ArticlePhysical review. E2022
Picking winners in cell-cell collisions: Wetting, speed, and contact.
Article in Physical review. E, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Confinement, Jamming, and Adhesion in Cancer Cells Dissociating from a Collectively Invading Strand.PRX life · 2025Article
- Deposited footprints let cells switch between confined, oscillatory, and exploratory migration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Limits on the accuracy of contact inhibition of locomotion.Physical review. E · 2024Article
- The Role of Mechanotransduction in Contact Inhibition of Locomotion and Proliferation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Migration and division in cell monolayers on substrates with topological defects.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Groups of eukaryotic cells can coordinate their crawling motion to follow cues more effectively, stay together, or invade new areas. This collective cell migration depends on cell-cell interactions, which are often studied by colliding pairs of cells together. Can the outcome of these collisions be predicted? Recent experiments on trains of colliding epithelial cells suggest that cells with a smaller contact angle to the surface or larger speeds are more likely to maintain their direction ("win") upon collision. When should we expect shape or speed to correlate with the outcome of a collision? To investigate this question, we build a model for two-cell collisions within the phase field framework, which allows for cell shape changes. We can reproduce the observation that cells with high speed and small contact angles are more likely to win with two different assumptions for how cells interact: (1) velocity aligning, in which we hypothesize that cells sense their own velocity and align to it over a finite timescale, and (2) front-front contact repolarization, where cells polarize away from cell-cell contact, akin to contact inhibition of locomotion. Surprisingly, though we simulate collisions between cells with widely varying properties, in each case, the probability of a cell winning is completely captured by a single summary variable: its relative speed (in the velocity-aligning model) or its relative contact angle (in the contact repolarization model). Both models are currently consistent with reported experimental results, but they can be distinguished by varying cell contact angle and speed through orthogonal perturbations.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.