MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412795358 · doi:10.3791/68405

Reproducible Manufacturing of SPOT as a High-throughput Scaffold-based Culture Platform

2025· article· en· W4412795358 on OpenAlexaff
Ruonan Cao, Nancy T. Li, Chantelle B Shing, Zoe Kutulakos, Cassidy M Tan, Alison P. McGuigan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThroughputScaffoldComputer scienceComputational biologyBiologyTelecommunicationsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient-derived organoids (PDOs) are becoming increasingly used in the field of cancer research to model tumors. They combine the benefits of in vivo and traditional in vitro models, recapitulating tissue complexity and heterogeneity while still consisting of human cells. The rise of physiologically representative PDO models has prompted a need for devices that enable straightforward analysis of organoid behavior. This protocol explains how to assemble and use the Scaffold-supported Platform for Organoid-based Tissues (SPOT), a high-throughput, three-dimensional (3D) organoid culture device. This platform eliminates the meniscus typically formed by seeded hydrogels to allow accurate, quick imaging, similar to the imaging process for two-dimensional (2D) cultures. As a result, organoids and co-cultures seeded in SPOT can easily be imaged using high-throughput microscopy. Designed for off-the-shelf use, SPOT is accessible to researchers with basic tissue culture experience and is compatible with both manual and automated seeding workflows. This protocol details the fabrication of SPOT in 96- and 384-well formats, including step-by-step instructions for assembly, seeding, quality control, and troubleshooting. While fabrication requires 3-4 h, excluding idle time, multiple plates can be produced simultaneously, improving scalability. By streamlining PDO culture and analysis, SPOT provides a robust tool for high-throughput drug screening and translational cancer research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.390 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207