Method Profile

Perfused Human BBB–Glioma Spheroid Comparison

Compare tumor viability and barrier permeability during coupled exposure or transfer of accumulated permeate.

Brain & Neural ModelsOrgan Chips
English illustration of diffusion, carrier transport, transcytosis and efflux across the blood–brain barrier.
Transport routes across the blood–brain barrier. (Armin Kübelbeck (Kuebi); English-language version by Swilson43, CC BY 3.0)

Research Applications

Exploratory assessment of brain-tumor drug delivery, exposure schedule and barrier injury.

Model & Design

Human hCMEC/D3 endothelium with primary astrocytes and pericytes; two diffuse midline glioma models, SF8628 and KISPIDMG-105, formed into separate spheroids.

Experimental Format

32 plastic units per plate with tilt-driven perfusion, a porous membrane and a hanging-drop tumor compartment. Direct spheroid exposure, simultaneous barrier–tumor exposure and sequential permeate transfer are distinct designs.

Model Components

  • Component

    Models and controls

    Description

    Preformed 500-cell tumor spheroids; barrier-cell spheroids for the direct screen; bare PET membrane and untreated cellular-barrier controls. At least two lots of primary supporting cells were used.

  • Component

    Drug conditions and readouts

    Description

    Direct 24-hour cisplatin, doxorubicin, homoharringtonine and docetaxel screen. Chip follow-up used cisplatin/doxorubicin 0.5 or 1 μM and homoharringtonine 10 or 25 nM for 24 hours; ATP viability and fluorescent tracer permeability were measured.

Measurements & Endpoints

  • ATP-based viability and direct-exposure IC50
  • Lucifer Yellow and dextran barrier permeability
  • Response under coupled versus transferred-permeate exposure

Analysis

Compare tumor responses with a bare-membrane reference and with separate spheroids exposed to medium collected after 24-hour barrier permeation. Evaluate post-treatment tracer leakage separately from viability.

Published Evidence

  • Study Sample

    Four to eight spheroids per well-plate condition; nine or eleven chip units per condition. Two tumor models.

    Comparison

    Untreated controls, acellular membrane, direct drug exposure and 24-hour permeation followed by a separate 24-hour tumor exposure.

    Finding

    The cellular barrier reduced apparent drug efficacy. KISPIDMG-105 viability (mean ± standard deviation) after 1 μM doxorubicin was 96.16% ± 8.16% with the barrier versus 64.83% ± 12.67% with bare membrane. Doxorubicin and homoharringtonine increased tracer permeability despite concentrations below barrier-spheroid IC50.

    Interpretation & Limits
    • Transfer and continuous exposure have different concentration–time histories.
    • Drug concentrations were not directly quantified in each compartment; delivery limitation is functionally inferred.
    • Short exposure, simplified barrier and two tumor models lack clinical outcome or human PK validation.
    Study Design

    Primary study comparisons of the stated models, treatments and measurements.

Sources

  1. A perfused, parallelized blood brain barrier-tumor platform for compound permeation and efficacy investigations. Microsystems & Nanoengineering (2026). ↗