Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26613613›Full record

ArticleEuropean biophysics journal : EBJ2016

Substrate elasticity regulates the behavior of human monocyte-derived macrophages.

Katrina M Adlerz, Helim Aranda-Espinoza, Heather N Hayenga

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European biophysics journal : EBJ, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Macrophage-Fibroblast Crosstalk in Kidney Injury: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katrina M AdlerzFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Helim Aranda-EspinozaFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Heather N HayengaDepartment of Bioengineering, The University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA. heather.hayenga@utdallas.edu.
University of Maryland, College Park · USThe University of Texas at Dallas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Macrophages play a key role in atherosclerosis, cancer, and in the response to implanted medical devices. In each of these situations, the mechanical environment of a macrophage can vary from soft to stiff. However, how stiffness affects macrophage behavior remains uncertain. Using substrates of varying stiffness, we show macrophage phenotype and function depends on substrate stiffness. Notably, the cell area increases slightly from a sphere after 18 h on substrates mimicking healthy arterial stiffness (1-5 kPa), whereas macrophages on stiffer substrates (280 kPa-70 GPa) increased in area by nearly eight-fold. Macrophage migration is random regardless of substrate stiffness. The total average track speed was 7.8 ± 0.5 μm/h, with macrophages traveling fastest on the 280-kPa substrate (12.0 ± 0.5 μm/h) and slowest on the 3-kPa substrate (5.0 ± 0.4 μm/h). In addition F-actin organization in macrophages depends on substrate stiffness. On soft substrates, F-actin is spread uniformly throughout the cytoplasm, whereas on stiff substrates F-actin is functionalized into stress fibers. The proliferation rate of macrophages was faster on stiff substrates. Cells plated on the 280-kPa gel had a significantly shorter doubling time than those plated on the softer substrate. However, the ability of macrophages to phagocytose 1-μm particles did not depend on substrate stiffness. In conclusion, the results herein show macrophages are mechanosensitive; they respond to changes in stiffness by modifying their area, migration speed, actin organization, and proliferation rate. These results are important to understanding how macrophages respond in complex mechanical environments such as an atherosclerotic plaque.

Indexed as

ElasticityBiomechanical PhenomenaCell MovementCell ProliferationCytoskeletonHumansMacrophagesMonocytesPhagocytosisMechanobiologyMigrationPhagocytosisProliferationSpreading areaStiffness

Identifiers

PMID26613613
OpenAlexW2254613643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.