What are the 3D cell culture matrices you have tried out? Which one is your favorite? What do you use them for (invasion, cyst formation etc)?
Is it the layered collagen or matrigel or the new proprietary/synthetic matrices that are now available.

Our lab has been using Extracel from Glycosan BioSystems. We've been growing hESCs and differentiating them into neurons. It's easy to use and works well. The only downside for us is that it is a new product, so there aren't as many protocols as there are for Matrigel or collagen.

I'm writing an article for The Scientist magazine's Lab Tools section about 3D cell culture. I'm looking for users like samm and jabba -- and anyone else -- who may have challenges and/or solutions to 3D cell culture that they'd be willing to share. If that's you, please send me a private message with your contact information.

Thanks!
Josh

Hi Josh! sorry for the delay -but let me know if you have any particular questions about the technique, or just want to get some impressions on setting up 3D cultures (painful - but when it works, the reward is in the pretty pictures: on the plus side, its way easier than organ cultures!).
-sam

p.s. There have been several post exchanges on the forum on this subject. Those might also help give you some idea about what researchers think of it, and the problems face (the biggest of those, in my opinion, is variation in the matrix, unless you are lucky enough to have cells that grow in a defined matrix like Invitrogen's new alginate based ones)

Has anyone tried 3D Insert from 3D Biotek?

I am doing some market research for a client that is developing a novel 3D cell culture matrix. I am curious if there is a need for more "customized" matrixes that more closely mimmic the ideal in vivo environment for a specific cell. My understanding is that the existing 3D matrices (e.g., Matrigel) provide a more "generic" 3D environment. Are there specific types of cell where a customized 3D environment would be most beneficial? Or cells where generic 3D matrices work fine?

Also, would a tool that could rapidly determine the ideal material and geometry for a specific cell matrix be of value? If so, for what applications?

Thanks for your insights

There are applications where you "customize" the matrix - which is mostly a trial and error process, often involving different ratios of components (e.g. collagen+Matrigel (which itself contains collagen!)) that show some degreeof batch-to-batch variability. Defined matrices that are currently available usually do not work with all cell types - and Murphy's law usually works in this case...

Samm,

From your perspective, why cell types are the current generic 3D cell culture least effective?

Thanks
Deirdre

Deirdre said:

Samm, From your perspective, why cell types are the current generic 3D cell culture least effective? Thanks Deirdre

Hi Deirdre! I'm not sure if i understand your question properly, but to the best of my knowledge, there is no ONE matrix/protocol that I know of, that is suitable for all 3d/primary culture requirements.
Cells/tissues have very different microenvironments - which translates to different requirements for matrices, growth factors, media and culture conditions. Finally, different kinds of assays/cultures with the same tissue/cell type (a common eg would be cell growth and expansion v/s differentiation) can have different requirements. In addition, cells like L Ep TypII can actually digest and regenerate MatriGel/Collagen type matrices to "create" something on their terms!