Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33043017›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2020

Mechanical Cues Affect Migration and Invasion of Cells From Three Different Directions.

Claudia Tanja Mierke

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Changes in Tissue Fluidity Predict Tumor Aggressiveness In Vivo.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Cancer Metastasis: Therapeutic Challenges and Opportunities.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claudia Tanja MierkeFaculty of Physics and Earth Science, Peter Debye Institute of Soft Matter Physics, Biological Physics Division, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Leipzig University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell migration and invasion is a key driving factor for providing essential cellular functions under physiological conditions or the malignant progression of tumors following downward the metastatic cascade. Although there has been plentiful of molecules identified to support the migration and invasion of cells, the mechanical aspects have not yet been explored in a combined and systematic manner. In addition, the cellular environment has been classically and frequently assumed to be homogeneous for reasons of simplicity. However, motility assays have led to various models for migration covering only some aspects and supporting factors that in some cases also include mechanical factors. Instead of specific models, in this review, a more or less holistic model for cell motility in 3D is envisioned covering all these different aspects with a special emphasis on the mechanical cues from a biophysical perspective. After introducing the mechanical aspects of cell migration and invasion and presenting the heterogeneity of extracellular matrices, the three distinct directions of cell motility focusing on the mechanical aspects are presented. These three different directions are as follows: firstly, the commonly used invasion tests using structural and structure-based mechanical environmental signals; secondly, the mechano-invasion assay, in which cells are studied by mechanical forces to migrate and invade; and thirdly, cell mechanics, including cytoskeletal and nuclear mechanics, to influence cell migration and invasion. Since the interaction between the cell and the microenvironment is bi-directional in these assays, these should be accounted in migration and invasion approaches focusing on the mechanical aspects. Beyond this, there is also the interaction between the cytoskeleton of the cell and its other compartments, such as the cell nucleus. In specific, a three-element approach is presented for addressing the effect of mechanics on cell migration and invasion by including the effect of the mechano-phenotype of the cytoskeleton, nucleus and the cell's microenvironment into the analysis. In precise terms, the combination of these three research approaches including experimental techniques seems to be promising for revealing bi-directional impacts of mechanical alterations of the cellular microenvironment on cells and internal mechanical fluctuations or changes of cells on the surroundings. Finally, different approaches are discussed and thereby a model for the broad impact of mechanics on cell migration and invasion is evolved.

Indexed as

cancer cellscell mechanicsconfinementelasticityextracellular matrixinhomogeneitiesstiffnessviscosity

Identifiers

PMID33043017
PMCPMC7527720
OpenAlexW3092355809

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.