ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of in vitro migration assays evaluating nintedanib's migration inhibitory effects on melanoma cells.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Anticancer Activity of Microbial Biosurfactants Amphisin and Viscosinamide Against Melanoma Cells.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cell migration plays a central role in tumor progression and metastasis, making it a critical parameter in both cancer biology and therapeutic evaluation. A range of in vitro migration assays are commonly used to assess treatment-induced effects on motility, each with distinct advantages and limitations that must be considered when interpreting results. In this study, we systematically compared four migration assay formats-scratch, zone-exclusion (Z-E), transwell, and single-cell tracking-across five melanoma cell lines treated with the multi-kinase inhibitor nintedanib. Migration inhibition was quantified for each assay, alongside machine learning-based classification to evaluate the discriminative power of assay-derived features in detecting treatment effects. All assays detected inhibitory effects of nintedanib, although response magnitude varied across formats. The transwell assay demonstrated clear inhibition in most lines but was sensitive to morphological changes. Gap closure assay-based migration rankings were influenced by cell size, underscoring the importance of size normalization. Scratch assays exhibited greater variability and potential confounding due to cell damage, while Z-E assays generated more uniform gaps without mechanical disruption. Single-cell tracking enabled high-resolution phenotypic profiling, including cell-specific features such as size and shape, resulting in consistently high classification accuracy. These findings highlight the importance of selecting appropriate assay formats to accurately evaluate migration behavior and the therapeutic efficacy of anti-migratory compounds.
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.