ArticleBioData mining2025
A graph-theoretic framework for quantitative analysis of angiogenic networks.
Article in BioData mining, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Progress and new challenges in image-based profiling.Molecular systems biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The endothelial tube formation assay is an established in vitro model for evaluating angiogenesis. Although widely used, quantification of angiogenic behavior in such assays remains semi-empirical and often lacks spatial, topological, and structural context. Here, we present a graph-theoretic framework to quantify network morphology, temporal dynamics, and spatial heterogeneity in tube formation assays. We simulated two distinct angiogenic network morphologies using human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) seeded at two densities and imaged at 2, 4, and 18 h post-seeding. Skeletonized images were converted to mathematical graphs from which 11 graph-based metrics were extracted. This framework captured both morphological differences and temporal progression. Sparse networks exhibited significantly higher average node degree (p = 0.00079), clustering coefficient (p = 0.00109), and tortuosity (p = 0.0171), whereas dense networks showed greater node and edges counts (p = 0.00109). Over time, networks evolved from fragmented forms at 2 h to integrated structures at 18 h, as reflected by increased largest component size (p = 0.00216), connectivity index (p = 0.00216), and efficiency (p = 0.0152). ROC AUC analysis revealed that metrics such as average degree (AUC = 0.98) and clustering coefficient (AUC = 0.96) effectively distinguished between sparse and dense morphologies, while component-based metrics perfectly separated 2- and 18-hour networks (AUC = 1.00). Radial zone analysis revealed that vascular distribution becomes more compartmentalized over time, with increasing standard deviation and coefficient of variation. This approach provides a sensitive and scalable method for quantifying angiogenic dynamics, offering insight into both therapeutic efficacy and disease-related vascular remodeling.
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.