Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 26;11(12):1065–1083. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v11.i12.1065

Table 1.

Differences in two-dimensional vs three-dimensional cell culture models

Type of culture 2D 3D Ref.
In vivo-like Do not mimic the natural structure of the tissue or tumor mass In vivo tissues and organs are in 3D form Takai et al[102]
Proliferation Tumor cells were grown in monolayer faster than in 3D spheroids Similar to the situation in vivo Lv et al[11]
Polarity Partial polarization More accurate depiction of cell polarization Antoni et al[18]
Cell morphology Sheet-like, flat, and stretched cells in monolayer Form aggregate/spheroid structures Breslin et al[103]
Stiffness High stiffness (approximately 3 × 109 Pa) Low stiffness (> 4000 Pa) Krausz et al[104]
Cell-cell interaction Limited cell-cell and cell-extracellular matrix interactions and no “niches” In vivo-like, proper interactions of cell-cell and cell-extracellular matrix, environmental “niches” are created Lv et al[11], Kang et al[105]
Gene/protein expression Changes in gene expression, mRNA splicing, topology, and biochemistry of cells, often display differential gene/protein levels compared with in vivo models Expression of genes and proteins in vivo is relevantly presented in 3D models Bingel et al[92], Ravi et al[106]
Drug responses Lack of correlation between 2D monolayer cell cultures and human tumors in drug testing. Tumor cells in 3D culture showed drug resistance patterns similar to those observed in patients Lv et al[11], Bingel et al[92]
The culture formation From minutes to a few hours From a few hours to a few days Dai et al[33]
Quality of culture High performance, reproducibility, long-term culture, easy to interpret, simplicity of culture Worse performance and reproducibility, difficult to interpret, cultures are more difficult to carry out Hickman et al[107]
Access to essential compounds Unlimited access to oxygen, nutrients, metabolites, and signaling molecules (in contrast to in vivo) Variable access to oxygen, nutrients, metabolites, and signaling molecules (similar to in vivo) Pampaloni et al[108], Senkowski et al[30]
Cost during maintenance of a culture Cheap, commercially available tests and media More expensive, more time-consuming, fewer commercially available tests Friedrich et al[35]