ReviewFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2026
Mechanical observables of cancer invasion: actin, adhesion, and metastatic plasticity.
Review in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer invasion is commonly classified through epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity, yet cells with similar transcriptional states can differ substantially in force production, cytoskeletal organization and collective mobility. We critically examine whether mechanical measurements can supply information that is not already contained in molecular or histopathological classifications. The available evidence does not justify a universal five-dimensional phase space. It supports a more restrained hierarchy: primary measurements (filament orientation, cortical tension, substrate traction, cell and nuclear boundaries, and velocity fields), derived descriptors (polarity, field-specific normalized nematic order, shape and density metrics), and tissue-scale constructions (orientation fields, defects and inferred unjamming states). These levels are coupled and often mathematically dependent. We correct several common conflations. Traction-force microscopy recovers substrate traction through an inverse mechanical model; it does not directly measure intrinsic cortical active stress. Isotropic cortical contractility must be separated from anisotropic nematic stress. Structural actin order must likewise be distinguished from apolar alignment calculated from an optical-flow field; the latter is a dynamic image-derived descriptor, not a direct measurement of filament orientation or active stress. The vertex model threshold
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.