ArticleBulletin of mathematical biology2023
Minimal Morphoelastic Models of Solid Tumour Spheroids: A Tutorial.
Article in Bulletin of mathematical biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pattern Formation as a Resilience Mechanism in Cancer Immunotherapy.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2025Article
- Surface tension-driven boundary growth in tumour spheroids.Interface focus · 2025Article
- Modelling Volumetric Growth in Soft Solids via Residual Stress.Journal Of Elasticity · 2025Article
- Cancer cell sedimentation in 3D cultures reveals active migration regulated by self-generated gradients and adhesion sites.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Morphological Stability for in silico Models of Avascular Tumors.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Tumour spheroids have been the focus of a variety of mathematical models, ranging from Greenspan's classical study of the 1970 s through to contemporary agent-based models. Of the many factors that regulate spheroid growth, mechanical effects are perhaps some of the least studied, both theoretically and experimentally, though experimental enquiry has established their significance to tumour growth dynamics. In this tutorial, we formulate a hierarchy of mathematical models of increasing complexity to explore the role of mechanics in spheroid growth, all the while seeking to retain desirable simplicity and analytical tractability. Beginning with the theory of morphoelasticity, which combines solid mechanics and growth, we successively refine our assumptions to develop a somewhat minimal model of mechanically regulated spheroid growth that is free from many unphysical and undesirable behaviours. In doing so, we will see how iterating upon simple models can provide rigorous guarantees of emergent behaviour, which are often precluded by existing, more complex modelling approaches. Perhaps surprisingly, we also demonstrate that the final model considered in this tutorial agrees favourably with classical experimental results, highlighting the potential for simple models to provide mechanistic insight whilst also serving as mathematical examples.
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.