Probabilistic Voxel-Fe model for single cell motility in 3D

BackgroundCells respond to a variety of external stimuli regulated by the environment conditions. Mechanical, chemical and biological factors are of great interest and have been deeply studied. Furthermore, mathematical and computational models have been rapidly growing over the past few years, permitting researches to run complex scenarios saving time and resources. Usually these models focus on specific features of cell migration, making them only suitable to study restricted phenomena.MethodsHere we present a versatile finite element (FE) cell-scale 3D migration model based on probabilities depending in turn on ECM mechanical properties, chemical, fluid and boundary conditions.ResultsWith this approach we are able to capture important outcomes of cell migration such as: velocities, trajectories, cell shape and aspect ratio, cell stress or ECM displacements.ConclusionsThe modular form of the model will allow us to constantly update and redefine it as advancements are made in clarifying how cellular events take place.

[1]  Micah Dembo,et al.  Dynamic changes in traction forces with DC electric field in osteoblast-like cells , 2004, Journal of Cell Science.

[2]  A. Khademhosseini,et al.  Microfluidic fabrication of microengineered hydrogels and their application in tissue engineering. , 2012, Lab on a chip.

[3]  Christian Franck,et al.  Three-Dimensional Traction Force Microscopy: A New Tool for Quantifying Cell-Matrix Interactions , 2011, PloS one.

[4]  Sean P. Palecek,et al.  Integrin-ligand binding properties govern cell migration speed through cell-substratum adhesiveness , 1997, Nature.

[5]  Roger D. Kamm,et al.  Microfluidic Platforms for Studies of Angiogenesis, Cell Migration, and Cell–Cell Interactions , 2010, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[6]  Léa Trichet,et al.  Evidence of a large-scale mechanosensing mechanism for cellular adaptation to substrate stiffness , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  J. Forrester,et al.  Membrane lipids, EGF receptors, and intracellular signals colocalize and are polarized in epithelial cells moving directionally in a physiological electric field , 2002, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[8]  G. J. Pettet,et al.  The migration of cells in multicell tumor spheroids , 2001, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[9]  D. Zhelev,et al.  Controlled pseudopod extension of human neutrophils stimulated with different chemoattractants. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[10]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Migration of tumor cells in 3D matrices is governed by matrix stiffness along with cell-matrix adhesion and proteolysis. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  Kenneth M. Yamada,et al.  Cell migration in 3D matrix. , 2005, Current opinion in cell biology.

[12]  Wesley R. Legant,et al.  Multidimensional traction force microscopy reveals out-of-plane rotational moments about focal adhesions , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Shelly R. Peyton,et al.  Extracellular matrix rigidity governs smooth muscle cell motility in a biphasic fashion , 2005, Journal of cellular physiology.

[14]  Henry C Wong,et al.  Finite element analysis of the effects of focal adhesion mechanical properties and substrate stiffness on cell migration. , 2011, Journal of biomechanics.

[15]  David Swigon,et al.  Continuum Model of Collective Cell Migration in Wound Healing and Colony Expansion , 2022 .

[16]  Wouter-Jan Rappel,et al.  Establishing direction during chemotaxis in eukaryotic cells. , 2002, Biophysical journal.

[17]  S. Linder.  The matrix corroded: podosomes and invadopodia in extracellular matrix degradation. , 2007, Trends in cell biology.

[18]  R D Kamm,et al.  Mechano-sensing and cell migration: a 3D model approach , 2011, Physical biology.

[19]  P. Bar-Yoseph,et al.  Stochastic collective movement of cells and fingering morphology: no maverick cells. , 2009, Biophysical journal.

[20]  Kenneth M. Yamada,et al.  Taking Cell-Matrix Adhesions to the Third Dimension , 2001, Science.

[21]  David Thomas,et al.  The Art in Computer Programming , 2001 .

[22]  Mark A J Chaplain,et al.  Computational modeling of single-cell migration: the leading role of extracellular matrix fibers. , 2012, Biophysical journal.

[23]  Song Li,et al.  Mechanotransduction in endothelial cell migration , 2005, Journal of cellular biochemistry.

[24]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Cell Migration: A Physically Integrated Molecular Process , 1996, Cell.

[25]  P. Friedl,et al.  The biology of cell locomotion within three-dimensional extracellular matrix , 2000, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences CMLS.

[26]  W. Saltzman,et al.  Quantification of human neutrophil motility in three-dimensional collagen gels. Effect of collagen concentration. , 1992, Biophysical journal.

[27]  M. Zaman.  A multiscale probabilisitic framework to model early steps in tumor metastasis. , 2007, Molecular & cellular biomechanics : MCB.

[28]  Marion Ghibaudo,et al.  Rigidity-driven growth and migration of epithelial cells on microstructured anisotropic substrates , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Melody A Swartz,et al.  Autologous chemotaxis as a mechanism of tumor cell homing to lymphatics via interstitial flow and autocrine CCR7 signaling. , 2007, Cancer cell.

[30]  Douglas A Lauffenburger,et al.  Marrow‐Derived stem cell motility in 3D synthetic scaffold is governed by geometry along with adhesivity and stiffness , 2010, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[31]  Casey M. Kraning-Rush,et al.  Cellular Traction Stresses Increase with Increasing Metastatic Potential , 2012, PloS one.

[32]  Kenneth M. Yamada,et al.  Direct comparisons of the morphology, migration, cell adhesions, and actin cytoskeleton of fibroblasts in four different three-dimensional extracellular matrices. , 2011, Tissue engineering. Part A.

[33]  Paul Matsudaira,et al.  Computational model for cell migration in three-dimensional matrices. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[34]  Guillaume Charras,et al.  Blebs lead the way: how to migrate without lamellipodia , 2008, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[35]  M. Gracheva,et al.  A model of fibroblast motility on substrates with different rigidities. , 2010, Biophysical journal.

[36]  R. Bonnecaze,et al.  Extracellular matrix stiffness and architecture govern intracellular rheology in cancer. , 2009, Biophysical journal.

[37]  M. Dembo,et al.  Cell movement is guided by the rigidity of the substrate. , 2000, Biophysical journal.

[38]  C. M. Elliott,et al.  Modelling cell motility and chemotaxis with evolving surface finite elements , 2012, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[39]  M. Dembo,et al.  Stresses at the cell-to-substrate interface during locomotion of fibroblasts. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[40]  Marion Ghibaudo,et al.  Traction forces and rigidity sensing regulate cell functions , 2008 .

[41]  J. Bereiter-Hahn,et al.  Lowering of tumor interstitial fluid pressure reduces tumor cell proliferation in a xenograft tumor model. , 2006, Neoplasia.

[42]  Pascal Silberzan,et al.  Traction forces exerted through N‐cadherin contacts , 2006, Biology of the cell.

[43]  Ulrich S Schwarz,et al.  Physical determinants of cell organization in soft media. , 2005, Medical engineering & physics.

[44]  Douglas A. Lauffenburger,et al.  Understanding Effects of Matrix Protease and Matrix Organization on Directional Persistence and Translational Speed in Three-Dimensional Cell Migration , 2006, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[45]  Ben Fabry,et al.  Single-cell response to stiffness exhibits muscle-like behavior , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[46]  William J. Polacheck,et al.  Interstitial flow influences direction of tumor cell migration through competing mechanisms , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[47]  Kenneth M. Yamada,et al.  Cell interactions with three-dimensional matrices. , 2002, Current opinion in cell biology.