ArticlePLoS computational biology2026
Computational insights on the interplay between electrotaxis and mechanotaxis.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. 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.
- Computational models in directed cell migration.Frontiers in cell and developmental 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding how cells migrate in response to external cues has important implications for biology, medicine, and bioengineering. Chemical, mechanical, and electrical signals are the primary drivers of directed cell migration, and each has been extensively studied over the past decades. Among them, chemical cues were the first to be investigated and remain the most widely studied due to their undeniable role in in vivo guidance. Mechanical signals, particularly substrate stiffness gradients, have gained prominence for their ubiquity across cell types and their potential to direct migration. More recently, growing evidence suggests that electrotaxis offers a highly precise and programmable means to guide cell movement. Despite this, these cues are often studied in isolation, whereas in vivo they typically coexist and interact. Using well-established biophysical models, we investigate how mechanical and electrical signals cooperate and how they can be engineered to compete for control over cell migration. Our model shows that an electric field can override and even reverse mechanotaxis. Still, the specific outcomes strongly depend on the cell type or, in other words, on the model parameters that describe how strongly the sensing molecules activate the signaling network. To address this large variability in controlling cell migration, we propose particular steps toward further exploration. To support such future research, we provide a freely available platform for predicting electro-mechanical interactions in cell migration, based on a given cell's sensing and signaling characteristics, which could tailor the mechanical and electrical signals that arise naturally during organ development, cancer invasion, or tissue regeneration.
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.