12. Similarly, for PDOs grown in a 3D format, cellular/matrix complexity can be customized to include other relevant components. PDOs can be rapidly generated and are often able to be passaged extensively or cryopreserved for later use, despite having a finite lifespan21,22,23. Pharmacodynamics (i.e., response to a drug) can be evaluated using multiple read-outs, including organoid viability and morphology, and characterization of immunohistochemistry targets or transcriptional changes.

Here, the procedures for the establishment of bladder cancer organoids from patient material collected from transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) or surgical removal of the bladder (radical cystectomy) are described. The method to generate PDOs is illustrated, using readily available wet laboratory materials and tools. Endpoints include changes in cell morphological characteristics and viability. These were measured using fluorescence microscopy, in vitro viability (metabolic and cell membrane integrity) assays, and histopathological analysis. Figure 1 shows the workflow for establishing human bladder cancer PDOs from clinical material obtained during elective surgery.

Protokół

Patients have consented to this study following their admission under the Urology team at the Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. This study was performed in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and within ethical and institutional guidelines (ethics number HREC/05/QPAH/95, QUT 1000001165).

NOTE: As eligibility criteria, patients were aged ≥ 18 with cancer, and able to understand and provide consent. Those who were not able to give informed consent were excluded. Those having a primary language other than English were excluded as the provision of interpreters was not possible due to logistical and budgetary considerations. Also excluded were patients whose tumors were not accessible to biopsy or unlikely to be available in adequate amount after routine pathology.

1. Organoid Medium Preparation

NOTE: Human bladder cancer organoid medium requires growth factors that aid in the survival, growth, and continuous expansion of organoids derived from dissociated clinical material (Table 1). For complete details of each supplement used in this procedure, please refer to the Table of Materials.

  1. Thaw frozen ingredients on ice or in a refrigerator at 2-8 °C. Avoid repeated freeze/thaw cycles and work from frozen aliquots (stored at -20 °C).
  2. Basal medium: Prepare basal medium by supplementing advanced Dulbecco's Modified Eagle Medium/Ham's F-12 (adDMEM/F12) with HEPES (10 mM) and glutamine (2 mM). This is also used as a transport medium, and during organoid washing steps.
    NOTE: Advanced DMEM/F-12 is used as the basal medium to aid in the expansion of organoids in the presence of limited serum; however, it requires supplementation with HEPES and L-glutamine.
  3. Briefly centrifuge fibroblast growth factor 10 (FGF-10), fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF-2), epithelial growth factor (EGF), SB202190, prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), and A 83-01 before opening to ensure components are at the bottom of the vial.
  4. Complete organoid medium: Supplement basal medium with human noggin- and R-spondin 1-conditioned media at a final concentration of 5% v/v, human EGF (50 ng/mL), human FGF-2 (5 ng/mL), human FGF-10 (20 ng/mL), A 83-01 (500 nM), SB202190 (10 µM), B27 (1x), nicotinamide (10 mM), N-acetylcysteine (1.25 mM), Y-27632 (10 µM), PGE2 (1 µM) and a broad-spectrum antibiotic formation at the concentration indicated by the manufacturer.
  5. Store organoid media at 4 °C in the dark and use it within 2 weeks (1 month at most). Do not freeze. Avoid extended exposure to light sources.
    NOTE: The organoid medium is prepared serum-free; however, serum and penicillin/streptomycin could be supplemented on a user-to-user basis as required.

2. A day before procedure outlined in 3

  1. Thaw growth factor reduced basement membrane (BME; see Table of Materials) overnight for at least 12 h before use in a 4 °C refrigerator or cold room. If required, dispense BME into 1 mL aliquots in a 1.5 mL polypropylene single-use tube to avoid freeze-thaw cycles.
  2. Place filtered pipette tips into a 4 °C refrigerator or cold room.
    NOTE: This section refers to pipette tips that will be used when handling BME to prevent premature polymerization and reduce the coating of BME on the surface of the tips.
  3. Sterilize all surgical equipment required for the procedure.

3. Generation of bladder tumor organoids

NOTE: This is an initial step for PDO establishment from primary patient tumors. This procedure is adapted for bladder cancer tissues from methods established by Gao et al.24.

  1. Use a class II biohazard hood to prepare the specimen. Retrieve dry and wet ice and print Patient Specimen Processing Sheet (Supplemental File).
  2. Call research personnel to the operating room when surgical resection is near complete.
    NOTE: Confirm that the patient meets the eligibility criteria and has signed the participant consent form. Tissue is provided for research only if surplus to requirements for clinical histopathologic assessment.
  3. Collect a fresh macroscopically viable tumor specimen from surgery. Ensure that the sample is submerged in transport medium (either 1x adDMEM/F12 or 1x Dulbecco's phosphate-buffered saline (DPBS)) in a sterile 50 mL conical tube or urine specimen jar during transit.
    NOTE: At some clinical centers, tissue may need to be transported to a pathology laboratory for to be allocated for research. Under these circumstances, it is recommended that antibiotics and antimycotics be added to the transport medium. Tissue can be stored at 4 °C in basal medium for up to 24 h post-surgery and still generate viable organoid cultures.
  4. Record specimen details, including tissue weight (g or mg), sample description, and details regarding any blood and urine samples on the Patient Specimen Processing Sheet (Supplemental File).
  5. Carefully remove the transport medium and replace it with 10 mL of basal media. Allow the tumor tissue to settle by gravity.
    NOTE: Transport medium is considered as clinical waste and must be collected in an appropriately labeled waste container in an appropriate amount of decontamination solution. Once the liquid has been chemically decontaminated, it can be disposed of according to institutional guidelines for hazardous waste.
  6. Remove the tumor tissue with forceps and place it in a sterile 90 mm Petri dish (Figure 2A). Record the weight of the tissue in mg or g on the clinical specimen processing sheet and dissection grid (Figure 2B).
  7. Remove non-cancerous tissue (including adipose tissue) and macroscopically visible necrotic regions using sterile forceps and disposable scalpel blade mounted to scalpel handle (Figure 2C). Wash tumor pieces 1-2 times with cold 1x DPBS. Collect the tumor pieces and transfer them to a new sterile 90 mm Petri Dish.
    NOTE: As scalpel blades are sharp, take caution when manually slicing. Tumor-adjacent adipose tissue can be identified by distinctly soft, gelatinous, pale areas immediately adjacent to the visual tumor perimeter. Macroscopic adipose tissue, and focally dark regions representing areas of necrosis will require personal judgment when dissecting from an excisional bladder tumor biopsy.
  8. Take a photograph, draw a diagram of tissue, and plan tissue dissection on a clinical processing grid (Figure 2B and Figure 2C).
    NOTE: It is important to keep a visual record and rough sketch of the individual macroscopic tumor characteristics and dissection for each specific case.
  9. Dissect tumor tissue pieces and allocate for histopathological (Figure 2D) and molecular analyses (Figure 2E).
    1. For histological analyses: Place approximately 50 mg of tumor tissue into a labeled disposable plastic histology cassette (Figure 2D). Submerge histology cassette into a container with 5x to 10x volume of 10% neutral buffered formalin (NBF). Incubate overnight at RT.
    2. Remove 10% NBF and replace with 70% (w/w) ethanol the next day for storage at 4 °C until tissue can be processed using routine tissue processing protocol
    3. For molecular analyses: Snap freeze at least one 1-3 mm3 tumor piece in an RNase/DNase-free 1.5 mL cryovial using liquid nitrogen and store at -80 °C (Figure 2E).
  10. Dispense 5 mL of organoid medium (Table 1) in the 90 mm Petri dish containing the remaining tumor piece(s).
  11. Mechanically mince tissue as finely as possible (0.5-1 mm3 pieces or smaller) with a sterile #10 scalpel blade.
    NOTE: Larger fragments or whole chunks of tissue (>3 mm3) will take considerably longer to digest and will decrease the viability of the specimen. Omit the above step if the tissue is disaggregated and fragments are small enough to pipette with a 5 mL serological pipette tip.
  12. Transfer finely minced tissue to a 50 mL conical tube and add 4 mL of organoid medium, 1 mL of 10x collagenase/hyaluronidase, and 0.1 mg/mL deoxyribonuclease 1 (DNase 1) to avoid cell clumping.
    NOTE: Enzyme solution should be freshly prepared each time. Increase the volume of the medium to be approximately 10x the visible amount of the tumor fragments for large samples.
  13. Incubate the minced tumor tissue and enzyme solution for 1-2 h on an orbital shaker or rotator (150 rpm) in an incubator (37 °C, 5% CO2) to dissociate fragments into a cell suspension and break down collagens. This can be checked with histological analysis (Figure 3A).
    NOTE: If the amount of tissue is large or no obvious dissociation is observed after 1-1.5 h, increase the incubation time checking the level of dissociation every 30 min. Timing for this step depends on the sample and must be determined empirically each time. A noticeably clearer solution with tissue fragments indiscernible to the eye (or very few fragments) indicates successful digestion.
  14. Terminate the digestion with the addition of 2x volume (20 mL) of basal medium to the sample.
  15. Centrifuge the sample at 261 x g for 5 min at room temperature (RT), aspirate, and discard the supernatant.
  16. To lyse contaminating red blood cells (RBCs), resuspend the pellet obtained from the above step in 5 mL of ammonium-chloride-potassium (ACK) buffer. Incubate the tube at RT for 3 min or until the complete lysis of the RBCs is seen (suspension becomes clear).
    NOTE: If RBCs are not observed as a small red clump in the pellet, this step may be omitted.
  17. Add 20 mL of the basal medium into the tube. Centrifuge the tube at 261 x g for 5 min at RT and aspirate the supernatant.
  18. At this step, place a 10 mL aliquot of 2x and 1x organoid medium in a 37 °C water bath to warm.
  19. Filter the sample through a pre-wet reversible 100 µm strainer into a new 50 mL tube to remove large insoluble material.
    NOTE: Large undigested material (>100 µm) collected by the filter may contain cells of interest and can be cultured in 90 mm Petri dish or 6-well cell culture plate in organoid medium to derive 2D cultures (Figure 1 (step 5) and Figure 3B).
  20. Filter the eluate through a pre-wet reversible 37 µm strainer to collect single cells and small clusters for single-cell and immune cell isolation (Tube 37-1; Figure 1 (step 6) and Figure 3B).
    NOTE: The yield of tumor cells during this step may be increased by passing the filtered cell suspension through the strainer again.
  21. Reverse the 37 µm strainer and use 10 mL of basal media to collect small and moderate-sized clusters (37-100 µm) (tube 70-1; Figure 3B).
  22. Top up each of the new 50 mL tubes (tubes 70-1 and 37-1) with DPBS to 40 mL. Centrifuge the suspension at 261 x g for 5 min at RT. Aspirate and discard the supernatant.
  23. Add 10 mL of basal media to tube 37-1 and count the cells using trypan blue exclusion dye and an automated cell counter (as per the manufacturer's specifications). Determine the cell number and viability of cells.
  24. Centrifuge the remainder of the sample at 261 x g for 5 min at RT. Aspirate the medium and replace it with cell freezing solution or basal media containing 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 1% penicillin/streptomycin, and 10% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO).
  25. Place samples in 1.5 mL cryovials and store them in a cell-freezing container. Immediately transfer the container to a -80 °C freezer for optimal rate of cooling. Following overnight freezer storage at -80 °C, transfer the cryovials into cryogenic liquid or air phase storage (-196 °C) for long-term storage.
  26. Resuspend cells from tube 70-1 with 500 µL of pre-warmed 2x organoid medium.
    NOTE: Seeding density must be high for successful organoid propagation. The volume of the organoid medium and, subsequently, BME should be altered empirically on the number of cells isolated from the filtration step. This step provides a relevant starting point based on studies in our laboratory.
  27. Add BME to cells (at a 1:1 ratio with 2x organoid medium) with ice-cold P1000 sterile filter pipette tips and mix gently to suspend cells. Quickly and carefully pipette 100 µL of reconstituted cells/ BME mixture to wells of an ultra-low attachment flat-bottom 96-well plate. Place the 96-well plate in an incubator (37 °C, 5% CO2) for 20-30 min to solidify.
  28. Add 1:2 ratio of 1x organoid medium on top of BME cell suspension depending on the empirically assessed volume. In the relevant starting point, add 50 µL of 1x organoid medium media on top of 100 µL of reconstituted cells/ BME mixture.
  29. Place the 96-well plate in an incubator (37 °C, 5% CO2) for 20 min to equilibrate.
  30. Take the cell culture plate out of the incubator and assemble it on a specimen holder on the stage of a microscope. Assess organoids visually under phase contrast or brightfield settings.
    NOTE: Images are best acquired by an inverted phase-contrast microscope equipped with differential interference (DIC) optics, digital camera, and associated software to observe the formation of spherical PDOs in preparation for endpoint analysis.
    1. If distinct clusters are visible, place the cell culture plate into an onstage electronically heated microscope chamber (37 °C, 5% CO2) for live-cell imaging over the first 24-72 h.
    2. Ensure the flexible heated collar is attached to the lens to reduce thermal drift and the humidifier is filled with dH2O.
    3. Perform the initial imaging using a 4x or 10x objective lens (N.A. 0.30, W.D. 15.2 mm). Time-lapse every 5-10 min on the phase-contrast setting.
    4. Check for the successful isolation as characterized by the appearance of >10 self-organizing organoids per well after a 24-72 h period.
    5. Allow cultures to continue for up to two weeks if organoid numbers are low (Figure 3C).
  31. Top up the medium every 2-3 days using 50 µL of pre-warmed organoid medium to replenish depleted growth factors and overall volume.
  32. Acquire images (as described in step 3.30) on days 1, 2, and 3 (time-lapse series), and on days 5, 7, and 10 before passaging (if applicable).
    NOTE: Organoids (observed as generally round structures where you cannot see the edges of individual cells) are typically passaged 7-10 days following setup, depending on the success of the isolation. Before or following passaging, organoids can be treated with cytotoxics or therapeutic agents for up to 6 days and drug response measured using cell viability and cytotoxicity assays. Alternatively, organoids can be retrieved from BME (using 1 mg/mL dispase) and cryopreserved (bio banked), prepared for molecular testing, or embedded and assessed histologically (Figure 4).

Wyniki

3D organoids were successfully established from human bladder cancer patient TURBT and cystectomy tissues. Briefly, this technique highlights a rapid formation of 3D multicellular structures that are both viable and suitable for other endpoint analyses such as histological evaluation, molecular characterization (by immunohistochemistry or quantitative real-time PCR), and drug screening. During the procedure (Figure 1), the various eluates during our filtration phases (Fi...

Dyskusje

While 3D organoid protocols derived from bladder cancer tissue are still in their infancy, they are an area of active research and clinical investigation. Here, an optimized protocol to successfully establish bladder cancer PDOs that are suitable for both NMIBC and MIBC specimens is detailed. This workflow integrates parallelly into hospital-based clinical trials and considers biobank sample accrual, including histological sample processing and fresh frozen tissue banking, which is an important consideration for clinical...

Ujawnienia

The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Podziękowania

We acknowledge the technical assistance of the Translational Research Institute Histology core and Biological Resource Facility. This research was supported by funding from a Princess Alexandra Research Foundation award (I.V., E.D.W.), and the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Rapid Applied Research Translation Program (Centre for Personalised Analysis of Cancers (CPAC; E.D.W., I.V.). The Translational Research Institute receives support from the Australian Government.

Materiały

NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
1.2 mL cryogenic vialCorning430487
1.5 mL Eppendorf tubesSigma-AldrichT9661-500EApolypropylene single-use tube
100 µM reversible strainerSTEMCELL Technologies#27270
100 mm petri dishCorning430167
10x Collagenase/ HyaluronidaseSTEMCELL Technologies#07912
37 µM reversible strainerSTEMCELL Technologies#27250
37°C incubator
37°C water bath
50 mL falcon tubeCorningCLS430829-500EA
6-well plateCorningCLS3516
70% (w/w) ethanol
-80°C freezer
96 well ultra low attachment plate (Black)Sigma-AldrichCLS3474-24EA
A 83-01BioScientific2939Prevents the growth-inhibitory effects of TGF-β
ACK lysis bufferSTEMCELL Technologies#07850
adDMEM/F-12Thermo Fisher Scientific12634028Base medium
Animal-free recombinant EGFSigma518179Growth factor
Automated cell counter (TC20)Bio-rad1450102
B27 additiveGibco17504044Increases sphere-forming efficiency
Cell Counting SlidesBio-rad1450015
CentrifugeEppendorfEP022628188
Computer system
CryoStor CS10STEMCELL Technologies#07930Cell freezing solution
Dispase II, powderThermofisher17105041To enzymatically disrupt Matrigel
DNAse 1STEMCELL Technologies#07900
DPBSThermofisher14190144
Dry and wet ice
Esky
Farmdyne (Iodine 16g/L)Ecolab
Formalin solution, neutral buffered, 10%SigmaHT501128Histological tissue fixative
Glutamax (L-alanine-L-glutamine)Invitrogen35050061Source of nitrogen for the synthesis of proteins, nucleic acids
HEPESGibco15630-080All-purpose buffer
Histology cassetteProSciTechRCH44-W
Human FGF-10Peprotech100-26-25Growth factor
Human FGF-2Peprotech100-18B-50Growth factor
Liquid nitrogen
Matrigel (Growth Factor Reduced (GFR), phenol red-free, LDEV free)In Vitro Technologies356231Basement membrane extract (BME)
Mr. Frosty freezing containerThermoFisher5100-0001cell freezing container
N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC)SigmaA7250Anti-oxidant required to protect against ROS-induced cytotoxicity
NicotinamideSigmaN0636-100GSIRT-1 inhibitor
NikonTs2U inverted microscopeNikonMFA510BB
NIS-Elements Advanced ResearchNikonMQS31000
Noggin conditioned mediaIn-houseBMP inhibitor
Pipetboy acu 2Integra155000
Pipettes (p20, p100, p1000) with tips
PrimocinJomar Bioscienceant-pm2Combination of antibacterial and antifungal compounds to protect cell cultures from contaminations
Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2)Tocris2296support proliferation of cells
Rotary tube mixerRatekRSM7DC
R-spondin 1 conditioned mediaIn-houseWNT signalling regulator
SB202190Jomar Biosciences1077-25mgSelective p38 MAP kinase inhibitor
Scale
Scalpel handleLivingstoneWBLDHDL03
Scalpels, #11 bladeMedical and Surgical RequisitesEU-211-1
Serological pipettes (5, 10, 25 mL)
Specimen Waste BagsMedical SearchSU09125X16
Urine specimen jar
Y27632Jomar Biosciences1049-10mgSelective ROCK inhibitor. Increases survival of dissociated epithelial cells

Odniesienia

  1. Saginala, K., et al. Epidemiology of bladder cancer. Medical Sciences. 8 (1), 15 (2020).
  2. Lindskrog, S. V., et al. An integrated multi-omics analysis identifies prognostic molecular subtypes of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Nature Communications. 12 (1), 2301 (2021).
  3. Isharwal, S., Konety, B. Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer risk stratification. Indian Journal of Urology. 31 (4), 289-296 (2015).
  4. Lozano, F., Raventos, C. X., Carrion, A., Trilla, E., Morote, J. Current status of genetic urinary biomarkers for surveillance of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review. BMC Urology. 20 (1), 99 (2020).
  5. Batista, R., et al. TERT promoter mutation as a potential predictive biomarker in bcg-treated bladder cancer patients. Internation Journal of Molecular Science. 21 (3), 947 (2020).
  6. Patel, V. G., Oh, W. K., Galsky, M. D. Treatment of muscle-invasive and advanced bladder cancer in 2020. Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 70 (5), 404-423 (2020).
  7. Williams, S. B., et al. Estimated costs and long-term outcomes of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with bacillus calmette-guérin in the veterans affairs health system. JAMA Network Open. 4 (3), 213800 (2021).
  8. Zhu, S., et al. Preclinical models for bladder cancer research. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America. 35 (3), 613-632 (2021).
  9. lvarez-Maestro, M., Guerrero-Ramos, F., Rodríguez-Faba, O., Domínguez-Escrig, J. L., Fernández-Gómez, J. M. Current treatments for BCG failure in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition). 45 (2), 93-102 (2021).
  10. Berry, D. L., et al. Treatment decision making in patients with bladder cancer. Bladder Cancer. 1 (2), 151-158 (2015).
  11. Drost, J., et al. Organoid culture systems for prostate epithelial and cancer tissue. Nature Protocols. 11 (2), 347-358 (2016).
  12. Kato, M., Sasaki, T., Inoue, T. Current experimental human tissue-derived models for prostate cancer research. International Journal of Urology. 28 (2), 150-162 (2021).
  13. Liu, L., Yu, L., Li, Z., Li, W., Huang, W. Patient-derived organoid (PDO) platforms to facilitate clinical decision making. Journal of Translational Medicine. 19 (1), 40 (2021).
  14. Joshi, A., Roberts, M. J., Alinezhad, S., Williams, E. D., Vela, I. Challenges, applications and future directions of precision medicine in prostate cancer - the role of organoids and patient-derived xenografts. British Journal of Urology International. 126 (1), 65-72 (2020).
  15. Pan, C. X., et al. Development and characterization of bladder cancer patient-derived xenografts for molecularly guided targeted therapy. PLoS One. 10 (8), 0134346 (2015).
  16. Gopinathan, A., Tuveson, D. A. The use of GEM models for experimental cancer therapeutics. Disease models & mechanisms. 1 (2-3), 83-86 (2008).
  17. Kemp, C. J. Animal models of chemical carcinogenesis: driving breakthroughs in cancer research for 100 years. Cold Spring Harbor Protocols. 2015 (10), 865-874 (2015).
  18. Day, C. P., Merlino, G., Van Dyke, T. Preclinical mouse cancer models: a maze of opportunities and challenges. Cell. 163 (1), 39-53 (2015).
  19. Kobayashi, T., Owczarek, T. B., McKiernan, J. M., Abate-Shen, C. Modelling bladder cancer in mice: opportunities and challenges. Nature Reviews Cancer. 15 (1), 42-54 (2015).
  20. Liu, W., et al. Conditional reprogramming: Modeling urological cancer and translation to clinics. Clinical Translational Medicine. 10 (2), 95 (2020).
  21. Yoshida, G. J. Applications of patient-derived tumor xenograft models and tumor organoids. Journal of Hematological Oncology. 13 (1), 4 (2020).
  22. Kim, J., Koo, B. K., Knoblich, J. A. Human organoids: model systems for human biology and medicine. Nature Reviews Molecular Cellular Biology. 21 (10), 571-584 (2020).
  23. Marshall, L. J., Triunfol, M., Seidle, T. Patient-derived xenograft vs. organoids: a preliminary analysis of cancer research output, funding and human health impact in 2014-2019. Animals. 10 (10), 1923 (2020).
  24. Gao, D., et al. Organoid cultures derived from patients with advanced prostate cancer. Cell. 159 (1), 176-187 (2014).
  25. Lee, S. H., et al. Tumor evolution and drug response in patient-derived organoid models of bladder cancer. Cell. 173 (2), 515-528 (2018).
  26. Kim, I. H., Lee, H. J. Perioperative immunotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Translational Andrology and Urology. 9 (6), 2976-2985 (2020).
  27. Raphael, M. J., Booth, C. M. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: Underused across the 49(th) parallel. Canadian Urological Association Journal. 13 (2), 29-31 (2019).
  28. Tiriac, H., French, R., Lowy, A. M. Isolation and characterization of patient-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma organoid models. Journal of Visualized Experiments. (155), e60364 (2020).
  29. Pleguezuelos-Manzano, C., et al. Establishment and culture of human intestinal organoids derived from adult stem cells. Current Protocols in Immunology. 130 (1), 106 (2020).
  30. Fusco, P., et al. Patient-derived organoids (PDOs) as a novel in vitro model for neuroblastoma tumours. BMC Cancer. 19 (1), 970 (2019).
  31. Mullenders, J., et al. Mouse and human urothelial cancer organoids: A tool for bladder cancer research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 116 (10), 4567-4574 (2019).
  32. Vasyutinv, I., Zerihun, L., Ivan, C., Atala, A. Bladder organoids and spheroids: potential tools for normal and diseased tissue modelling. Anticancer Research. 39 (3), 1105-1118 (2019).
  33. Santos, C. P., et al. Urothelial organoids originating from Cd49fhigh mouse stem cells display Notch-dependent differentiation capacity. Nature Communications. 10 (1), 4407 (2019).
  34. Whyard, T., Liu, J., Darras, F. S., Waltzer, W. C., Romanov, V. Organoid model of urothelial cancer: establishment and applications for bladder cancer research. Biotechniques. 69 (3), 193-199 (2020).

Przedruki i uprawnienia

Zapytaj o uprawnienia na użycie tekstu lub obrazów z tego artykułu JoVE

Zapytaj o uprawnienia

Przeglądaj więcej artyków

Bladder Cancer OrganoidsPrecision MedicinePatient derived OrganoidsUrological CancersGenetic HeterogeneityTumor Specimen ProcessingCancer Treatment PredictionHistopathological AnalysisMolecular AnalysisTissue DissectionOrganoid MediumCold DPBSCryovial StorageFormalin Incubation

This article has been published

Video Coming Soon

JoVE Logo

Prywatność

Warunki Korzystania

Zasady

Badania

Edukacja

O JoVE

Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. Wszelkie prawa zastrzeżone