Table 1 |.
Comparison of main organoid generation approaches
| Reference | Format | Variability | Applications | Considerations/uniqueness |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eiraku et al.5 | Guided | Low | Genetic disease, drug dosing, drug screening | Low variability is attractive for drug screening; development and metabolomics may be influenced by presence of insulin in some protocols; may not have spontaneous inhibitory neuron development49 |
| Lancaster et al.19 | Unguided | High | Lissencephalies, genetic disease, whole brain development | Spontaneous development of multiple brain regions; high cell diversity, high organoid to organoid variability. Newer adaptations can produce neural oscillations21 |
| Trujillo et al.7 | Guided or ‘semi-guided’ | Medium (Extended Data Fig. 2) | Genetic disease, metabolic disease, population level spontaneous electrical activity, drug dosing/screening | Spontaneous emergence of physiologically relevant oscillatory activity from functional excitatory–inhibitory neuron development; expected tradeoff of efficiency/variability due to semi-guided nature, long-term developmental scale. Can be used only to model cortical-born interneurons, not ganglionic eminence-born interneurons or migration of interneurons to the cortex. Resultant organoids follow the neurodevelopment of the human brain |