Show source-provided references
6. Three-dimensional cancer models mimic cell-matrix interactions in the tumour microenvironment
10.1093/carcin/bgu108 ↗7. Deconstructing Dimensionality
10. Jensen, C., and Teng, Y. (2020). Is It Time to Start Transitioning From 2D to 3D Cell Culture?. Front. Mol. Biosci., 7.
10.3389/fmolb.2020.00033 ↗11. The relevance of using 3D cell cultures, in addition to 2D monolayer cultures, when evaluating breast cancer drug sensitivity and resistance
10.18632/oncotarget.9935 ↗14. Monferrer, E., Martín-Vañó, S., Carretero, A., García-Lizarribar, A., Burgos-Panadero, R., Navarro, S., Samitier, J., and Noguera, R. (2020). A three-dimensional bioprinted model to evaluate the effect of stiffness on neuroblastoma cell cluster dynamics and behavior. Sci. Rep., 10.
10.1038/s41598-020-62986-w ↗15. Moghimi, N., Hosseini, S.A., Dalan, A.B., Mohammadrezaei, D., Goldman, A., and Kohandel, M. (2023). Controlled tumor heterogeneity in a co-culture system by 3D bio-printed tumor-on-chip model. Sci. Rep., 13.
10.1038/s41598-023-40680-x ↗16. Simple method for fluorescence DNA in situ hybridization to squashed chromosomes
17. Saji Joseph, J., Tebogo Malindisa, S., and Ntwasa, M. (2019). Two-Dimensional (2D) and Three-Dimensional (3D) Cell Culturing in Drug Discovery. Cell Culture, IntechOpen.
10.5772/intechopen.81552 ↗19. Rana, D., Arulkumar, S., Vishwakarma, A., and Ramalingam, M. (2015). Considerations on Designing Scaffold for Tissue Engineering. Stem Cell Biology and Tissue Engineering in Dental Sciences, Elsevier Inc.
10.1016/B978-0-12-397157-9.00012-6 ↗20. Sultana, N. (2018). Mechanical and biological properties of scaffold materials. Functional 3D Tissue Engineering Scaffolds: Materials, Technologies, and Applications, Elsevier.
10.1016/B978-0-08-100979-6.00001-X ↗22. González-Díaz, E.C., and Varghese, S. (2016). Hydrogels as Extracellular Matrix Analogs. Gels, 2.
10.3390/gels2030020 ↗23. Biocompatibility of Nanocellulose
26. Ryngajłło, M., Kubiak, K., Jędrzejczak-Krzepkowska, M., Jacek, P., and Bielecki, S. (2019). Comparative genomics of the Komagataeibacter strains—Efficient bionanocellulose producers. Microbiologyopen, 8.
10.1002/mbo3.731 ↗28. Nanocellulose as a sustainable biomass material: Structure, properties, present status and future prospects in biomedical applications
10.1039/C7NR04994C ↗30. Aditya, T., Allain, J.P., Jaramillo, C., and Restrepo, A.M. (2022). Surface Modification of Bacterial Cellulose for Biomedical Applications. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 23.
10.3390/ijms23020610 ↗32. Bacterial nanocellulose-IKVAV hydrogel matrix modulates melanoma tumor cell adhesion and proliferation and induces vasculogenic mimicry in vitro
10.1002/jbm.b.34055 ↗36. Gama, F.M., Gatenholm, P., and Klemm, D. (2016). Bacterial NanoCellulose: A Sophisticated Multifunctional Material, CRC Press.
10.1201/b12936 ↗38. Bacterial Cellulose Membranes Constitute Biocompatible Biomaterials for Mesenchymal and Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Culture and Tissue Engineering
39. Engineering of porous bacterial cellulose toward human fi broblasts ingrowth for tissue engineering
10.1557/jmr.2014.315 ↗40. Human Skeletal Muscle Myoblast Culture in Aligned Bacterial Nanocellulose and Commercial Matrices
10.1021/acsami.4c07612 ↗44. Taymour, R., Chicaiza-Cabezas, N.A., Gelinsky, M., and Lode, A. (2022). Core-shell bioprinting of vascularized in vitro liver sinusoid models. Biofabrication, 14.
10.1088/1758-5090/ac9019 ↗45. Vinson, B.T., Phamduy, T.B., Shipman, J., Riggs, B., Strong, A.L., Sklare, S.C., Murfee, W.L., Burow, M.E., Bunnell, B.A., and Huang, Y. (2017). Laser direct-write based fabrication of a spatially-defined, biomimetic construct as a potential model for breast cancer cell invasion into adipose tissue. Biofabrication, 9.
10.1088/1758-5090/aa6bad ↗46. Nanocellulose biosynthesis by Komagataeibacter hansenii in a defined minimal culture medium
49. The choice of phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate differentiation protocol influences the response of THP-1 macrophages to a pro-inflammatory stimulus
10.1016/j.jim.2016.01.012 ↗50. Genin, M., Clement, F., Fattaccioli, A., Raes, M., and Michiels, C. (2015). M1 and M2 macrophages derived from THP-1 cells differentially modulate the response of cancer cells to etoposide. BMC Cancer, 15.
10.1186/s12885-015-1546-9 ↗52. Carcinoma-associated fibroblasts promoted tumor spheroid invasion on a microfluidic 3D co-culture device
10.1039/c000022a ↗54. Cancer-associated fibroblasts promote progression and gemcitabine resistance via the SDF-1/SATB-1 pathway in pancreatic cancer
10.1038/s41419-018-1104-x ↗55. Cancer associated fibroblasts sculpt tumour microenvironment by recruiting monocytes and inducing immunosuppressive PD-1 + TAMs
57. Ireland, L.V., and Mielgo, A. (2018). Macrophages and fibroblasts, key players in cancer chemoresistance. Front. Cell Dev. Biol., 6.
10.3389/fcell.2018.00131 ↗59. Cell responses to the mechanochemical microenvironment-Implications for regenerative medicine and drug delivery
10.1016/j.addr.2007.08.007 ↗63. Scaffold mean pore size influences mesenchymal stem cell chondrogenic differentiation and matrix deposition
10.1089/ten.tea.2013.0545 ↗68. Dvorak, K.M., Pettee, K.M., Rubinic-Minotti, K., Su, R., Nestor-Kalinoski, A., and Eisenmann, K.M. (2018). Carcinoma associated fibroblasts (CAFs) promote breast cancer motility by suppressing mammalian Diaphanous-related formin-2 (mDia2). PLoS ONE, 13.
10.1371/journal.pone.0195278 ↗70. McCarthy, J.B., El-Ashry, D., and Turley, E.A. (2018). Hyaluronan, cancer-associated fibroblasts and the tumor microenvironment in malignant progression. Front. Cell Dev. Biol., 6.
10.3389/fcell.2018.00048 ↗71. Cui, K., Ardell, C.L., Podolnikova, N.P., and Yakubenko, V.P. (2018). Distinct migratory properties of M1, M2, and resident macrophages are regulated by αdβ2and αmβ2integrin-mediated adhesion. Front. Immunol., 9.
10.3389/fimmu.2018.02650 ↗72. Tedesco, S., De Majo, F., Kim, J., Trenti, A., Trevisi, L., Fadini, G.P., Bolego, C., Zandstra, P.W., Cignarella, A., and Vitiello, L. (2018). Convenience versus biological significance: Are PMA-differentiated THP-1 cells a reliable substitute for blood-derived macrophages when studying in vitro polarization?. Front. Pharmacol., 9.
10.3389/fphar.2018.00071 ↗78. Sarrió, D., Palacios, J., Hergueta-Redondo, M., Gómez-López, G., Cano, A., and Moreno-Bueno, G. (2009). Functional characterization of E- and P-cadherin in invasive breast cancer cells. BMC Cancer, 9.
10.1186/1471-2407-9-74 ↗79. Eslami Amirabadi, H., Tuerlings, M., Hollestelle, A., SahebAli, S., Luttge, R., van Donkelaar, C.C., Martens, J.W.M., and den Toonder, J.M.J. (2019). Characterizing the invasion of different breast cancer cell lines with distinct E-cadherin status in 3D using a microfluidic system. Biomed. Microdevices, 21.
10.1007/s10544-019-0450-5 ↗80. E-cadherin expression in human breast cancer cells suppresses the development of osteolytic bone metastases in an experimental metastasis model
81. Characterization of triple-negative breast cancer MDA-MB-231 cell spheroid model
10.2147/OTT.S249756 ↗82. Russo, G.C., Karl, M.N., Clark, D., Cui, J., Carney, R., Su, B., Starich, B., Lih, T.S., Zhang, Q., and Wu, P.H. (2020). E-cadherin promotes cell hyper-proliferation in breast cancer. bioRxiv.
83. JUNB governs a feed-forward network of TGFβ signaling that aggravates breast cancer invasion
10.1093/nar/gkx1190 ↗84. TGF-β1-induced EMT promotes targeted migration of breast cancer cells through the lymphatic system by the activation of CCR7/CCL21-mediated chemotaxis
10.1038/onc.2015.133 ↗86. The prognostic value of JUNB-positive CTCs in metastatic breast cancer: From bioinformatics to phenotypic characterization
10.1186/s13058-019-1166-4 ↗87. Differential Expression Profiles of the Transcriptome in Breast Cancer Cell Lines Revealed by Next Generation Sequencing
10.1159/000485344 ↗88. The suppression of DUSP5 expression correlates with paclitaxel resistance and poor prognosis in basal-like breast cancer
10.7150/ijms.24981 ↗89. Dual Specificity Phosphatase 5 Is a Novel Prognostic Indicator for Patients with Advanced Colorectal Cancer