ArticleBiophysical journal2025
Probabilistic analysis of spatial viscoelastic cues in 3D cell culture using magnetic microrheometry.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microscale Mechanical Cues in Hydrogels: Engineering Strategies to Modulate Cell Fates in Three Dimensions.Cell biomaterials · 2026Article
- Materials and measurement in mechanobiology.Biophysical journal · 2025Article
- Revisiting the biophysical aspects of extracellular-matrix-mimicking hydrogels: what cells seeBiomaterials science · 2025Review
- Ex Vivo Preconditioning as a Useful Tool for Modification of the Extracellular Matrix of Multipotent Mesenchymal Stromal Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast tumors are typically surrounded by extracellular matrix (ECM), which is heterogeneous, not just structurally but also mechanically. Conventional rheometry is inadequate for describing cell-size-level spatial differences in ECM mechanics that are evident at micrometer scales. Optical tweezers and passive microrheometry provide a microscale resolution for the purpose but are incapable of measuring ECM viscoelasticity (the liquid-like viscous and solid-like elastic characteristics) at stiffness levels as found in breast tumor biopsies. Magnetic microrheometry records data on varying microscale viscoelasticity within 3D ECM-mimicking materials up to the biopsy-relevant stiffness. However, the measurement probe-based microrheometry data has limitations in spatial resolution. Here, we present a probabilistic modeling method-providing analysis of sparse, probe-based spatial information on microscale viscoelasticity in ECM obtained from magnetic microrheometry-in two parts. First, we validate the method's applicability for analysis of a controlled stiffness difference, based on two collagen type 1 concentrations in one sample, showing a detectable stiffness gradient in the interface of the changing concentrations. Second, we used the method to quantify and visualize differences in viscoelasticity within 3D cell cultures containing breast-cancer-associated fibroblasts, and collagen type 1 (both typically present in the tumor ECM). The fibroblasts' presence stiffens the collagen material, which aligns with previous research. Importantly, we provide probabilistic quantification of related spatial heterogeneity differences in viscoelasticity recorded by magnetic microrheometry, for the first time. The fibroblasts culturing leads to an initially higher spatial heterogeneity in the collagen stiffness. In summary, this method reports on enhanced spatial mapping of viscoelasticity in breast cancer 3D cultures, with the future potential for matching of spatial viscoelasticity distribution in the 3D cultures with the one in biopsies.
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.