Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24973724›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in cell biology2014

Bioengineering paradigms for cell migration in confined microenvironments.

Kimberly M Stroka, Zhizhan Gu, Sean X Sun, Konstantinos Konstantopoulos

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in cell biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Engineered Models of Confined Cell Migration.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2016
    Review
  17. Interplay of the physical microenvironment, contact guidance, and intracellular signaling in cell decision making.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kimberly M StrokaDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Institute for NanoBioTechnology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Physical Sciences - Oncology Center, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Zhizhan GuDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Institute for NanoBioTechnology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Physical Sciences - Oncology Center, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Sean X SunJohns Hopkins Institute for NanoBioTechnology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Physical Sciences - Oncology Center, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Konstantinos KonstantopoulosDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Institute for NanoBioTechnology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Physical Sciences - Oncology Center, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA. Electronic address: konstant@jhu.edu.

Funding

TRANS NETWORK PROJECTSU54CA143868 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI KONSTANTOPOULOS, KONSTANTINOS · 2009 to 2013
$13.7M
Pancreatic Cancer Cell Mechanics and ImagingR01CA186286 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI KONSTANTOPOULOS, KONSTANTINOS · 2014 to 2018
$2.1M
Role of the physical microenvironment in tumor cell migration and the cell cycleF32CA177756 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI STROKA, KIMBERLY · 2013 to 2014
$93k
NCI NIH HHS F32 CA177756NCI NIH HHS F32-CA177756NCI NIH HHS R01 CA186286NCI NIH HHS R01-CA186286NCI NIH HHS U54 CA143868NCI NIH HHS U54-CA143868
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell migration is a fundamental process underlying diverse (patho)physiological phenomena. The classical understanding of the molecular mechanisms of cell migration has been based on in vitro studies on two-dimensional substrates. More recently, mounting evidence from intravital studies has shown that during metastasis, tumor cells must navigate complex microenvironments in vivo, including narrow, pre-existing microtracks created by anatomical structures. It is becoming apparent that unraveling the mechanisms of confined cell migration in this context requires a multi-disciplinary approach through integration of in vivo and in vitro studies, along with sophisticated bioengineering techniques and mathematical modeling. Here, we highlight such an approach that has led to discovery of a new model for cell migration in confined microenvironments (i.e., the Osmotic Engine Model).

Indexed as

BioengineeringCell MovementAnimalsCell Culture TechniquesHumansModels, BiologicalNeoplasmsTumor Microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID24973724
PMCPMC4354884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.