ArticlePloS one2017
Mechanical characterization of human brain tumors from patients and comparison to potential surgical phantoms.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
65 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of the make-up and properties of in vitro models of the healthy and diseased blood-brain barrier.Nature biomedical engineering · 2025Pooled it
- Mechanical memory as a metastatic compass: a comparative framework for understanding organotropism through biophysical priming.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2026Review
- Mechanical fingerprints in breast cancer research: A multimodal experimental approach.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2026Article
- Tuning hydrogel properties and Schwann cell behavior through microchannel size control in magnetically templated hydrogels.Biomaterials science · 2026Article
- Review
- Wide-field and non-invasive imaging of brain tumours with scattered light techniques.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Neurosurgical Robot for MRI-Guided Intratumoral Therapeutic Delivery.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2026Article
- An integrated single-cell lung cancer atlas reveals distinct fibroblast phenotypes between adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinomas.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- A mechanobiology-driven cell-derived ECM bioink for engineering 3D glioblastoma tumor microenvironment models.Theranostics · 2026Article
- Mechanical characterization of brain tissue: experimental techniques, human testing considerations, and perspectives.Acta biomaterialia · 2025Review
- Design, Computational Assessment, and Experimental Characterization of a Self-Assembling Peptide Hydrogel.ACS applied bio materials · 2025Article
- Towards a Steerable Neurosurgical Robot for Debulking of Brain Mass Lesions.IEEE robotics and automation letters · 2025Article
- Article
- Type III Collagen Regulates Matrix Architecture and Mechanosensing during Wound Healing.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2025Article
- Glioblastoma drives protease-independent extracellular matrix invasion of microglia.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- A method for mimicking tumour tissue in brain ex-vivo ultrasound for research application and clinical training.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- From Synthesis to Solutions: Hydrogels' Impact on the Biomedical Landscape.Current pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2025Review
- Mechanical signatures in cancer metastasis.npj biological physics and mechanics · 2025Review
- 3DFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Heterogeneous Mechanical Stress and Interstitial Fluid Flow Predictions Derived from DCE-MRI for Rat U251N Orthotopic Gliomas.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While mechanical properties of the brain have been investigated thoroughly, the mechanical properties of human brain tumors rarely have been directly quantified due to the complexities of acquiring human tissue. Quantifying the mechanical properties of brain tumors is a necessary prerequisite, though, to identify appropriate materials for surgical tool testing and to define target parameters for cell biology and tissue engineering applications. Since characterization methods vary widely for soft biological and synthetic materials, here, we have developed a characterization method compatible with abnormally shaped human brain tumors, mouse tumors, animal tissue and common hydrogels, which enables direct comparison among samples. Samples were tested using a custom-built millimeter-scale indenter, and resulting force-displacement data is analyzed to quantify the steady-state modulus of each sample. We have directly quantified the quasi-static mechanical properties of human brain tumors with effective moduli ranging from 0.17-16.06 kPa for various pathologies. Of the readily available and inexpensive animal tissues tested, chicken liver (steady-state modulus 0.44 ± 0.13 kPa) has similar mechanical properties to normal human brain tissue while chicken crassus gizzard muscle (steady-state modulus 3.00 ± 0.65 kPa) has similar mechanical properties to human brain tumors. Other materials frequently used to mimic brain tissue in mechanical tests, like ballistic gel and chicken breast, were found to be significantly stiffer than both normal and diseased brain tissue. We have directly compared quasi-static properties of brain tissue, brain tumors, and common mechanical surrogates, though additional tests would be required to determine more complex constitutive models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.