ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2025
Dynamics of spindle assembly and position checkpoints: Integrating molecular mechanisms with computational models.
Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delayed Signaling in Mitotic Checkpoints: Biological Mechanisms and Modeling Perspectives.Biology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in mitotic checkpoint modeling: transforming our understanding of cellular division through machine learning and predictive biology.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Cell Population Dynamics Informed by Cell-Cycle Regulation: A Deterministic Modeling Toolkit.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Review
- A minimal deterministic model reveals integration of spindle assembly and position checkpoints in mitosis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mitotic checkpoints orchestrate cell division through intricate molecular networks that ensure genomic stability. While experimental research has uncovered key aspects of checkpoint function, the complexity of protein interactions and spatial dynamics necessitates computational modeling for a deeper, system-level understanding. This review explores mathematical frameworks-from ordinary differential equations to stochastic simulations, which reveal checkpoint dynamics across multiple scales, encompassing models ranging from simple protein interactions to whole-system simulations with thousands of parameters. These approaches have elucidated fundamental properties, including bistable switches driving spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) activation, spatial organization principles underlying spindle position checkpoint (SPOC) signaling, and critical system-level features ensuring checkpoint robustness. This study evaluates diverse modeling approaches, from rule-based models to chemical organization theory, highlighting their successful application in predicting protein localization patterns and checkpoint response dynamics validated through live-cell imaging. Contemporary challenges persist in integrating spatial and temporal scales, refining parameter estimation, and enhancing spatial modeling fidelity. However, recent advances in single-molecule imaging, data-driven algorithms, and machine learning techniques, particularly deep learning for parameter optimization, present transformative opportunities for improving model accuracy and predictive power. By bridging molecular mechanisms with system-level behaviors through validated computational frameworks, this review offers a comprehensive perspective on the mathematical modeling of cell cycle control, with practical implications for cancer research and therapeutic development.
Indexed as
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.