Migration of tumor cells in 3D matrices is governed by matrix stiffness along with cell-matrix adhesion and proteolysis.

By M. Zaman, Linda M. Trapani, A. L. Sieminski, Drew Mackellar, H. Gong, Roger D. Kamm, A. Wells, Douglas A. Lauffenburger, P. Matsudaira. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006

1,214 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Cell Biology, Oncology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f7b3c66b1189901eb84694c8cd0fcc4f0f43c392

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

In Cell Biology

In Oncology

Citations in the corpus

Modeling tissue morphogenesis and cancer in 3D. (2007, positive): “…many such studies have been performed on cells grown as monolayers, 3D models are likely to provide data with greater physiological relevance for mathematical models of growth, signaling, migration/invasion, and morphogenesis (Hicks et al., 2006; Nelson and Bissell, 2006; Zaman et al., 2006).”
Protease-dependent versus -independent cancer cell invasion programs: three-dimensional amoeboid movement revisited (2009, background): “…cross the basement membrane, a specialized ECM barrier that surrounds or underlies epithelial cells, muscle, nerves, and the endothelium (Wang et al., 2003; Zaman et al., 2006; Gadea et al., 2007; Kitzing et al., 2007; Sahai, 2007; Wolf et al., 2007; Fackler and Grosse, 2008; Rowe and Weiss, 2008).”
A Review of Cell Adhesion Studies for Biomedical and Biological Applications (2015, background): “In contrast to 2D migration, cell migration through a dense 3D network of extracellular matrix proteins is possible only when the cell generates sufficient tractions to overcome the steric hindrance of the surroundings [68].”
One-dimensional topography underlies three-dimensional fibrillar cell migration (2009, background): “For example, the protein concentration of 3D gel matrices affects ligand density, matrix stiffness, and pore size, which can physically impede cells and require activation of proteolytic pathways for migration ( Zaman et al., 2006 ).”
Three-Dimensional Cell Culture Matrices: State of the Art (2008, background): “opens up the spaces in 3D matrices to promote cell migration.(26,131) Hotary et al.”
Matrix Crosslinking Forces Tumor Progression by Enhancing Integrin signaling (2009, background): “LOX-mediated ECM stiffening could also impede cell invasion in the absence of MMP activity (Zaman et al., 2006) reminiscent of highly crosslinked, stiff fibrotic tissues and scars that often never progress to malignancy.”
Deconstructing the third dimension – how 3D culture microenvironments alter cellular cues (2012, background): “…to the fibrous ECM the cells are embedded in, as well as the activation of proteolytic machinery to J o u rn a l o f C e ll S c ie n c e bore into the matrix or activation of mechanisms needed to squeeze through pores (Doyle et al., 2009; Zaman et al., 2006; Raeber et al., 2005; Wolf et al., 2003).”
Dynamic interplay between the collagen scaffold and tumor evolution (2010, background): “Linearized fibers are stiffer than curly ones and the resulting increased ECM stiffness can substantially potentiate growth factor-dependent cell migration [19,37].”