Immunotherapies are emerging as promising strategies to cure cancer and extend patients’ survival. Efforts should be focused, however, on the development of preclinical tools better able to predict the therapeutic benefits in individual patients. In this context, the availability of reliable preclinical models capable of recapitulating the tumor milieu while overcoming the limitations of traditional systems is mandatory.


3. Micro-Physiological Systems for Investigating Immune Cell–Tumor Dynamic Interactions
Cancer immunotherapy has shown many signs of progress in recent years, thanks to novel strategies aimed at enhancing the efficacy of immunomodulating agents and their patient-specific approaches. Furthermore, alternative in vitro platforms are in continuous development for overcoming some limitations of traditional preclinical models. As we discussed above, 3D tissue models allow us to better investigate tumor pathways in a tissue-like architecture than in simplistic cell culture monolayers, by introducing physiological barriers that mediate immune system–cancer cell crosstalk. However, the three-dimensionality itself cannot properly reproduce the complexity of the human tissues and organs, where dynamic stimuli (e.g., blood and lymphatic flow mechanical forces) shape the immune cell infiltration and their dynamic interactions with cancer cells. In this context, recent advancements in the realization of immunological tissues-on-chips have increased the relevance of in vitro models, leading to better knowledge of immune cell recruitment, selection, invasion, and activation within the tumor milieu [34,203].
Microfluidics is a rapidly growing technology using narrow channels, ranging in height/width from tens to hundreds of micrometers, to study cell migration by handling small fluid volumes, thus reducing the amounts of reagents and biological materials. Overall, microfluidic assays outperform other in vitro models in terms of physiological relevance because they allow local monitoring of the cellular, physical, and biochemical cues, making them a good compromise between in vivo and other types of in vitro systems [204,205]. They may also permit real-time imaging with fine control on the interplays between different cellular populations growing within the interconnected channels. This enables the investigation of spatiotemporal dynamics similar to those found in the TME, as well as the effects of environmental characteristics on cell behavior such as changes in pH and oxygen levels (i.e., acidification and tumor hypoxia) and cytokine/chemokine gradients [206]. Several studies focused on cancer and immune cell interactions as well as on cell-mediated immunotherapies used microfluidic devices coupled with 3D hydrogel-based models.
Despite the benefits discussed above, some technical and biological limitations still affect these platforms. First, most of them are fabricated with polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) that may cause toxicity due to the progressive release of non-crosslinked oligomers, and the retention of small hydrophobic molecules through adsorption, making some biochemical analyses difficult [204,206,208,212,213,215,220]. Furthermore, although the recovery of cells from the separate compartments of microfluidic devices is feasible, the low number of recovered cells makes it difficult to perform functional and phenotypic analysis [204]. For this reason, most data are derived from imaging analysis. Furthermore, in the case of immune cells loaded in microfluidic tools, monitoring the functional and phenotypic changes occurring over time without interrupting and altering the microfluidic flux is not feasible. Moreover, the clinically relevant size of the tissue models hosted and cultured in such microfluidic devices still represents a challenge. Extended research in properly resembling the ECM complexity within these devices for the establishment of a tumor niche and the co-culture of different immune cell types (MDSCs, Th1 cells, Bregs, eosinophils, etc.) should be carried out [34,204].
Interestingly, at this time, the majority of these microfluidic devices are adopted for co-culturing tumor–immune cells in different compartments, physically separated by a polymeric gel, for evaluating the real-time cell migration under virtual static conditions, similar to the Boyden chamber-based assays [204,206,208,212,213,215,220]. However, these conditions do not properly recapitulate the circulatory flow in the human body, limiting the experience of blood flow-associated forces (e.g., shear stress) that influence the survival, escape, and activation of immune cells during their journey in the vascular network [142,224].
Along this line, the authors of this review are currently involved in the study of the NKmediated cytotoxicity against NB cell-laden hydrogels [23] within the novel fluidic device MIVO (Multi in Vitro Organ System), which is schematically represented in Figure 2b, capable of both mimicking the blood flow circulation in a highly reliable context [225–227], and culturing clinically relevant sized cancer tissues, as previously reported in recent works [226,227].
4. Conclusions and Future Directions
The recent assessment of innovative immunotherapies against cancer led to the urgent need for an increasing number of predictive preclinical models capable of reproducing the key features of the TME and properly testing the efficacy of immunomodulating agents. Up to now, the gold standard still relies on in vitro cell culture monolayers and animal testing, which, over the years, enabled us to take important steps forwards to the knowledge of tumor immunology. However, it is increasingly evident that novel platforms should be realized for overcoming the limitations that affect the traditional settings, which unfortunately often result in ruinous discrepancies between the benefits observed in preclinical and clinical studies.
In the present review, we have provided an overview of 3D in vitro models based on different types of biomaterials more commonly used to study tumor–immune cell interactions, and standard and innovative immunotherapeutic strategies. As discussed, the composition of the TME can play a pivotal role in malignant progression due to the evasion of the immune surveillance. Depending on their own characteristics, which may be more or less suitable for some specific applications, both natural and synthetic polymeric matrices are currently adopted to reproduce the key features of the tumor-surrounding ECM. In general, typical ECM organic components, such as GAGs, proteoglycans, and glycoproteins interact with cancer, stromal, and immune cells and highly impact the hydration and stiffness of the ECM. Thus, to provide cells with such biological signals, bioactive polymers such as Matrigel or chitosan can be selected, while inert polymers such as alginate or PEG need to be functionalized to become biologically active. Other ECM elements, such fibrillary components, greatly impact tumor progression, also representing physical barriers both for tumor and immune cells. Thus, a polymer enriched in fiber elements may represent a good tool to investigate cancer cell invasiveness and metastasis as well as the mechanisms regulating immune cell recruitment in the tumor mass.
It should be taken into consideration that the ECM can be shaped by the action of radio- and chemotherapy. In this context, in a recent study focused on lung cancer, chemotherapyinduced remodeling of the ECM occurred with the pivotal intervention of host T cells which, stimulated by paclitaxel, increased their release of lysyl oxidase, favoring the formation of tumor metastases [228]. It is important to highlight that the ECM composition and stiffness greatly vary among different types of tumors. This should be considered when setting an appropriate 3D model. Indeed, some solid tumors are characterized by a more rigid ECM, thus requiring hydrogels with high stiffness. In this case, an optimal choice may be represented by synthetic polymers that allow finely tuning their composition to reach a proper stiffness. Conversely, other materials such as collagen or chitosan form hydrogels characterized by poor mechanical properties. On the other hand, other malignancies arising, for example, in soft tissues may be modeled with low-stiffness and highly hydrated polymers such as alginate. Therefore, the choice of the most appropriate biomaterial-based model strictly depends on the type of tumor to be addressed and on the experimental aims.
Despite encouraging results, we are still far from the possibility to explore cancer immunotherapeutic approaches in a system that closely resembles the complexity and dynamic of the human body. Microfluidic tools represent a challenging approach in this sense, by introducing dynamical cues and the possibility to culture cells in a highly controllable environment that may help to elucidate the mechanisms exploited by immune cells to infiltrate tumors. Some of the mentioned issues such as the experimental limits of microfluidic devices can be overcome by designing new fluidical platforms that can be adapted to the standard laboratories’ tools commonly used for in vitro cell culture. Along this line, recent emerging technologies have inserted, in the fluidic devices, commercially available trans-wells that can be easily removed from the dynamic circuit and analyzed with conventional techniques. Other strategies take advantages of integrated biosensors able to measure some metabolic parameters and soluble factors, over time, without the interruption of the dynamic culture [229,230]. Nevertheless, such platforms may also remain too simplistic, due to the lack of a realistic vasculature where immune cells can flow and transmigrate through the endothelial wall, reaching the tumor. Moreover, it is important to highlight that most of the studies have based their works on the use of long-term cultured cell lines, known to be remarkably different from primary tumors or immune cells. Future implementations should focus on the use of patient-derived tumors and immune cells with stromal components, eventually in multi-organ on-chip platforms, where the contribution of different organs to immunotherapies can be considered (Figure 2b). The new in vitro 3D preclinical approaches may lead to personalized medicine predicting response to immunotherapies with greater patient benefits.
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/cancers14041013