ArticleMaterials today. Bio2024
From static to dynamic: The influence of mechanotransduction on skin equivalents analyzed by bioimaging and RNAseq.
Article in Materials today. Bio, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An integrated design strategy for structurally stable full-thickness human skin models with regulatory-qualified barrier assessment.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Recent advances in immunocompetent human skin-on-chip models: Construction strategies and biomedical applications.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- Research Progress on Construction Technology of 3D Human Skin Models and Its Application Prospects in Dermatology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Advancing transdermal drug delivery through 4D bioprinting and dynamic skin modelling.Frontiers in drug delivery · 2026Review
- Skin-Brain Axis: neural pathways in acupuncture treatment.Chinese medicine · 2025Review
- 3D bioprinting of skin equivalents: Towards functional wound healing models.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
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
In this study, we explore the impact of mechanical stimuli on skin models using an innovative skin-on-a-chip platform, addressing the limitations of conventional transwell-cultured skin equivalents. This platform facilitates cyclic mechanical stimulation through compression and stretching, combined with automated media perfusion. Our findings, using bioimaging and bulk RNA sequencing, reveal increased expression of Keratin 10 and Keratin 14, indicating enhanced skin differentiation and mechanical integrity. The increase in desmosomes and tight junctions, observed through Claudin-1 and Desmoplakin 1 & 2 analysis, suggests improved keratinocyte differentiation due to mechanical stimulation. Gene expression analyses reveal a nuanced regulatory response, suggesting a potential connection to the Hippo pathway, indicative of a significant cellular reaction to mechanical stimuli. The results show the important influence of mechanical stimulation on skin model integrity and differentiation, demonstrating the potential of our microfluidic platform in advancing skin biology research and pharmaceutical testing.
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.