AccScience Publishing / IJB / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/IJB026220213
Cite this article
48
Download
1014
Views
Related Info Links
More by Authors Links
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
RESEARCH ARTICLE

A 3D-bioprinted collagen in vitro model of Ewing sarcoma: A feasibility platform for drug screening

Giovanna Desando1† ,  Evelin Pellegrini2† ,  Giovanni D’Atri3,4† ,  Alessandra De Feo2 ,  Marianna Carrabotta2 ,  Brunella Grigolo1 ,  Gina Lisignoli3 ,  Katia Scotlandi2*
Show Less
1 Laboratorio RAMSES per la medicina rigenerativa e personalizzata dell’apparato muscolo-scheletrico, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna , Italia
2 SC Laboratorio di Ricerca Oncologica e Genomica Funzionale (ONCOGEN), IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna , Italia
3 Laboratorio di Immunoreumatologia e Rigenerazione Tissutale, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna , Italia
4 Dipartimento di Chimica, Materiali e Ingegneria Chimica “Giulio Natta”, Politecnico di Milano, Milano , Italia
†These authors contributed equally to this work.
Received: 25 May 2026 | Revised: 11 July 2026 | Accepted: 16 July 2026 | Published online: 16 July 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Ewing sarcoma (EwS) is a rare pediatric malignancy that develops in a physiologically stiff bone environment. Conventional in vitro models fail to faithfully recapitulate the complexity of this microenvironment and therefore have limited translational relevance for preclinical drug screening. In this study, we present a novel three-dimensional (3D) in vitro EwS model using extrusion-based 3D bioprinting with a collagen-based bioink. Rheological and morphometric analyses were performed to establish a printability framework, optimizing bioink formulations and cell densities for effective biofabrication. Alamar Blue assay was used to identify optimal cell densities for the evaluation of cell viability and growth in short- and long-term studies. The optimized formulation (medium:bioink = 1:10) containing TC-71 cells at a final density of 1.4 × 106 cells/mL enabled reproducible biofabrication of structurally stable constructs with improved viscoelastic properties and shape fidelity. The 3D tumor microenvironment was modulated by adjusting hydrogel viscoelasticity, which supported sustained cell growth and remodeling activities as indicated by increased expression of MMP-9 and MMP-13. Under these conditions, viable multicellular spheroids formed within the hydrogel by day 3 and exhibited sustained growth through day 14, enabling both short- and long-term studies. The immunohistochemical analysis confirmed homogeneous cell distribution, and together with the gene expression analysis, recapitulated key tumor features. As proof of concept, treatment with talazoparib, a potent poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, led to reduced proliferation (Ki-67 labeling) and activation of the DNA damage response (γH2AX expression) in the 3D EwS model, demonstrating the feasibility of this platform for drug screening. Comparative analysis with a conventional two-dimensional (2D) model further illustrated the enhanced physiological relevance of the 3D environment. Notably, the analysis of Ki-67 expression revealed that the 3D model exhibited slower proliferation kinetics compared to the 2D culture, with significantly lower Ki-67 levels at day 3 and comparable levels to the 2D control by day 10. Furthermore, treatment with 20 nM talazoparib in the 3D model significantly reduced Ki-67 expression and increased γH2AX positivity by day 10, indicating a delayed DNA damage response relative to the rapid accumulation of DNA damage observed in the 2D cultures. Overall, this study provides a reproducible and biologically relevant 3D-bioprinted EwS model, supporting its application as a predictive preclinical tool for therapeutic evaluation.

Graphical abstract
Keywords
Ewing sarcoma
Bioprinting technology
In vitro 3D-bioprinted tumor model
Collagen hydrogel
Preclinical drug screening
Funding
The work was funded by the European Union - Next Generation EU - NRRP M6C2 - Investment 2.1 Enhancement and strengthening of biomedical research in the NHS, PNRR-POC-2023-12377841, CUP D33C24000480006.
Conflict of interest
Brunella Grigolo is an Editorial Board Member of this journal, but was not in any way involved in the editorial and peer-review process conducted for this paper, directly or indirectly. The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
  1. Grunewald TGP, Cidre-Aranaz F, Surdez D, et al. Ewing sarcoma. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2018;4(1):5. doi: 10.1038/s41572-018-0003-x
  2. Rossig C. Cellular immunotherapy strategies for Ewing sarcoma. Immunotherapy. 2014;6(5):611-621. doi: 10.2217/imt.14.36
  3. Li S, Hou Y, Zhang L, Zhang H, Wang C. Different neutrophil extracellular trap related Ewing sarcoma subtypes exhibit distinct prognosis, and immune microenvironment characteristics. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):24523. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-10277-7
  4. Liu Y, Wu W, Cai C, Zhang H, Shen H, Han Y. Patient-derived xenograft models in cancer therapy: technologies and applications. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2023;8(1):160. doi: 10.1038/s41392-023-01419-2
  5. Gu A, Li J, Li MY, Liu Y. Patient-derived xenograft model in cancer: establishment and applications. MedComm (2020). 2025;6(2):e70059. doi: 10.1002/mco2.70059
  6. Munoz-Garcia J, Jubelin C, Loussouarn A, et al. In vitro three-dimensional cell cultures for bone sarcomas. J Bone Oncol. 2021;30:100379. doi: 10.1016/j.jbo.2021.100379
  7. Galoian K, Bilbao D, Denny C, et al. Targeting cancer stem cells by TPA leads to inhibition of refractory sarcoma and extended overall survival. Mol Ther Oncol. 2024;32(4):200905. doi: 10.1016/j.omton.2024.200905
  8. Marturano-Kruik A, Villasante A, Yaeger K, et al. Biomechanical regulation of drug sensitivity in an engineered model of human tumor. Biomaterials. 2018;150:150-161. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.10.020
  9. Luo Z, Zhou X, Mandal K, et al. Reconstructing the tumor architecture into organoids. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2021;176:113839. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2021.113839
  10. Li K, He Y, Jin X, Jin K, Qian J. Reproducible extracellular matrices for tumor organoid culture: challenges and opportunities. J Transl Med. 2025;23(1):497. doi: 10.1186/s12967-025-06349-x
  11. Bonnet V, Angelidakis E, Sart S, Baroud CN. Microfluidic and organ-on-a-chip approaches to model the tumor microenvironment. Curr Opin Biomed Eng. 2025;35:100606. doi: 10.1016/j.cobme.2025.100606
  12. Fevre R, Mary G, Vertti-Quintero N, et al. Combinatorial drug screening on 3D Ewing sarcoma spheroids using droplet-based microfluidics. iScience. 2023;26(5):106651. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.106651
  13. Kyriakopoulou K, Koutsakis C, Piperigkou Z, Karamanos NK. Recreating the extracellular matrix: novel 3D cell culture platforms in cancer research. FEBS J. 2023;290(22):5238-5247. doi: 10.1111/febs.16778
  14. Ashammakhi N, Ahadian S, Xu C, et al. Bioinks and bioprinting technologies to make heterogeneous and biomimetic tissue constructs. Mater Today Bio. 2019;1:100008. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2019.100008
  15. Valdoz JC, Johnson BC, Jacobs DJ, et al. The ECM: to scaffold, or not to scaffold, that is the question. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(23):12690. doi: 10.3390/ijms222312690
  16. De Cock L, Palubeckaitė I, Bersani F, et al. Establishment of patient-derived 3D in vitro models of sarcomas: literature review and guidelines on behalf of the FORTRESS working group. Neoplasia. 2025;65:101171. doi: 10.1016/j.neo.2025.101171
  17. Benwood C, Chrenek J, Kirsch RL, et al. Natural biomaterials and their use as bioinks for printing tissues. Bioengineering (Basel). 2021;8(2):27. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering8020027
  18. Chen XB, Anvari-Yazdi AF, Duan X, et al. Biomaterials/bioinks and extrusion bioprinting. Bioact Mater. 2023;28:511-536. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.06.006
  19. Zhang Q, Zhou J, Zhi P, et al. 3D printing method for bone tissue engineering scaffold. Med Nov Technol Devices. 2023;17:100205. doi: 10.1016/j.medntd.2022.100205
  20. Stepanovska J, Supova M, Hanzalek K, Broz A, Matejka R. Collagen bioinks for bioprinting: a systematic review of hydrogel properties, bioprinting parameters, protocols, and bioprinted structure characteristics. Biomedicines. 2021;9(9):1137. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines9091137
  21. Marques CF, Diogo GS, Pina S, et al. Collagen-based bioinks for hard tissue engineering applications: a comprehensive review. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2019;30(3):32. doi: 10.1007/s10856-019-6234-x
  22. Amirrah IN, Lokanathan Y, Zulkiflee I, Wee MFMR, Motta A, Fauzi MB. A comprehensive review on collagen type I development of biomaterials for tissue engineering: from biosynthesis to bioscaffold. Biomedicines. 2022;10(9):2307. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10092307
  23. Redzheb M, Sbirkov Y, Valev A, et al. Collagen bioinks redefined: optimizing ionic strength and growth factor delivery for cartilage tissue engineering. Int J Bioprint. 2024;10(6):4566. doi: 10.36922/ijb.4566
  24. Garnett MJ, Edelman EJ, Heidorn SJ, et al. Systematic identification of genomic markers of drug sensitivity in cancer cells. Nature. 2012;483(7391):570-575. doi: 10.1038/nature11005
  25. Collins VJ, Ludwig KR, Nelson AE, et al. Enhancing standard of care chemotherapy efficacy using DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK) inhibition in preclinical models of Ewing sarcoma. Mol Cancer Ther. 2024;23(8):1109-1123. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-23-0641
  26. Pellegrini E, Desando G, Petretta M, et al. A 3D collagen-based bioprinting model to study osteoasarcoma invasiveness and drug response. Polymers. 2022;14:4070. doi: 3390/polym14194070.
  27. Jansen LE, Birch NP, Schiffman JD, Crosby AJ, Peyton SR. Mechanics of intact bone marrow. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;50:299-307. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.06.023
  28. Gómez-Florit M, Pardo A, Domingues RMA, et al. Natural-based hydrogels for tissue engineering applications. Molecules. 2020;25(24):5858. doi: 10.3390/molecules25245858
  29. Blanco-Fernandez B, Rey-Vinolas S, Bagci G, et al. Bioprinting decellularized breast tissue for the development of three-dimensional breast cancer models. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2022;14(26):29467-29482. doi: 10.1021/acsami.2c00920
  30. Saini G, Segaran N, Mayer JL, Saini A, Albadawi H, Oklu R. Applications of 3D bioprinting in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. J Clin Med. 2021;10(21):4966. doi: 10.3390/jcm10214966
  31. McMurtrey RJ. Analytic models of oxygen and nutrient diffusion, metabolism dynamics, and architecture optimization in three-dimensional tissue constructs with applications and insights in cerebral organoids. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2016;22(3):221-249. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEC.2015.0375
  32. Magliaro C, Mattei G, Iacoangeli F, Corti A, Piemonte V, Ahluwalia A. Oxygen consumption characteristics in 3D constructs depend on cell density. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019;7:251. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00251
  33. Schmitz A, Fischer SC, Mattheyer C, Pampaloni F, Stelzer EHK. Multiscale image analysis reveals structural heterogeneity of the cell microenvironment in homotypic spheroids. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):43693. doi: 10.1038/srep43693
  34. Imamura Y, Mukohara T, Shimono Y, et al. Comparison of 2D- and 3D-culture models as drug-testing platforms in breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2015;33(4):1837-1843. doi: 10.3892/or.2015.3767
  35. Kang HG, Jenabi JM, Zhang J, et al. E-cadherin cell-cell adhesion in Ewing tumor cells mediates suppression of anoikis through activation of the ErbB4 tyrosine kinase. Cancer Res. 2007;67(7):3094-3105. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3259
  36. Tollabi M, Poursalehi Z, Mehrafshar P, et al. Insight into the role of integrins and integrins-targeting biomaterials in bone regeneration. Connect Tissue Res. 2024;65(5):343-363. doi: 10.1080/03008207.2024.2396002
  37. Popova NV, Jucker M. The functional role of extracellular matrix proteins in cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(1):238. doi: 10.3390/cancers14010238
  38. Gorthi A, Romero JC, Loranc E, et al. EWS-FLI1 increases transcription to cause R-loops and block BRCA1 repair in Ewing sarcoma. Nature. 2018;555(7696):387-391. doi: 10.1038/nature25748
  39. Choy E, Butrynski JE, Harmon DC, et al. Phase II study of olaparib in patients with refractory Ewing sarcoma following failure of standard chemotherapy. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:813. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-813
  40. Gatz SA, Berlanga P, Le Teuff G, et al. Phase I/II study of the PARP inhibitor olaparib and irinotecan in children and young adults with recurrent/refractory malignancies: arm D of the AcSé-ESMART trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2026;32(7):1210-1223. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-25-3767
  41. Stewart E, Goshorn R, Bradley C, et al. Targeting the DNA repair pathway in Ewing sarcoma. Cell Rep. 2014;9(3):829-841. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.09.028
  42. Fong EL, Lamhamedi-Cherradi SE, Burdett E, et al. Modeling Ewing sarcoma tumors in vitro with 3D scaffolds. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110(16):6500-6505. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1221403110
  43. Wong SK, Yee MMF, Chin KY, Ima-Nirwana S. A review of the application of natural and synthetic scaffolds in bone regeneration. J Funct Biomater. 2023;14(5):286. doi: 10.3390/jfb14050286
  44. Ho YH, Del Toro R, Rivera-Torres J, et al. Remodeling of bone marrow hematopoietic stem cell niches promotes myeloid cell expansion during premature or physiological aging. Cell Stem Cell. 2019;25(3):407-418.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2019.06.007
  45. Donnelly H, Ross E, Xiao Y, et al. Bioengineered niches that recreate physiological extracellular matrix organisation to support long-term haematopoietic stem cells. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):5791. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-50054-0
  46. Shin JW, Mooney DJ. Extracellular matrix stiffness causes systematic variations in proliferation and chemosensitivity in myeloid leukemias. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113(43):12126-12131. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1611338113
Share
Back to top
International Journal of Bioprinting, Electronic ISSN: 2424-8002 Print ISSN: 2424-7723, Published by AccScience Publishing