Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 14, 2026

Heterogeneity Mapping of Protein Expression in Tumors using Quantitative Immunofluorescence
Published on: October 25, 2011
Micrometastatic Drug Screening Platform Shows Heterogeneous Response to MAP Chemotherapy in Osteosarcoma Cell Lines
Christopher D Collier1, Emily C Wirtz, Gabrielle J Knafler
1C. D. Collier, E. C. Wirtz, G. J. Knafler, W. Z. Morris, P. J. Getty, E. M. Greenfield, Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA P. J. Getty, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA E. M. Greenfield, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Background:
Approximately 80% of patients with osteosarcoma harbor subclinical pulmonary micrometastases at diagnosis. Conventional chemotherapy includes methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MAP); however, this regimen and thus overall survival (60%-70%) have remained largely unchanged for 30 years. It therefore is necessary to identify novel therapeutics targeting the metastatic progression of osteosarcoma.
Questions/Purposes:
This laboratory study explored application of osteosarcoma spheroids (sarcospheres) for drug screening with the following purposes: (1) to characterize sarcosphere size; (2) to establish accurate measurement of sarcosphere growth; (3) to confirm sarcosphere uniformity; and (4) to apply the platform to evaluate MAP chemotherapy.
Methods:
Sarcospheres were first characterized to establish accurate measurement of sarcosphere growth and uniform production. The refined platform then was applied to evaluate MAP chemotherapy to validate its use in drug screening. Sarcospheres were generated from highly metastatic human cell lines (143B, MG-63.3, and LM7) by centrifugation to form three-dimensional aggregates modeling micrometastases. Sarcospheres were matured for 24 hours and then incubated with or without drug from Days 0 to 2. Size was assessed by diameter and volume using brightfield microscopy. Growth was measured by volume and resazurin reduction in viable cells. Sarcosphere uniformity was assessed by diameter and resazurin reduction at Day 0 and the Z' factor, a measure of assay suitability for high-throughput screening, was calculated at Day 2. Sarcospheres were treated with individual MAP agents (0 to 1000 μmol/L) to determine concentrations at which 50% of growth from Days 0 to 2 was inhibited (GIC50). Cell lines resistant to MAP in sarcospheres were treated in monolayer for comparison.
Results:
Sarcosphere diameter and growth from Days 0 to 2 were quantitatively dependent on the number of cells seeded and the cell line used. Accurate measurement of growth occurred after resazurin incubation for 6 hours, without EDTA-mediated permeabilization, and was correlated with the number of cells seeded and sarcosphere volume for 143B (Spearman's r: 0.98; p < 0.001), MG-63.3 (0.99; p < 0.001), and LM7 (0.98; p < 0.001). Sarcospheres met established criteria for screening applications as mean Z' factors were greater than 0.5 for all cell lines. Response to MAP therapy was cell line-dependent, because MG-63.3 and LM7 sarcospheres exhibited greater than 2000-fold resistance to methotrexate (GIC50 = 88 ± 36 μmol/L and 174 ± 16 μmol/L, respectively) compared with the 143B cell line (GIC50 = 0.04 ± 0.01 μmol/L; p < 0.001 for MG-63.3 and LM7). MG-63.3 monolayers were more sensitive to methotrexate (GIC50 = 0.01 ± 0.01 μmol/L; p < 0.001) than MG-63.3 sarcospheres, whereas LM7 monolayers remained chemoresistent (GIC50 not reached).
Conclusions:
This study developed and validated a drug screening platform for progression of osteosarcoma micrometastases. It also highlights heterogeneity among osteosarcoma cell lines. These findings appear to reflect known patient-to-patient heterogeneity and underscore the importance of evaluating multiple tumor models when testing drugs for the treatment of osteosarcoma.
Clinical Relevance:
The described approach is a promising starting point for drug screening in osteosarcoma because it is tailored to evaluate micrometastatic disease. A reliable and rapid method to identify novel therapeutics is critical to improve stagnant outcomes for patients with osteosarcoma.
More Related Videos
04:25Intratibial Osteosarcoma Cell Injection to Generate Orthotopic Osteosarcoma and Lung Metastasis Mouse Models
Published on: October 28, 2021
11:34Building Up a High-throughput Screening Platform to Assess the Heterogeneity of HER2 Gene Amplification in Breast Cancers
Published on: December 5, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Cell Lines
Factors Affecting Drug Response: Overview
Chronopharmacokinetics: Circadian Rhythms and Influence on Drug Response
The time of drug administration is an important factor to consider, as it can influence the toxic dose of a drug. For example, a study conducted by Prins et al. in 1997 examined the effects of the timing of...
Lossless Lines
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Cannabinoids
Two synthetic agonists of THC,...
Lossy Lines and Overvoltages
Attenuation
When constant series resistance and shunt conductance are present, voltage and current equations are modified. The propagation constant indicates that voltage and current waves consist of both forward and backward traveling components. These waves attenuate as they propagate, with the attenuation factor related to the resistance and conductance. In a...