Back

From Patient to Tumor Organoid: Culture Protocol Choice Controls Glioblastoma Tumor Architecture and Identity

Slovackova, J.; Bernatik, O.; Cimborova, K.; Barak, M.; Hendrych, M.; Kocourkova, K.; Sulcova, M.; Olha, J.; Amruz Cerna, K.; Hodny, Z.; Jancalek, R.; Bohaciakova, D.

2026-05-01 cancer biology
10.64898/2026.04.28.721493 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPatient-derived tumor organoids are widely used in cancer research, yet the biological impact of tissue processing during model generation remains unclear. Fragment-based and dissociation-based approaches are commonly assumed to trade fidelity for uniformity, but their molecular consequences remain incompletely defined. MethodsWe performed a proteome-wide comparison of fragment-based (CUT) and dissociation-based (DIS) glioblastoma organoid protocols using quantitative mass spectrometry. Organoids from multiple patient tumors were cultured under growth factor-free or growth factor-supplemented conditions and compared with matched primary tissue. ResultsBoth protocols produced technically robust glioblastoma organoids when maintained in their native media. However, CUT organoids matched the reproducibility of DIS cultures while preserving a broader extracellular matrix repertoire and networks linked to collagen assembly, vascular support, and cell-matrix signaling. DIS cultures were biased toward exogenous basement membrane components and proliferative, growth factor-responsive states. Across tumors, CUT organoids consistently showed greater proteomic similarity to matched primary tissue, retaining neural, glial, stromal, and extracellular features largely absent from DIS models. ConclusionsFragment-based glioblastoma organoids can be both reproducible and biologically faithful. Tissue dissociation acts as a major perturbation that reshapes extracellular matrix organization, cellular states, and tumor identity, making protocol choice a critical determinant of model fidelity and translational relevance.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
2
Neuro-Oncology
30 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.0%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.5%
4
Laboratory Investigation
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
5
Neoplasia
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 28%
4.3%
7
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.7%
8
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.7%
9
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
10
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
50% of probability mass above
11
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
12
Cancer Research
116 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
Acta Neuropathologica Communications
81 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
14
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.4%
16
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.4%
17
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
18
The American Journal of Pathology
31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
19
The Journal of Pathology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
20
Cancer Research Communications
46 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
21
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Nature Protocols
30 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
23
Bioengineering & Translational Medicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
24
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
26
Clinical Proteomics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
27
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 57%
0.8%
28
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
29
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%