OVERVIEW OF CELL MODELS: FROM ORGANS CULTURED IN A PETRI DISH TO “ORGANS-ON-CHIPS”

In this review, we tried to elucidate the origin and development of different animal and human cell culture methodologies used to evaluate the effects of various factors and substances in vitro. Organ cultures and conventional two-dimensional cultures of dissociated cells of various types, such as primary, tumor, induced pluripotent, stem, and etc. have their advantages and drawbacks but usually do not represent accurate models for studying biological processes that take place in living organisms. Nowadays high-throughput cell assays on the basis of various methods of signal detection (optical utilizing colorimetric, luminescent and fluorescent methods of detection and electrochemical) are widely used at early stages of drug development for selection of the most active compounds and evaluation of their cytotoxic effects. The use of animals as models for drug testing is being criticized because of the lack of correlation between the results obtained in studies on them and on humans, and also because of the high cost and ethical issues. Therefore, much effort is put to create models based on human cells. This is how cultures emerged that utilize a three-dimensional network to simulate the architecture of tissues in vivo, and then so-called “organs-on-chips” – microfluidic microdevices combining several types of cells, that replicate physical and chemical parameters of the microenvironment of cells in living organisms. In summary, experimental cell models have come a long way from the whole organs cultivated in a growth medium to almost complete reconstruction of organs in vitro based on the cutting-edge engineering approach with the use of different cell types. This currently enables to replicate complex biological processes and study the influence of different substances and factors on them more successfully.

1. Loeb L. Über die Entstehung von Bindegewebe, Leuсocyten und roten Blutkörperchen aus Epithel und über eine Methode, isolierte Gewebsteile zu zuchten // Chicago: M. Stern and Co., 1897. 72 p.

2. Pomerat C.M., Leake C.D. Short term cultures for drug assays: general considerations // Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1954. Vol. 58. P. 1110–1128.

3. DiMasi J.A., Hansen R.W., Grabowski H.G. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs // J. Health Econ. 2003. Vol. 22. N 2. P. 151–185.

4. Morgan S., Grootendorst P., Lexchin J., Cunningham C., Greyson D. The cost of drug development: a systematic review // Health Policy. 2011. Vol. 100. N 1. P. 4–17.

5. Sundberg S.A. High-throughput and ultra-high-throughput screening: solution- and cell- based approaches // Curr. Opin. Biotech. 2000. Vol. 11. N 1. P. 47–53.

6. An W.F., Tolliday N. Cell-based assays for highthroughput screening // Mol. Biotechnol. 2010. Vol. 45. N 2. P. 180–186.

7. Ponec M., Boelsma E., Gibbs S., Mommaas M. Characterization of reconstructed skin models // Skin Pharmacol. Appl. Skin Physiol. 2002. Vol. 15. N 1. P. 4–17.

8. Meleshina A.V., Bystrova A.S., Rogovaya O.S., Vorotelyak E.A., Vasiliev A.V., Zagaynova E.V. Tissue-engineered skin constructs and application of stem cells for creation of skin equivalents (review) // Sovr. Tehnol. Med. 2017. Vol. 9. N 1. P. 198–218.

9. Jírová D., Basketter D., Liebsch M., Bendová H., Kejlová K., Marriott M., Kandárová H. Comparison of human skin irritation patch test data with in vitro skin irritation assays and animal data // Contact Dermatitis. 2010. Vol. 62. N 2. P. 109–116.

10. Bou-Dargham M.J., Khamis Z.I., Cognetta A.B., Sang Q.A. The role of interleukin-1 in inflammatory and malignant human skin diseases and the rationale for targeting interleukin-1 alpha // Med. Res. Rev. 2017. Vol. 37. N 1. P. 180–216.

11. Wang C., An Q., Zhao D., Li M., Zheng H., Zhang J., Liu J., Yang L., Su N. Insight into the mechanism of SDS irritation on human skin keratinocytes by examination of changes in gene expression // Am. J. Biomed. Sci. 2016. Vol. 8. N 4. P. 311–321.

12. Hoffmann J., Heisler E., Karpinski S., Losse J., Thomas D., Siefken W., Ahr H.-J., Vohr H.- W., Fuchs H.W. Epidermal- skin-test 1000 (EST-1000) – A new reconstructed epidermis for in vitro skin corrosivity testing // Toxicol. in Vitro. 2005. Vol. 19. N 7. P. 925–929.

13. Rasmussen C., Gratz K., Liebel F., Southall M., Garay M., Bhattacharyya S., Simon N., Vander Zanden M., Van Winkle K., Pirnstill J., Pirnstill S., Comer A., Allen-Hoffmann B.L. The StrataTest® human skin model, a consistent in vitro alternative for toxicological testing // Toxicol. in Vitro. 2010. Vol. 24. N 7. P. 2021–2029.

14. Cotovio J., Onno L., Justine P., Lamure S., Catroux P. Generation of oxidative stress in human cutaneous models following in vitro ozone exposure // Toxicol. in Vitro. 2001. Vol. 15. N 4–5. P. 357–362.

15. Eglen R., Reisine T. Primary cells and stem cells in drug discovery: emerging tools for high-throughput screening // Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 2011. Vol. 9. N 2. P. 108–124.

16. Allen D.D., Caviedes R., Cárdenas A.M., Shimahara T., Segura-Aguilar J., Caviedes P.A. Cell lines as in vitro models for drug screening and toxicity studies // Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2005. Vol. 31. N 8. P. 757–768.

17. Donato M.T., Lahoz A., Castell J.V., Gómez-Lechón M.J. Cell lines: a tool for in vitro drug metabolism studies // Curr. Drug Metab. 2008. Vol. 9. N 1. P. 1–11.

18. Sharma S.V., Haber D.A., Settleman J. Cell linebased platforms to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of candidate anticancer agents // Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2010. Vol. 10. N 4. P. 241–253.

19. Jänicke R.U. MCF-7 breast carcinoma cells do not express caspase-3 // Breast Cancer Res. Tr. 2009. Vol. 117. N 1. P. 219–221.

20. Takahashi K., Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors // Cell. 2006. Vol. 26. N 4. P. 663–676.

21. Dashinimaev E.B., Artyuhov A.S., Bolshakov A.P., Vorotelyak E.A., Vasiliev A.V. Neurons derived from induced pluripotent stem cells of patients with Down syndrome reproduce early stages of Alzheimer’s disease type pathology in vitro // J. Alzheimers Dis. 2017. Vol. 56. N 2. P. 835–847.

22. Mak I.W., Evaniew N., Ghert M. Lost in translation: animal models and clinical trials in cancer treatment // Am. J. Transl. Res. 2014. Vol. 6. N 2. P. 114–118.

23. Seok J., Warren H.S., Cuenca A.G., et al. Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases // Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2013. Vol. 110. N 9. P. 3507–3512.

24. Fitzgerald K.A., Malhotra M., Curtin C.M., O’ Brien F.J., O’ Driscoll C.M. Life in 3D is never flat: 3D models to optimise drug delivery // J. Control. Release. 2015. Vol. 215. P. 39–54.

25. Basu S., Yang S.-T. Astrocyte growth and glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor secretion in three-dimensional polyethylene terephthalate fibrous matrices // Tissue Eng. 2005. Vol. 11. N 5–6. P. 940–952.

26. Smitskamp-Wilms E., Pinedo H.M., Veerman G., Ruiz van Haperen V.W., Peters G.J. Postconfluent multilayered cell line cultures for selective screening of gemcitabine // Eur. J. Cancer. 1998. Vol. 34. N 6. P. 921–926.

27. Wu M.-H., Urban J.P., Cui Z., Cui Z.F. Development of PDMS microbioreactor with well- defined and homogenous culture environment for chondrocyte 3-D culture // Biomed. Microdevices. 2006. Vol. 8. N 4. P. 331–340.

28. Wu M.-H., Huang S.-B., Lee G.-B. Microfluidic cell culture systems for drug research // Lab Chip. 2010. Vol. 10. N 8. P. 939–956.

29. Chen S.-Y., Hung P.J., Lee P.J. Microfluidic array for three-dimensional perfusion culture of human mammary epithelial cells // Biomed. Microdevices. 2011. Vol. 13. N 4. P. 753–758.

30. Pazzano D., Mercier K.A., Moran J.M, Fong S.S., DiBiasio D.D., Rulfs J.X., Kohles S.S., Bonassar L.J. Comparison of chondrogenesis in static and perfused bioreactor culture // Biotechnol. Progr. 2000. Vol. 16. N 5. P. 893–896.

31. Hughes J.D., Blagg J., Price D.A., et al. Physiochemical drug properties associated with in vivo toxicological outcomes // Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2008. Vol. 18. N 17. P. 4872–4875.

32. Betts J.I., Baganz F. Miniature bioreactors: current practices and future opportunities // Microb. Cell Fact. 2006. Vol. 5, 21.

33. Ding L., Du D., Zhang X., Ju H. Trends in cell-based electrochemical biosensors // Curr. Med. Chem. 2008. Vol. 15. N 30. P. 3160–3170.

34. Berry M.N., Grivell M.B. An electrochemical description of metabolism // Bioelectrochemistry of cells and tissues / Eds. D. Walz, H. Berg, and G. Milazzo. Basel: Birkhauser Verlag, 1995. P. 134–158.

35. Nonner W., Eisenberg B. Electrodiffusion in ionic channels of biological membranes // J. Mol. Liq. 2000. Vol. 87. N 2. P. 149–162.

36. Borgmann S., Radtke I., Erichsen T., Blöchl A., Heumann R., Schuhmann W. Electrochemical high-content screening of nitric oxide release from endothelial cells // Chembiochem. 2006. Vol. 7. N 4. P. 662–668.

37. Kamei K., Haruyama T., Mie M., Yanagida Y., Aizawa M., Kobatake E. The construction of endothelial cellular biosensing system for the control of blood pressure drugs // Biosens. Bioelectron. 2004. Vol. 19. N 9. P. 1121–1124.

38. May K.M., Wang Y., Bachas L.G., Anderson K.W. Development of a whole-cell-based biosensor for detecting histamine as a model toxin // Anal. Chem. 2004. Vol. 76. N 14. P. 4156–4161.

39. Yeon J.H., Park J.-K. Cytotoxicity test based on electrochemical impedance measurement of HepG2 cultured in microfabricated cell chip // Anal. Biochem. 2005. Vol. 341. N 2. P. 308–315.

40. Wodnicka M., Guarino R.D., Hemperly J.J., Timmins M.R., Stitt D., Pitner J.B. Novel fluorescent technology platform for high throughput cytotoxicity and proliferation assays // J. Biomol. Screen. 2000. Vol. 5. N 3. P. 141–152.

41. O’Brien J., Wilson I., Orton T., Pognan F. Investigation of the Alamar Blue (resazurin) fluorescent dye for the assessment of mammalian cell cytotoxicity // Eur. J. Biochem. 2000. Vol. 267. N 17. P. 5421–5426.

42. Derfus A.M., Chan W.C., Bhatia S.N. Probing the cytotoxicity of semiconductor quantum dots // Nano Lett. 2004. Vol. 4. N 1. P. 11–18.

43. Malich G., Markovic B., Winder C. The sensitivity and specificity of the MTS tetrazolium assay for detecting the in vitro cytotoxicity of 20 chemicals using human cell lines // Toxicology. 1997. Vol. 124. N 3. P. 179–192.

44. Khokhlov A.N., Morgunova G.V. On the constructing of survival curves for cultured cells in cytogerontological experiments: A brief note with three hierarchy diagrams // Moscow Univ. Biol. Sci. Bull. 2015. Vol. 70. N 2. Р. 67–71.

45. Durick K., Negulescu P. Cellular biosensors for drug discovery // Biosens. Bioelectron. 2001. Vol. 16. N 7–8. P. 587–592.

46. Fan F., Wood K.V. Bioluminescent assays for highthroughput screening // Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 2007. Vol. 5. N 1. P. 127–136.

47. Meisenheimer P.L., O’Brien M.A., Cali J.J. Luminogenic enzyme substrates: The basis for a new paradigm in assay design // Promega Notes. 2008. Vol. 100. P. 22–26.

48. Inoue Y., Tojo A., Sekine R., Soda Y., Kobayashi S., Nomura A., Izawa K., Kitamura T., Okubo T., Ohtomo K. In vitro validation of bioluminescent monitoring of disease progression and therapeutic response in leukaemia model animals // Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging. 2006. Vol. 33. N 5. P. 557–565.

49. Gribbon P., Sewing A. Fluorescence readouts in HTS: no gain without pain? // Drug Discov. Today. 2003. Vol. 8. N 22. P. 1035–1043.

50. Beske O.E., Goldbard S. High-throughput cell analysis using multiplexed array technologies // Drug Discov. Today. 2002. Vol. 7. N 18. P. S131–S135.

51. Michalet X., Pinaud F.F., Bentolila L.A., Tsay J.M., Doose S., Li J.J., Sundaresan G., Wu A.M., Gambhir S.S., Weiss S. Quantum dots for live cells, in vivo imaging, and diagnostics // Science. 2005. Vol. 307. N 5709. P. 538–544.

52. Yang S.T., Zhang X., Wen Y. Microbioreactors for high-throughput cytotoxicity assays // Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Develop. 2008. Vol. 11. P. N 1. 111–127.

53. Hunt L., Jordan M., De Jesus M., Wurm F.M. GFPexpressing mammalian cells for fast, sensitive, noninvasive cell growth assessment in a kinetic mode // Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1999. Vol. 65. N 2. P. 201–205.

54. Wolff M., Wiedenmann J., Nienhaus G.U., Valler M., Heilker R. Novel fluorescent proteins for high-content screening // Drug Discov. Today. 2006. Vol. 11. N 23–24. P. 1054–1060.

55. Xu X., Gerard A.L., Huang B.C., Anderson D.C., Payan D.G., Luo Y. Detection of programmed cell death using fluorescence energy transfer // Nucleic Acids Res. 1998. Vol. 26. N 8. P. 2034–2035.

56. Abraham V.C., Taylor D.L., Haskins J.R. High content screening applied to large-scale cell biology // Trends Biotechnol. 2004. Vol. 22. N 1. P. 15–22.

57. Haney S.A., LaPan P., Pan J., Zhang J. High-content screening moves to the front of the line // Drug Discov. Today. 2006. Vol. 11. N 19–20. P. 889–894.

58. Girard P., Jordan M., Tsao M., Wurm F.M. Smallscale bioreactor system for process development and optimization // Biochem. Eng. J. 2001. Vol. 7. N 2. P. 117–119.

59. Zhang X., Yang S.-T. High-throughput 3-D cellbased proliferation and cytotoxicity assays for drug screening and bioprocess development // J. Biotechnol. 2011. Vol. 151. N 2. P. 186–193.

60. Leclerc E., Sakai Y., Fujii T. Cell culture in 3-dimensional microfluidic structure of PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane) // Biomed. Microdev. 2003. Vol. 5. N 2. P. 109–114.

61. Viravaidya K., Sin A., Shuler M.L. Development of a microscale cell culture analog to probe naphthalene toxicity // Biotechnol. Progr. 2004. Vol. 20. N 1. P. 316–323.

62. Hung P.J., Lee P.J., Sabounchi P., Lin R., Lee L.P. Continuous perfusion microfluidic cell culture array for high-throughput cell-based assays // Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2005. Vol. 89. N 1. P. 1–8.

63. Su X., Young E.W., Underkofler H.A., Kamp T.J., January C.T., Beebe D.J. Microfluidic cell culture and its application in high-throughput drug screening: cardiotoxicity assay for hERG channels // J. Biomol. Screen. 2011. Vol. 16. N 1. P. 101–111.

64. Barbulovic-Nad I., Au S.H., Wheeler A.R. A microfluidic platform for complete mammalian cell culture // Lab Chip. 2010. Vol. 10. N 12. P. 1536–1542.

65. Huh D., Hamilton G.A., Ingber D.E. From 3D cell culture to organs-on-chips // Trends Cell Biol. 2011. Vol. 21. N 12. P. 745–754.

66. Huh D., Matthews B.D., Mammoto A., Montoya-Zavala M., Hsin H.Y., Ingber D.E. Reconstituting organ-level lung functions on a chip // Science. 2010. Vol. 328. N 5986. P. 1662–1668.

67. Inamdar N.K., Borenstein J.T. Microfluidic cell culture models for tissue engineering // Curr. Opin. Biotech. 2011. Vol. 22. N 5. P. 681–689.

68. Huh D., Leslie D.C., Matthews B.D., Fraser J.P., Jurek S., Hamilton G.A., Thorneloe K.S., McAlexander M.A., Ingber D.E. A human disease model of drug toxicity-induced pulmonary edema in a lung-on-a-chip microdevice // Sci. Transl. Med. 2012. Vol. 4. N 159. 159ra147.

69. Khetani S.R., Bhatia S.N. Microscale culture of human liver cells for drug development // Nat. Biotechnol. 2008. Vol. 26. N 1. P. 120–126.

70. Bhatia S.N., Balis U.J., Yarmush M.L., Toner M. Effect of cell-cell interactions in preservation of cellular phenotype: cocultivation of hepatocytes and nonparenchymal cells // FASEB J. 1999. Vol. 13. N 14. P. 1883–1900.

71. Huh D., Torisawa Y.S., Hamilton G.A., Kim H.J., Ingber D.E. Microengineered physiological biomimicry: Organs- on-chips // Lab Chip. 2012. Vol. 12. N 12. P. 2156–2164.

72. Ghaemmaghami A.M., Hancock M.J., Harrington H., Kaji H., Khademhosseini A. Biomimetic tissues on a chip for drug discovery // Drug Discov. Today. 2012. Vol. 17. N 3–4. P. 173–181.

73. Van der Meer A.D., van den Berg A. Organs-onchips: breaking the in vitro impasse // Integr. Biol. (Camb.). 2012. Vol. 4. N 5. P. 461–470.

74. Esch M.B., King T.L., Shuler M.L. The role of bodyon-a-chip devices in drug and toxicity studies // Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2011. Vol. 13. P. 55–72.

75. Eisenstein M. Artificial organs: Honey, I shrunk the lungs // Nature. 2015. Vol. 519. N 7544. P. S16–S18.