Skip to content
2000
Volume 33, Issue 8
  • ISSN: 0929-8673
  • E-ISSN: 1875-533X

Abstract

The burden of increasing cancer incidence among the population, and, in particular, of prostate cancer in men living in highly developed countries, brings with it, on one hand, the need for new devices that allow a faster and earlier diagnosis, ideally in a non-invasive way and with low consumption of expensive reagents, and on the other the need for the assessment of new models that allow a more reliable assessment of cancer features, including its microenvironment and sensibility to different drugs. At the crossroads of these features, microfluidic devices are found. These, taking advantage of the chemical-physical properties of cells and human samples, have demonstrated great sensitivity and sensibility at an on-chip scale. Many fields of biomedical sciences have tried to exploit all their potentialities: from the detection of antigens in the early phases of the disease (when they are very low concentrated, but the treatment is more effective) to isolation and characterization of circulating tumor cells. However, is in the building of 3D models to better assess and comprehend the fundamental dynamics occurring in the tumor microenvironment and metastasis that 3D bioprinting techniques come into play. The aim of the present review is to describe the potential of these two different cutting-edge technologies for the detection and treatment of prostate cancer, in the perspective of a possible future combination of them that allows scientists to fill the gaps present in the field to improve patient care and treatment.

© 2026 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cmc/10.2174/0109298673298382240307040239
2024-03-08
2026-03-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cmc/10.2174/0109298673298382240307040239
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. SungH. FerlayJ. SiegelR.L. LaversanneM. SoerjomataramI. JemalA. BrayF. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: Globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.CA Cancer J. Clin.202171320924910.3322/caac.2166033538338
     [Google Scholar]
  2. ZhouC.K. CheckD.P. Lortet-TieulentJ. LaversanneM. JemalA. FerlayJ. BrayF. CookM.B. DevesaS.S. Prostate cancer incidence in 43 populations worldwide: An analysis of time trends overall and by age group.Int. J. Cancer201613861388140010.1002/ijc.2989426488767
     [Google Scholar]
  3. HuncharekM. HaddockK.S. ReidR. KupelnickB. Smoking as a risk factor for prostate cancer: A meta-analysis of 24 prospective cohort studies.Am. J. Public Health2010100469370110.2105/AJPH.2008.15050819608952
     [Google Scholar]
  4. SalemS. SalahiM. MohseniM. AhmadiH. MehrsaiA. JahaniY. PourmandG. Major dietary factors and prostate cancer risk: A prospective multicenter case-control study.Nutr. Cancer2011631212721161822
     [Google Scholar]
  5. SiegelR.L. MillerK.D. WagleN.S. JemalA. Cancer statistics.CA Cancer J. Clin.2023731174810.3322/caac.2176336633525
     [Google Scholar]
  6. SiegelR.L. MillerK.D. JemalA. Cancer statistics.CA Cancer J. Clin.201868173010.3322/caac.2144229313949
     [Google Scholar]
  7. RantaperoT. WahlforsT. KählerA. HultmanC. LindbergJ. TammelaT.L.J. NykterM. SchleutkerJ. WiklundF. Inherited DNA repair gene mutations in men with lethal prostate cancer.Genes202011331410.3390/genes1103031432183364
     [Google Scholar]
  8. BerishR.B. AliA.N. TelmerP.G. RonaldJ.A. LeongH.S. Translational models of prostate cancer bone metastasis.Nat. Rev. Urol.201815740342110.1038/s41585‑018‑0020‑229769644
     [Google Scholar]
  9. XuK. HuangY. WuM. YinJ. WeiP. 3D bioprinting of multi-cellular tumor microenvironment for prostate cancer metastasis.Biofabrication202315303502010.1088/1758‑5090/acd96037236173
     [Google Scholar]
  10. ChanS.C. DehmS.M. Constitutive activity of the androgen receptor.Adv. Pharmacol.20147032736610.1016/B978‑0‑12‑417197‑8.00011‑024931201
     [Google Scholar]
  11. RobinsD.M. Androgen receptor gene polymorphisms and alterations in prostate cancer: Of humanized mice and men.Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.20123521-2263310.1016/j.mce.2011.06.00321689727
     [Google Scholar]
  12. ShokoohmandA. RenJ. BaldwinJ. AtackA. ShafieeA. TheodoropoulosC. WilleM.L. TranP.A. BrayL.J. SmithD. ChettyN. PollockP.M. HutmacherD.W. ClementsJ.A. WilliamsE.D. BockN. Microenvironment engineering of osteoblastic bone metastases reveals osteomimicry of patient-derived prostate cancer xenografts.Biomaterials201922011940210.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.11940231400612
     [Google Scholar]
  13. MartineL.C. HolzapfelB.M. McGovernJ.A. WagnerF. QuentV.M. HesamiP. WunnerF.M. VaquetteC. De-Juan-PardoE.M. BrownT.D. NowlanB. WuD.J. HutmacherC.O. MoiD. OussenkoT. PiccininiE. ZandstraP.W. MazzieriR. LévesqueJ.P. DaltonP.D. TaubenbergerA.V. HutmacherD.W. Engineering a humanized bone organ model in mice to study bone metastases.Nat. Protoc.201712463966310.1038/nprot.2017.00228253234
     [Google Scholar]
  14. KimJ. JangJ. ChoD.W. Recapitulating the cancer microenvironment using bioprinting technology for precision medicine.Micromachines2021129112210.3390/mi1209112234577765
     [Google Scholar]
  15. LoboD.A. GinestraP. CerettiE. MiquelT.P. CiuranaJ. Cancer cell direct bioprinting: A focused review.Micromachines202112776410.3390/mi1207076434203530
     [Google Scholar]
  16. GnatowskiP. PiłatE. Kucińska-LipkaJ. SaebM.R. HamblinM.R. MozafariM. Recent advances in 3D bioprinted tumor models for personalized medicine.Transl. Oncol.20233710175010.1016/j.tranon.2023.10175037572498
     [Google Scholar]
  17. LiS.S. XueC.D. LiY.J. ChenX.M. ZhaoY. QinK.R. Microfluidic characterization of single-cell biophysical properties and the applications in cancer diagnosis.Electrophoresis2023elps.20230017710.1002/elps.20230017737909658
     [Google Scholar]
  18. MainzE.R. GunasekaraD.B. CarusoG. JensenD.T. HulveyM.K. Fracassi da SilvaJ.A. MettoE.C. CulbertsonA.H. CulbertsonC.T. LunteS.M. Monitoring intracellular nitric oxide production using microchip electrophoresis and laser-induced fluorescence detection.Anal. Methods20124241442010.1039/c2ay05542b
     [Google Scholar]
  19. BettegowdaC. SausenM. LearyR.J. KindeI. WangY. AgrawalN. BartlettB.R. WangH. LuberB. AlaniR.M. AntonarakisE.S. AzadN.S. BardelliA. BremH. CameronJ.L. LeeC.C. FecherL.A. GalliaG.L. GibbsP. LeD. GiuntoliR.L. GogginsM. HogartyM.D. HoldhoffM. HongS.M. JiaoY. JuhlH.H. KimJ.J. SiravegnaG. LaheruD.A. LauricellaC. LimM. LipsonE.J. MarieS.K.N. NettoG.J. OlinerK.S. OliviA. OlssonL. RigginsG.J. Sartore-BianchiA. SchmidtK. ShihM. Oba-ShinjoS.M. SienaS. TheodorescuD. TieJ. HarkinsT.T. VeroneseS. WangT.L. WeingartJ.D. WolfgangC.L. WoodL.D. XingD. HrubanR.H. WuJ. AllenP.J. SchmidtC.M. ChotiM.A. VelculescuV.E. KinzlerK.W. VogelsteinB. PapadopoulosN. DiazL.A.Jr Detection of circulating tumor DNA in early- and late-stage human malignancies.Sci. Transl. Med.20146224224ra2410.1126/scitranslmed.300709424553385
     [Google Scholar]
  20. SungB.H. WeaverA.M. Exosome secretion promotes chemotaxis of cancer cells.Cell Adhes. Migr.201711218719510.1080/19336918.2016.127330728129015
     [Google Scholar]
  21. SimpsonR.J. LimJ.W.E. MoritzR.L. MathivananS. Exosomes: Proteomic insights and diagnostic potential.Expert Rev. Proteomics20096326728310.1586/epr.09.1719489699
     [Google Scholar]
  22. KammR.D. Toward improved models of human cancer: Two perspectives.APL Bioeng.20215101040210.1063/5.004232433644625
     [Google Scholar]
  23. AyusoJ.M. ParkK.Y. Virumbrales-MuñozM. BeebeD.J. Toward improved in vitro models of human cancer.APL Bioeng.20215101090210.1063/5.002685733532672
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Lugo-CintrónK.M. AyusoJ.M. WhiteB.R. HarariP.M. PonikS.M. BeebeD.J. GongM.M. Virumbrales-MuñozM. Matrix density drives 3D organotypic lymphatic vessel activation in a microfluidic model of the breast tumor microenvironment.Lab. Chip.20202091586160010.1039/D0LC00099J32297896
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Lugo-CintrónK.M. GongM.M. AyusoJ.M. TomkoL.A. BeebeD.J. Virumbrales-MuñozM. PonikS.M. Breast fibroblasts and ECM components modulate breast cancer cell migration through the secretion of MMPs in a 3D microfluidic Co-culture model.Cancers2020125117310.3390/cancers1205117332384738
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Lugo-CintrónK.M. AyusoJ.M. HumayunM. GongM.M. KerrS.C. PonikS.M. HarariP.M. Virumbrales-MuñozM. BeebeD.J. Primary head and neck tumour-derived fibroblasts promote lymphangiogenesis in a lymphatic organotypic co-culture model.EBioMedicine20217310363410.1016/j.ebiom.2021.10363434673450
     [Google Scholar]
  27. RebelloR.J. OingC. KnudsenK.E. LoebS. JohnsonD.C. ReiterR.E. GillessenS. Van der KwastT. BristowR.G. Prostate cancer.Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers202171910.1038/s41572‑020‑00243‑033542230
     [Google Scholar]
  28. de CamposR.P.S. SiegelJ.M. FrestaC.G. CarusoG. da SilvaJ.A.F. LunteS.M. Indirect detection of superoxide in RAW 264.7 macrophage cells using microchip electrophoresis coupled to laser-induced fluorescence.Anal. Bioanal. Chem.2015407237003701210.1007/s00216‑015‑8865‑126159570
     [Google Scholar]
  29. KadimisettyK. MosaI.M. MallaS. Satterwhite-WardenJ.E. KuhnsT.M. FariaR.C. LeeN.H. RuslingJ.F. 3D-printed supercapacitor-powered electrochemiluminescent protein immunoarray.Biosens. Bioelectron.20167718819310.1016/j.bios.2015.09.01726406460
     [Google Scholar]
  30. KadimisettyK. SpakA.P. BhaleraoK.S. SharafeldinM. MosaI.M. LeeN.H. RuslingJ.F. Automated 4-sample protein immunoassays using 3D-printed microfluidics.Anal. Methods201810324000400610.1039/C8AY01271G30906426
     [Google Scholar]
  31. PaniniN.V. MessinaG.A. SalinasE. FernándezH. RabaJ. Integrated microfluidic systems with an immunosensor modified with carbon nanotubes for detection of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in human serum samples.Biosens. Bioelectron.20082371145115110.1016/j.bios.2007.11.00318162392
     [Google Scholar]
  32. PatabadigeD.E.W. JiaS. SibbittsJ. SadeghiJ. SellensK. CulbertsonC.T. Micro total analysis systems: Fundamental advances and applications.Anal. Chem.201688132033810.1021/acs.analchem.5b0431026599485
     [Google Scholar]
  33. GunasekaraD.B. SiegelJ.M. CarusoG. HulveyM.K. LunteS.M. Microchip electrophoresis with amperometric detection method for profiling cellular nitrosative stress markers.Analyst2014139133265327310.1039/C4AN00185K24728039
     [Google Scholar]
  34. BarbosaA.I. GehlotP. SidapraK. EdwardsA.D. ReisN.M. Portable smartphone quantitation of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in a fluoropolymer microfluidic device.Biosens. Bioelectron.20157051410.1016/j.bios.2015.03.00625775968
     [Google Scholar]
  35. GaoR. ChengZ. WangX. YuL. GuoZ. ZhaoG. ChooJ. Simultaneous immunoassays of dual prostate cancer markers using a SERS-based microdroplet channel.Biosens. Bioelectron.201811912613310.1016/j.bios.2018.08.01530121424
     [Google Scholar]
  36. GaoR. LvZ. MaoY. YuL. BiX. XuS. CuiJ. WuY. SERS-based pump-free microfluidic chip for highly sensitive immunoassay of prostate-specific antigen biomarkers.ACS Sens.20194493894310.1021/acssensors.9b0003930864786
     [Google Scholar]
  37. WangY. LiQ. ShiH. TangK. QiaoL. YuG. DingC. YuS. Microfluidic Raman biochip detection of exosomes: A promising tool for prostate cancer diagnosis.Lab Chip202020244632463710.1039/D0LC00677G33169756
     [Google Scholar]
  38. TrirojN. JaroenapibalP. ShiH. YehJ.I. BeresfordR. Microfluidic chip-based nanoelectrode array as miniaturized biochemical sensing platform for prostate-specific antigen detection.Biosens. Bioelectron.20112662927293310.1016/j.bios.2010.11.03921190835
     [Google Scholar]
  39. ChenS. WangZ. CuiX. JiangL. ZhiY. DingX. NieZ. ZhouP. CuiD. Microfluidic device directly fabricated on screen-printed electrodes for ultrasensitive electrochemical sensing of PSA.Nanoscale Res. Lett.20191417110.1186/s11671‑019‑2857‑630820698
     [Google Scholar]
  40. ChenJ. LiuC.Y. WangX. SweetE. LiuN. GongX. LinL. 3D printed microfluidic devices for circulating tumor cells (CTCs) isolation.Biosens. Bioelectron.202015011190010.1016/j.bios.2019.11190031767348
     [Google Scholar]
  41. HuangC. SantanaS.M. LiuH. BanderN.H. HawkinsB.G. KirbyB.J. Characterization of a hybrid dielectrophoresis and immunocapture microfluidic system for cancer cell capture.Electrophoresis20133420-212970297910.1002/elps.20130024223925921
     [Google Scholar]
  42. HuangC. LiuH. BanderN.H. KirbyB.J. Enrichment of prostate cancer cells from blood cells with a hybrid dielectrophoresis and immunocapture microfluidic system.Biomed. Microdevices201315694194810.1007/s10544‑013‑9784‑623807279
     [Google Scholar]
  43. KirbyB.J. JodariM. LoftusM.S. GakharG. PrattE.D. Chanel-VosC. GleghornJ.P. SantanaS.M. LiuH. SmithJ.P. NavarroV.N. TagawaS.T. BanderN.H. NanusD.M. GiannakakouP. Functional characterization of circulating tumor cells with a prostate-cancer-specific microfluidic device.PLoS One201274e3597610.1371/journal.pone.003597622558290
     [Google Scholar]
  44. LenshofA. Ahmad-TajudinA. JäråsK. Swärd-NilssonA.M. ÅbergL. Marko-VargaG. MalmJ. LiljaH. LaurellT. Acoustic whole blood plasmapheresis chip for prostate specific antigen microarray diagnostics.Anal. Chem.200981156030603710.1021/ac901357219594154
     [Google Scholar]
  45. EsmaeilsabzaliH. BeischlagT.V. CoxM.E. DechevN. ParameswaranA.M. ParkE.J. An integrated microfluidic chip for immunomagnetic detection and isolation of rare prostate cancer cells from blood.Biomed. Microdevices20161812210.1007/s10544‑016‑0041‑726876965
     [Google Scholar]
  46. GliaA. DeliormanM. SukumarP. JanahiF.K. SamaraB. BrimmoA.T. QasaimehM.A. Herringbone microfluidic probe for multiplexed affinity-capture of prostate circulating tumor cells.Adv. Mater. Technol.202166210005310.1002/admt.202100053
     [Google Scholar]
  47. OzkumurE. ShahA.M. CicilianoJ.C. EmminkB.L. MiyamotoD.T. BrachtelE. YuM. ChenP. MorganB. TrautweinJ. KimuraA. SenguptaS. StottS.L. KarabacakN.M. BarberT.A. WalshJ.R. SmithK. SpuhlerP.S. SullivanJ.P. LeeR.J. TingD.T. LuoX. ShawA.T. BardiaA. SequistL.V. LouisD.N. MaheswaranS. KapurR. HaberD.A. TonerM. Inertial focusing for tumor antigen-dependent and -independent sorting of rare circulating tumor cells.Sci. Transl. Med.20135179179ra4710.1126/scitranslmed.300561623552373
     [Google Scholar]
  48. YinC. WangY. JiJ. CaiB. ChenH. YangZ. WangK. LuoC. ZhangW. YuanC. WangF. Molecular profiling of pooled circulating tumor cells from prostate cancer patients using a dual-antibody-functionalized microfluidic device.Anal. Chem.20189063744375110.1021/acs.analchem.7b0353629464943
     [Google Scholar]
  49. ChoH. ChungJ.I. KimJ. SeoW.I. LeeC.H. MorganT.M. ByunS.S. ChungJ.S. HanK.H. Multigene model for predicting metastatic prostate cancer using circulating tumor cells by microfluidic magnetophoresis.Cancer Sci.2021112285987010.1111/cas.1474533232539
     [Google Scholar]
  50. ChanK.M. GleadleJ.M. GregoryP.A. PhillipsC.A. ShiraziH.S. WhiteleyA. LiJ. VasilevK. MacGregorM. Selective microfluidic capture and detection of prostate cancer cells from urine without digital rectal examination.Cancers20211321554410.3390/cancers1321554434771706
     [Google Scholar]
  51. RussoG.I. MussoN. RomanoA. CarusoG. PetraliaS. LanzanòL. BroggiG. CamardaM. The role of dielectrophoresis for cancer diagnosis and prognosis.Cancers202114119810.3390/cancers1401019835008359
     [Google Scholar]
  52. BonacciP.G. CarusoG. ScanduraG. PandinoC. RomanoA. RussoG.I. PethigR. CamardaM. MussoN. Impact of buffer composition on biochemical, morphological and mechanical parameters: A tare before dielectrophoretic cell separation and isolation.Transl. Oncol.20232810159910.1016/j.tranon.2022.10159936516639
     [Google Scholar]
  53. EsmaeilsabzaliH. PayerR.T.M. GuoY. CoxM.E. ParameswaranA.M. BeischlagT.V. ParkE.J. Development of a microfluidic platform for size-based hydrodynamic enrichment and PSMA-targeted immunomagnetic isolation of circulating tumour cells in prostate cancer.Biomicrofluidics201913101411010.1063/1.506447330867880
     [Google Scholar]
  54. KhamenehfarA. BeischlagT.V. RussellP.J. LingM.T.P. NelsonC. LiP.C.H. Label-free isolation of a prostate cancer cell among blood cells and the single-cell measurement of drug accumulation using an integrated microfluidic chip.Biomicrofluidics20159606410410.1063/1.493471526594265
     [Google Scholar]
  55. RenierC. PaoE. CheJ. LiuH.E. LemaireC.A. MatsumotoM. TribouletM. SrivinasS. JeffreyS.S. RettigM. KulkarniR.P. Di CarloD. Sollier-ChristenE. Label-free isolation of prostate circulating tumor cells using Vortex microfluidic technology.NPJ Precis. Oncol.2017111510.1038/s41698‑017‑0015‑029872702
     [Google Scholar]
  56. AugustssonP. MagnussonC. NordinM. LiljaH. LaurellT. Microfluidic, label-free enrichment of prostate cancer cells in blood based on acoustophoresis.Anal. Chem.201284187954796210.1021/ac301723s22897670
     [Google Scholar]
  57. RzhevskiyA.S. Razavi BazazS. DingL. KapitannikovaA. SayyadiN. CampbellD. WalshB. GillattD. Ebrahimi WarkianiM. ZvyaginA.V. Rapid and label-free isolation of tumour cells from the urine of patients with localised prostate cancer using inertial microfluidics.Cancers20191218110.3390/cancers1201008131905736
     [Google Scholar]
  58. RzhevskiyA.S. KapitannikovaA.Y. VasilescuS.A. KarashaevaT.A. Razavi BazazS. TaratkinM.S. EnikeevD.V. LekarevV.Y. ShpotE.V. ButnaruD.V. DeyevS.M. ThieryJ.P. ZvyaginA.V. Ebrahimi WarkianiM. Isolation of circulating tumor cells from seminal fluid of patients with prostate cancer using inertial microfluidics.Cancers20221414336410.3390/cancers1414336435884424
     [Google Scholar]
  59. AnD. KimK. KimJ. Microfluidic system based high throughput drug screening system for curcumin/trail combinational chemotherapy in human prostate cancer PC3 cells.Biomol. Ther.201422435536210.4062/biomolther.2014.07825143816
     [Google Scholar]
  60. MulhollandT. McAllisterM. PatekS. FlintD. UnderwoodM. SimA. EdwardsJ. ZagnoniM. Drug screening of biopsy-derived spheroids using a self-generated microfluidic concentration gradient.Sci. Rep.2018811467210.1038/s41598‑018‑33055‑030279484
     [Google Scholar]
  61. NolanJ. PearceO.M.T. ScreenH.R.C. KnightM.M. VerbruggenS.W. Organ-on-a-chip and microfluidic platforms for oncology in the UK.Cancers202315363510.3390/cancers1503063536765593
     [Google Scholar]
  62. JubelinC. Muñoz-GarciaJ. GriscomL. CochonneauD. OllivierE. HeymannM.F. ValletteF.M. OliverL. HeymannD. Three-dimensional in vitro culture models in oncology research.Cell Biosci.202212115510.1186/s13578‑022‑00887‑336089610
     [Google Scholar]
  63. JiangL. IvichF. TahsinS. TranM. FrankS.B. MirantiC.K. ZoharY. Human stroma and epithelium co-culture in a microfluidic model of a human prostate gland.Biomicrofluidics201913606411610.1063/1.512671431768202
     [Google Scholar]
  64. YuJ. BerthierE. CraigA. de GrootT.E. SparksS. IngramP.N. JarrardD.F. HuangW. BeebeD.J. ThebergeA.B. Reconfigurable open microfluidics for studying the spatiotemporal dynamics of paracrine signalling.Nat. Biomed. Eng.201931083084110.1038/s41551‑019‑0421‑431427781
     [Google Scholar]
  65. HardingA. Application of additive manufacturing in the biomedical field-A review.Annals of 3D Printed MedicineElsevier20231010011010.1016/j.stlm.2023.100110
     [Google Scholar]
  66. XuK. HanY. HuangY. WeiP. YinJ. JiangJ. The application of 3D bioprinting in urological diseases.Mater. Today Bio.20221610038810.1016/j.mtbio.2022.10038835967737
     [Google Scholar]
  67. GugulothuS.B. AsthanaS. Homer-VanniasinkamS. ChatterjeeK. Trends in photopolymerizable bioinks for 3D bioprinting of tumor models.JACS Au2023382086210610.1021/jacsau.3c0028137654587
     [Google Scholar]
  68. SinhaP. LahareP. SahuM. CimlerR. SchnitzerM. HlubenovaJ. HudakR. SinghN. GuptaB. KucaK. Concept and evolution in 3-D printing for excellence in healthcare.Curr. Med. Chem.20243110.2174/010929867326230023112910252038265395
     [Google Scholar]
  69. CadamuroF. MarongiuL. MarinoM. TaminiN. NespoliL. ZucchiniN. TerziA. AltamuraD. GaoZ. GianniniC. BindiG. SmithA. MagniF. BertiniS. GranucciF. NicotraF. RussoL. 3D bioprinted colorectal cancer models based on hyaluronic acid and signalling glycans.Carbohydr. Polym.202330212039510.1016/j.carbpol.2022.12039536604073
     [Google Scholar]
  70. ZouS. YeJ. WeiY. XuJ. Characterization of 3d-bioprinted in vitro lung cancer models using RNA-sequencing techniques.Bioengineering202310666710.3390/bioengineering1006066737370598
     [Google Scholar]
  71. DankóT. PetőváriG. RaffayR. SztankovicsD. MoldvaiD. VetlényiE. KrenczI. RókuszA. SiposK. VisnovitzT. PápayJ. SebestyénA. Characterisation of 3D bioprinted human breast cancer model for in vitro drug and metabolic targeting.Int. J. Mol. Sci.20222313744410.3390/ijms2313744435806452
     [Google Scholar]
  72. KahlM. A fluorescence-based opto-mechatronic screening module (OMSM) for automated 3D cell culture workflows.Biosensors and Bioelectronics: XElsevier202314100372
     [Google Scholar]
  73. SabettaS. VecchiottiD. ClementiL. Di Vito NolfiM. ZazzeroniF. AngelucciA. Comparative analysis of dasatinib effect between 2D and 3D tumor cell cultures.Pharmaceutics202315237210.3390/pharmaceutics1502037236839692
     [Google Scholar]
  74. BubendorfL. SchöpferA. WagnerU. SauterG. MochH. WilliN. GasserT.C. MihatschM.J. Metastatic patterns of prostate cancer: An autopsy study of 1,589 patients.Hum. Pathol.200031557858310.1053/hp.2000.669810836297
     [Google Scholar]
  75. HolzapfelB.M. WagnerF. LoessnerD. HolzapfelN.P. ThibaudeauL. CrawfordR. LingM.T. ClementsJ.A. RussellP.J. HutmacherD.W. Species-specific homing mechanisms of human prostate cancer metastasis in tissue engineered bone.Biomaterials201435134108411510.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.01.06224534484
     [Google Scholar]
  76. BrownT.D. DaltonP.D. HutmacherD.W. Melt electrospinning today: An opportune time for an emerging polymer process.Prog. Polym. Sci.20165611616610.1016/j.progpolymsci.2016.01.001
     [Google Scholar]
  77. ParsonsJ.K. PartinA.W. TrockB. BruzekD.J. CheliC. SokollL.J. Complexed prostate-specific antigen for the diagnosis of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.BJU Int.200799475876110.1111/j.1464‑410X.2007.06680.x17378839
     [Google Scholar]
  78. MottetN. BellmuntJ. BollaM. BriersE. CumberbatchM.G. De SantisM. FossatiN. GrossT. HenryA.M. JoniauS. LamT.B. MasonM.D. MatveevV.B. MoldovanP.C. van den BerghR.C.N. Van den BroeckT. van der PoelH.G. van der KwastT.H. RouvièreO. SchootsI.G. WiegelT. CornfordP. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent.Eur. Urol.201771461862910.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.00327568654
     [Google Scholar]
  79. SlevP.R. La’uluS.L. RobertsW.L. Intermethod differences in results for total PSA, free PSA, and percentage of free PSA.Am. J. Clin. Pathol.2008129695295810.1309/JYBPMFNUF6EYY9TB18480013
     [Google Scholar]
  80. LiljaH. UlmertD. VickersA.J. Prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer: Prediction, detection and monitoring.Nat. Rev. Cancer20088426827810.1038/nrc235118337732
     [Google Scholar]
  81. AsselM.J. GerdtssonA. ThorekD.L.J. CarlssonS.V. MalmJ. ScardinoP.T. VickersA. LiljaH. UlmertD. Long-term prediction of prostate cancer diagnosis and death using PSA and obesity related anthropometrics at early middle age: Data from the malmö preventive project.Oncotarget2018955778578510.18632/oncotarget.2298129464033
     [Google Scholar]
  82. TrockB.J. WalshP.C. Re: Radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy: Impact on metastasis and survival.J. Urol.201018362466246710.1016/j.juro.2010.02.04020403615
     [Google Scholar]
  83. KlingA. DirscherlL. DittrichP.S. Laser-assisted protein micropatterning in a thermoplastic device for multiplexed prostate cancer biomarker detection.Lab Chip202323353454110.1039/D2LC00840H36642981
     [Google Scholar]
  84. GaoR. ChengZ. deMelloA.J. ChooJ. Wash-free magnetic immunoassay of the PSA cancer marker using SERS and droplet microfluidics.Lab. Chip.20161661022102910.1039/C5LC01249J26879372
     [Google Scholar]
  85. ZhouQ. LinY. ZhangK. LiM. TangD. Reduced graphene oxide/BiFeO3 nanohybrids-based signal-on photoelectrochemical sensing system for prostate-specific antigen detection coupling with magnetic microfluidic device.Biosens. Bioelectron.201810114615210.1016/j.bios.2017.10.02729065339
     [Google Scholar]
  86. FloraF.C. RelvasS.B. SilvaF.A. FreireM.G. ChuV. CondeJ.P. Combined use of ionic liquid-based aqueous biphasic systems and microfluidic devices for the detection of prostate-specific antigen.Biosensors202313333410.3390/bios1303033436979546
     [Google Scholar]
  87. FeliciE. RegiartM. PereiraS. OrtegaF. AngnesL. MessinaG. Fernández-BaldoM. Microfluidic platform integrated with carbon nanofibers-decorated gold nanoporous sensing device for serum PSA quantification.Biosensors202313339010.3390/bios1303039036979602
     [Google Scholar]
  88. ZhangQ. MaS. ZhangK. ZhangL. LiuC. ShiH. WangC. WangN. ZhuA. A facile integrated microfluidic chip based on chitosan-gold nanoparticles-anchored three-dimensional graphene fiber film for monitoring prostate specific antigen.Microchem. J.202318410817110.1016/j.microc.2022.108171
     [Google Scholar]
  89. ZhaoL. WangD. ShiG. LinL. Dual-labeled chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay for simultaneous measurement of total prostate specific antigen (TPSA) and free prostate specific antigen (FPSA).Luminescence20173281547155310.1002/bio.335828636187
     [Google Scholar]
  90. CatalonaW.J. PartinA.W. SlawinK.M. BrawerM.K. FlaniganR.C. PatelA. RichieJ.P. deKernionJ.B. WalshP.C. ScardinoP.T. LangeP.H. SubongE.N.P. ParsonR.E. GasiorG.H. LovelandK.G. SouthwickP.C. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease: A prospective multicenter clinical trial.JAMA1998279191542154710.1001/jama.279.19.15429605898
     [Google Scholar]
  91. LudererA.A. ChenY.T. SorianoT.F. KrampW.J. CarlsonG. CunyC. SharpT. SmithW. PettewayJ. BrawerM.K. ThielR. Measurement of the proportion of free to total prostate-specific antigen improves diagnostic performance of prostate-specific antigen in the diagnostic gray zone of total prostate-specific antigen.Urology199546218719410.1016/S0090‑4295(99)80192‑77542820
     [Google Scholar]
  92. HuangM.P. TangP. KleinC. WeiX.H. DuW. FuJ.G. HuangT.H. ChenH. XieK.J. Free PSA performs better than total PSA in predicting prostate volume in Chinese men with PSA levels of 2.5–9.9 ng ml −1.Asian J. Androl.2023251828510.4103/aja20221735562126
     [Google Scholar]
  93. HuskovaZ. KnillovaJ. KolarZ. VrbkovaJ. KralM. BouchalJ. The percentage of free PSA and urinary markers distinguish prostate cancer from benign hyperplasia and contribute to a more accurate indication for prostate biopsy.Biomedicines20208617310.3390/biomedicines806017332630458
     [Google Scholar]
  94. ChiriacòM.S. PrimiceriE. MontanaroA. de FeoF. LeoneL. RinaldiR. MaruccioG. On-chip screening for prostate cancer: An EIS microfluidic platform for contemporary detection of free and total PSA.Analyst2013138185404541010.1039/c3an00911d23884165
     [Google Scholar]
  95. IwanagaM. Robust detection of cancer markers in human serums using all-dielectric metasurface biosensors.Biosensors202313337710.3390/bios1303037736979589
     [Google Scholar]
  96. MeaseR.C. FossC.A. PomperM.G. PET imaging in prostate cancer: Focus on prostate-specific membrane antigen.Curr. Top. Med. Chem.201313895196210.2174/156802661131308000823590171
     [Google Scholar]
  97. MaurerT. EiberM. SchwaigerM. GschwendJ.E. Current use of PSMA-PET in prostate cancer management.Nat. Rev. Urol.201613422623510.1038/nrurol.2016.2626902337
     [Google Scholar]
  98. LaidlerP. DulińskaJ. LekkaM. LekkiJ. Expression of prostate specific membrane antigen in androgen-independent prostate cancer cell line PC-3.Arch. Biochem. Biophys.2005435111410.1016/j.abb.2004.12.00315680901
     [Google Scholar]
  99. WuQ. DhirR. WellsA. Altered CXCR3 isoform expression regulates prostate cancer cell migration and invasion.Mol. Cancer2012111310.1186/1476‑4598‑11‑322236567
     [Google Scholar]
  100. TangC.K. VazeA. RuslingJ.F. Automated 3D-printed unibody immunoarray for chemiluminescence detection of cancer biomarker proteins.Lab. Chip.201717348448910.1039/C6LC01238H28067370
     [Google Scholar]
  101. BlackP.C. MizeG.J. KarlinP. GreenbergD.L. HawleyS.J. TrueL.D. VessellaR.L. TakayamaT.K. Overexpression of protease-activated receptors-1,-2, and-4 (PAR-1, -2, and -4) in prostate cancer.Prostate200767774375610.1002/pros.2050317373694
     [Google Scholar]
  102. RadjabiA.R. SawadaK. JagadeeswaranS. EichbichlerA. KennyH.A. MontagA. BrunoK. LengyelE. Thrombin induces tumor invasion through the induction and association of matrix metalloproteinase-9 and beta1-integrin on the cell surface.J. Biol. Chem.200828352822283410.1074/jbc.M70485520018048360
     [Google Scholar]
  103. KaushalV. KohliM. DennisR.A. SiegelE.R. ChilesW.W. MukunyadziP. Thrombin receptor expression is upregulated in prostate cancer.Prostate200666327328210.1002/pros.2032616245281
     [Google Scholar]
  104. LuY. ZhanC. YuL. YuY. JiaH. ChenX. ZhangD. GaoR. Multifunctional nanocone array as solid immunoassay plate and SERS substrate for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer on microfluidic chip.Sens. Actuators B Chem.202337613304610.1016/j.snb.2022.133046
     [Google Scholar]
  105. ChawS.Y. Abdul MajeedA. DalleyA.J. ChanA. SteinS. FarahC.S. Epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) biomarkers E-cadherin, beta-catenin, APC and Vimentin in oral squamous cell carcinogenesis and transformation.Oral Oncol.20124810997100610.1016/j.oraloncology.2012.05.01122704062
     [Google Scholar]
  106. KalluriR. WeinbergR.A. The basics of epithelial-mesenchymal transition.J. Clin. Invest.200911961420142810.1172/JCI3910419487818
     [Google Scholar]
  107. DharmasiriU. BalamuruganS. AdamsA.A. OkagbareP.I. ObubuafoA. SoperS.A. Highly efficient capture and enumeration of low abundance prostate cancer cells using prostate-specific membrane antigen aptamers immobilized to a polymeric microfluidic device.Electrophoresis200930183289330010.1002/elps.20090014119722212
     [Google Scholar]
  108. ChaJ. ChoH. ChungJ.S. ParkJ.S. HanK.H. Effective circulating tumor cell isolation using epithelial and mesenchymal markers in prostate and pancreatic cancer patients.Cancers20231510282510.3390/cancers1510282537345161
     [Google Scholar]
  109. RenX. FosterB.M. GhassemiP. StroblJ.S. KerrB.A. AgahM. Entrapment of prostate cancer circulating tumor cells with a sequential size-based microfluidic chip.Anal. Chem.201890127526753410.1021/acs.analchem.8b0113429790741
     [Google Scholar]
  110. ShimS. Stemke-HaleK. NoshariJ. BeckerF.F. GascoyneP.R.C. Dielectrophoresis has broad applicability to marker-free isolation of tumor cells from blood by microfluidic systems.Biomicrofluidics20137101180810.1063/1.477430724403990
     [Google Scholar]
  111. TodenhoferT. Microfluidic enrichment of circulating tumor cells in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.Urol. Oncol.2016341148348310.1016/j.urolonc.2016.06.004
     [Google Scholar]
  112. PakhiraW. KumarR. IbrahimiK.M. Distinct separation of multiple CTCs using inertial focusing phenomena utilizing single-looped spiral microfluidic lab-on-chip.Chem. Eng. Sci.202327511872410.1016/j.ces.2023.118724
     [Google Scholar]
  113. KangG. KimY. MoonH. LeeJ.W. YooT.K. ParkK. LeeJ.H. Discrimination between the human prostate normal cell and cancer cell by using a novel electrical impedance spectroscopy controlling the cross-sectional area of a microfluidic channel.Biomicrofluidics20137404412610.1063/1.481883824404059
     [Google Scholar]
  114. RahmanianM. Sartipzadeh HematabadO. AskariE. ShokatiF. BakhshiA. MoghadamS. OlfatbakhshA. Al Sadat HashemiE. Khorsand AhmadiM. Morteza NaghibS. SinhaN. TelJ. Eslami AmirabadiH. den ToonderJ.M.J. Majidzadeh-AK. A micropillar array-based microfluidic chip for label-free separation of circulating tumor cells: The best micropillar geometry?J. Adv. Res.20234710512110.1016/j.jare.2022.08.00535964874
     [Google Scholar]
  115. MoltzahnF. OlshenA.B. BaehnerL. PeekA. FongL. StöpplerH. SimkoJ. HiltonJ.F. CarrollP. BlellochR. Microfluidic-based multiplex qRT-PCR identifies diagnostic and prognostic microRNA signatures in the sera of prostate cancer patients.Cancer Res.201171255056010.1158/0008‑5472.CAN‑10‑122921098088
     [Google Scholar]
  116. MathewD.G. BeekmanP. LemayS.G. ZuilhofH. Le GacS. van der WielW.G. Electrochemical detection of tumor-derived extracellular vesicles on nanointerdigitated electrodes.Nano. Lett.202020282082810.1021/acs.nanolett.9b0274131536360
     [Google Scholar]
  117. SablaturaL.K. BircsakK.M. ShepherdP. BathinaM. QueirozK. Farach-CarsonM.C. KittlesR.A. ConstantinouP.E. SalehA. NavoneN.M. HarringtonD.A. A 3D perfusable platform for in vitro culture of patient derived xenografts.Adv. Healthc. Mater.20231214220143410.1002/adhm.20220143436461624
     [Google Scholar]
  118. SouzaA.G. SilvaI.B.B. Campos-FernandezE. BarcelosL.S. SouzaJ.B. MarangoniK. GoulartL.R. Alonso-GoulartV. Comparative assay of 2D and 3D cell culture models: Proliferation, gene expression and anticancer drug response.Curr. Pharm. Des.201824151689169410.2174/138161282466618040415230429623827
     [Google Scholar]
  119. CarusoG. MussoN. GrassoM. CostantinoA. LazzarinoG. TasceddaF. GulisanoM. LunteS.M. CaraciF. Microfluidics as a novel tool for biological and toxicological assays in drug discovery processes: Focus on microchip electrophoresis.Micromachines202011659310.3390/mi1106059332549277
     [Google Scholar]
  120. ChungJ. IngramP.N. Bersano-BegeyT. YoonE. Traceable clonal culture and chemodrug assay of heterogeneous prostate carcinoma PC3 cells in microfluidic single cell array chips.Biomicrofluidics20148606410310.1063/1.490082325553180
     [Google Scholar]
  121. ChakrabartyS. Quiros-SolanoW.F. KuijtenM.M.P. HaspelsB. MallyaS. LoC.S.Y. OthmanA. SilvestriC. van de StolpeA. GaioN. OdijkH. van de VenM. de RidderC.M.A. van WeerdenW.M. JonkersJ. DekkerR. TanejaN. KanaarR. van GentD.C. A microfluidic cancer-on-chip platform predicts drug response using organotypic tumor slice culture.Cancer Res.202282351052010.1158/0008‑5472.CAN‑21‑079934872965
     [Google Scholar]
  122. LeeJ. ShinD. RohJ.L. Development of an in vitro cell-sheet cancer model for chemotherapeutic screening.Theranostics20188143964397310.7150/thno.2643930083273
     [Google Scholar]
  123. DorrigivD. SimeoneK. CommunalL. Kendall-DupontJ. St-Georges-RobillardA. PéantB. CarmonaE. Mes-MassonA.M. GervaisT. Microdissected tissue vs tissue slices-a comparative study of tumor explant models cultured on-chip and off-chip.Cancers20211316420810.3390/cancers1316420834439362
     [Google Scholar]
  124. KhanalG. HiemstraS. PappasD. Probing hypoxia-induced staurosporine resistance in prostate cancer cells with a microfluidic culture system.Analyst2014139133274328010.1039/C3AN02324A24479128
     [Google Scholar]
  125. AstolfiM. PéantB. LateefM.A. RoussetN. Kendall-DupontJ. CarmonaE. MonetF. SaadF. ProvencherD. Mes-MassonA.M. GervaisT. Micro-dissected tumor tissues on chip: An ex vivo method for drug testing and personalized therapy.Lab. Chip.201616231232510.1039/C5LC01108F26659477
     [Google Scholar]
  126. LuoD. LiuN. ChenY. PengY. YueT. CaoS. LiuY. Microfluidic assessment of drug effects on physical properties of androgen sensitive and non-sensitive prostate cancer cells.Micromachines202112553210.3390/mi1205053234067167
     [Google Scholar]
  127. PandyaH.J. DhingraK. PrabhakarD. ChandrasekarV. NatarajanS.K. VasanA.S. KulkarniA. ShafieeH. A microfluidic platform for drug screening in a 3D cancer microenvironment.Biosens. Bioelectron.20179463264210.1016/j.bios.2017.03.05428371753
     [Google Scholar]
  128. HsiaoA.Y. TorisawaY. TungY.C. SudS. TaichmanR.S. PientaK.J. TakayamaS. Microfluidic system for formation of PC-3 prostate cancer co-culture spheroids.Biomaterials200930163020302710.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.02.04719304321
     [Google Scholar]
  129. BischelL.L. CasavantB.P. YoungP.A. EliceiriK.W. BasuH.S. BeebeD.J. A microfluidic coculture and multiphoton FAD analysis assay provides insight into the influence of the bone microenvironment on prostate cancer cells.Integr. Biol.20146662763510.1039/c3ib40240a24791272
     [Google Scholar]
  130. PereiraB.A. ListerN.L. HashimotoK. TengL. Flandes-IparraguirreM. EderA. Sanchez-HerreroA. NiranjanB. FrydenbergM. PapargirisM.M. LawrenceM.G. TaylorR.A. HutmacherD.W. EllemS.J. RisbridgerG.P. De-Juan-PardoE.M. Tissue engineered human prostate microtissues reveal key role of mast cell-derived tryptase in potentiating cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF)-induced morphometric transition in vitro.Biomaterials2019197728510.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.12.03030641266
     [Google Scholar]
  131. AhangarP. AkouryE. Ramirez Garcia LunaA. NourA. WeberM. RosenzweigD. Nanoporous 3D-printed scaffolds for local doxorubicin delivery in bone metastases secondary to prostate cancer.Materials2018119148510.3390/ma1109148530134523
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cmc/10.2174/0109298673298382240307040239
Loading
3D Bioprinting and Microfluidic-based Devices for Cancer Detection and Drug Treatment: Focus on Prostate Cancer
Curr. Med. Chem. 33, 1503 (2026); https://doi.org/10.2174/0109298673298382240307040239
/content/journals/cmc/10.2174/0109298673298382240307040239
/content/journals/cmc/10.2174/0109298673298382240307040239
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Review Article
Keyword(s): 3D bioprinting; antigen detection; cancer treatment; circulating tumor cells; in vitro models; microfluidics; Prostate cancer

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test