Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40305554›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Falsifying computational models of endothelial cell network formation through quantitative comparison with in vitro models.

Tessa M Vergroesen, Vincent Vermeulen, Roeland M H Merks

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tessa M VergroesenInstitute of Biology Leiden, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1796-1882
Vincent VermeulenInstitute of Biology Leiden, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-4220-6335
Roeland M H MerksInstitute of Biology Leiden, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6152-687X

Funding

Dutch Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During angiogenesis, endothelial cells expand the vasculature by migrating from existing blood vessels, proliferating and collectively organizing into new capillaries. In vitro and in vivo experimentation is instrumental for identifying the molecular players and cell behaviour that regulate angiogenesis. Alongside experimental work, computational and mathematical models of endothelial cell network formation have helped to analyse if the current molecular and cellular understanding of endothelial cell behaviour is sufficient to explain the formation of endothelial cell networks. As input, the models take (a subset of) the current knowledge or hypotheses of single cell behaviour and capture it into a dynamical, mathematical description. As output, they predict the multicellular behaviour following from the actions of many individual cells, i.e., formation of a vascular-like network. Paradoxically, computational modelling based on different assumptions, i.e., completely different, sometimes non-intersecting sets of observed single cell behaviour, can reproduce the same angiogenesis-like multicellular behaviour, making it practically impossible to decide which, if any, of these models is correct. Here we present dynamical analyses of time-lapses of in vitro endothelial cell network formation experiments and compare these with dynamic analyses of three mathematical models: (1) the cell elongation model; (2) the contact-inhibited chemotaxis model; and (3) the mechanical cell-cell communication model. We extract a variety of dynamical characteristics of endothelial cell network formation using a custom time-lapse video analysis pipeline in ImageJ. We compare the dynamical network characteristics of the in vitro experiments to those of the cellular networks produced by the computational models. We test the response of the in silico dynamical cell network characteristics to changes in cell density and make related changes in the in vitro experiments. Of the three computational models that we have considered, the cell elongation model best captures the remodelling phase of in vitro endothelial cell network formation. Furthermore, in the in vitro model, the final size and number of lacunae in the network are independent of the initial cell density. This observation is also reproduced in the cell elongation model, but not in the other two models that we have considered. Altogether, we present an approach to model validation based on comparisons of time-resolved data and variations of model conditions.

Indexed as

Endothelial CellsModels, BiologicalNeovascularization, PhysiologicCell CommunicationComputational BiologyComputer SimulationHumansHuman Umbilical Vein Endothelial Cells

Identifiers

PMID40305554
PMCPMC12074657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.