ArticleScientific reports2019
Computational/experimental evaluation of liver metastasis post hepatic injury: interactions with macrophages and transitional ECM.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hepatic Extracellular Matrix and Its Role in the Regulation of Liver Phenotype.Seminars in liver disease · 2024Review
- Article
- Review
- Review
- Mechanism of HBV-positive liver cancer cell exosomal miR-142-3p by inducing ferroptosis of M1 macrophages to promote liver cancer progression.Translational cancer research · 2022Article
- The impact of tumor associated macrophages on tumor biology under the lens of mathematical modelling: A review.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Modeling of tumor response to macrophage and T lymphocyte interactions in the liver metastatic microenvironment.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2021Article
- Impact of tumor-parenchyma biomechanics on liver metastatic progression: a multi-model approach.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- The liver matrisome - looking beyond collagens.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2020Review
- Modeling of Nanotherapy Response as a Function of the Tumor Microenvironment: Focus on Liver Metastasis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The complex interactions between subclinical changes to hepatic extracellular matrix (ECM) in response to injury and tumor-associated macrophage microenvironmental cues facilitating metastatic cell seeding remain poorly understood. This study implements a combined computational modeling and experimental approach to evaluate tumor growth following hepatic injury, focusing on ECM remodeling and interactions with local macrophages. Experiments were performed to determine ECM density and macrophage-associated cytokine levels. Effects of ECM remodeling along with macrophage polarization on tumor growth were evaluated via computational modeling. For primary or metastatic cells in co-culture with macrophages, TNF-α levels were 5× higher with M1 vs. M2 macrophages. Metastatic cell co-culture exhibited 10× higher TNF-α induction than with primary tumor cells. Although TGFβ1 induction was similar between both co-cultures, levels were slightly higher with primary cells in the presence of M1. Simulated metastatic tumors exhibited decreased growth compared to primary tumors, due to high local M1-induced cytotoxicity, even in a highly vascularized microenvironment. Experimental analysis combined with computational modeling may provide insight into interactions between ECM remodeling, macrophage polarization, and liver tumor growth.
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.