Junghyun Kim1, Sewoon Han1, Andy Lei2, Masaru Miyano3, Jessica Bloom3, Vasudha Srivastava4, Martha M Stampfer5, Zev J Gartner4,6, Mark A LaBarge3,5, Lydia L Sohn1,6. 1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA. 2. Department of Bioengineering, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA. 3. Department of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA. 4. Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA. 5. Biological Systems and Engineering Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, California, USA. 6. Graduate Program in Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley, and University of California, San Francisco, Berkeley, California, USA.
Abstract
The mechanical properties of cells change with their differentiation, chronological age, and malignant progression. Consequently, these properties may be useful label-free biomarkers of various functional or clinically relevant cell states. Here, we demonstrate mechano-node-pore sensing (mechano-NPS), a multi-parametric single-cell-analysis method that utilizes a four-terminal measurement of the current across a microfluidic channel to quantify simultaneously cell diameter, resistance to compressive deformation, transverse deformation under constant strain, and recovery time after deformation. We define a new parameter, the whole-cell deformability index (wCDI), which provides a quantitative mechanical metric of the resistance to compressive deformation that can be used to discriminate among different cell types. The wCDI and the transverse deformation under constant strain show malignant MCF-7 and A549 cell lines are mechanically distinct from non-malignant, MCF-10A and BEAS-2B cell lines, and distinguishes between cells treated or untreated with cytoskeleton-perturbing small molecules. We categorize cell recovery time, ΔTr, as instantaneous (ΔTr ~ 0 ms), transient (ΔTr ≤ 40ms), or prolonged (ΔTr > 40ms), and show that the composition of recovery types, which is a consequence of changes in cytoskeletal organization, correlates with cellular transformation. Through the wCDI and cell-recovery time, mechano-NPS discriminates between sub-lineages of normal primary human mammary epithelial cells with accuracy comparable to flow cytometry, but without antibody labeling. Mechano-NPS identifies mechanical phenotypes that distinguishes lineage, chronological age, and stage of malignant progression in human epithelial cells.
The mechanical properties of cells change with their differentiation, chronological age, and malignant progression. Consequently, these properties may be useful label-free biomarkers of various functional or clinically relevant cell states. Here, we demonstrate mechano-node-pore sensing (mechano-NPS), a multi-parametric single-cell-analysis method that utilizes a four-terminal measurement of the current across a microfluidic channel to quantify simultaneously cell diameter, resistance to compressive deformation, transverse deformation under constant strain, and recovery time after deformation. We define a new parameter, the whole-cell deformability index (wCDI), which provides a quantitative mechanical metric of the resistance to compressive deformation that can be used to discriminate among different cell types. The wCDI and the transverse deformation under constant strain show malignant MCF-7 and A549 cell lines are mechanically distinct from non-malignant, MCF-10A and BEAS-2B cell lines, and distinguishes between cells treated or untreated with cytoskeleton-perturbing small molecules. We categorize cell recovery time, ΔTr, as instantaneous (ΔTr ~ 0 ms), transient (ΔTr ≤ 40ms), or prolonged (ΔTr > 40ms), and show that the composition of recovery types, which is a consequence of changes in cytoskeletal organization, correlates with cellular transformation. Through the wCDI and cell-recovery time, mechano-NPS discriminates between sub-lineages of normal primary human mammary epithelial cells with accuracy comparable to flow cytometry, but without antibody labeling. Mechano-NPS identifies mechanical phenotypes that distinguishes lineage, chronological age, and stage of malignant progression in human epithelial cells.
Cells derive their mechanical properties from the structure and
dynamics of their intracellular components, including the cytoskeleton, cell
membrane, nucleus, and other organelles—all of which, in turn, emerge from cell
type-specific genetic, epigenetic, and biochemical processes. The ability to
identify differences within a population of one cell type or different cells among
heterogeneous populations, or to detect changes due to disease or environmental
interactions all based on cellular mechanical properties has potentially important
implications for cell and tissue biology and clinical metrics. As examples,
metastatic potential[1,2],
cell-cycle[3,4],
differentiation state[5-10],
the outcome of tissue self-organization[11], and infection with intracellular
pathogens[12,13]
have all been shown to correlate with changes in cellular. Even the process of aging
has been shown to affect the ability of cells within the vascular system and
musculoskeletal system to recover from mechanical
deformation[14]. Thus, methods to measure multiple cellular
mechanical properties rapidly and accurately have tremendous potential as label-free
research tools and diagnostics.Atomic-force microscopy (AFM)[15-17] and micropipette
aspiration[18,19]
are the gold standard for performing mechanical measurements on cells. These methods
provide controlled loading conditions (for example, stress relaxation and creep
indentation) and quantify such cellular properties as elastic modulus and cortical
tension. They are, however, burdened by slow throughput, capable of analyzing only
just a few cells per hour[7,20],
although recent adaptations of both methods have demonstrated higher throughput via
more efficient analysis[21,22].
Likewise, optical tweezers[23,24]
and microplate rheometery[25]—two other well-established methods to measure
cellular mechanical properties—also suffer from low throughput. Given these
drawbacks, a number of microfluidic platforms have consequently been developed,
including hydrodynamic stretching cytometry[26-28], suspended microchannel resonators
(SMR)[29],
and real-time deformability cytometry (RT-DC)[30], to name only a few. Each of
these methods, through optical imaging or measuring changes in resonant frequencies,
can analyze populations of cells in a relatively short time (for example,
2000–65 000 cells per for hydrodynamic stretching cytometry[26-28], 30 cells per s for SMR[29], and 100 cells per s for
RT-DC[30]). To identify specific cell types, these methods
most often focus on correlating cell size or mass with a specific mechanical
property. For example, hydrodynamic stretching cytometry and RT-DC compare cellular
deformability with cell size, and SMR determines the transit time of cells through a
narrow channel with respect to cell mass. Populations of cells are complex with
respect to the continua of cell states that are represented within, and as such,
multiple biophysical parameters are necessary to deconvolve and identify complex
cellular mixtures. Recently, Masaeli et
al.[31] and Lin et
al.[31,32]
have reported using deformability cytometry to measure multiple parameters, such as
cell size, morphology, and relaxation rate, while cells undergo deformation. In so
doing, they were able to identify different cellular states associated with
pluripotent and neural stem-cell differentiation, respectively. While this
achievement emphasizes the need for measuring multiple biophysical parameters to
identify specific cell types, Masaeli et
al.[31] and Lin et
al.[31,32]
focus on defining cellular phenotypes only while cells undergo deformation. Since
overall recovery of a cell once released from deformation plays significant roles in
cellular migration processes such as cancer metastasis[33] and in providing a protective
mechanism of cells against mechanical damage[34-36], it is imperative for mechano-phenotyping
platforms to have a temporal window sufficient enough to analyze the recovery that a
cell undergoes after deformation.Here, we describe a novel microfluidic platform called
‘mechano-Node-Pore Sensing’ (mechano-NPS). Mechano-NPS involves integrating a
node-pore sensor[37,38]
with a contraction channel and performing a four-terminal measurement of the current
across the integrated microfluidic channel to quantify four biophysical properties
of a single cell, simultaneously: diameter, resistance to compressive deformation,
transverse deformation, and recovery from deformation. This electronic-based method
of multi-dimensional mechanical phenotyping provides the means to use these
biophysical parameters as label-free biomarkers for identification and
differentiation among cell types and, uniquely, to determine the effects of
chronological age and malignant progression on cell elasticity and recovery from
deformation. Mechano-NPS distinguishes malignant from non-malignant immortal
epithelial cells and measures deformability changes in the cytoskeleton. In
addition, mechano-NPS can discriminate between sub-lineages and among chronological
age groups of primary normal human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs) based solely on
their mechanical properties. Mechano-NPS represents an efficient, simple, and direct
means to quantify multiple mechanical properties of single cells in heterogeneous
populations.
Materials and methods
Experimental design
The platform consists of a 30 μm-high microfluidic channel embedded
in a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) mold bonded to a glass substrate with pre-defined
platinum (Pt) electrodes and gold (Au) contact pads (Figure 1a). The central part of the channel, which we refer to as
the ‘contraction channel’, is long (2055 μm) and narrow (10 or 12 μm-wide) and
flanked on either side by a series of nodes and pores that are 85 and 25 μm wide,
respectively (Figure 1a, inset). The
length of the contraction channel was chosen to provide sufficient time (~30 ms)
over which a cell experiences constant applied strain. The node and pore
dimensions were chosen for sufficient signal-to noise ratios. Given the
flexibility and ease of device design and fabrication, different contraction
channel lengths and node and pore dimensions could be employed. Filters that are
25 μm in width (the width chosen based on the size range of cells measured in
these studies, aproximately 15–20 μm in diameter) are included at the entrance of
the microfluidic channel in order to remove cellular clusters that may otherwise
clog the device. Applying a constant DC voltage (1 V) across the channel, we
employ a four-terminal measurement technique[37-40] to measure the current pulses caused by cells
transiting across the microfluidic channel when a non-pulsatile pressure of
~21 kPa (determined by a commercial pressure gauge, SSI Technologies) is utilized
(Figure 1b and Supplementary Figure S1). After low-pass filtering
all current versus time data, we employ custom-written software to extract both
the magnitude and duration of each current sub-pulse (ΔInp, ΔIc, ΔTcont, and ΔTr in Figure
1b) (Supplementary Figure
S2).
Figure 1
Principle of mechanical phenotyping via mechano-NPS. (a) A photographic image of the microfluidic
platform. The scale bar corresponds to 4 mm. Red-dashed box shows a
close-up view of the entire microfluidic channel. The microfluidic channel
(pore) is segmented by nodes and a contraction channel. Two electrodes at
both ends of the channel apply a constant voltage (1 V), and two inner
electrodes measure the change of current across the channel. The regions
where free-cell diameter, deformed diameter, and cell recovery are
measured are as indicated. (b) Expected
current pulse generated by a cell transiting the microfluidic channel.
I, ΔInp, ΔIc, and ΔIr correspond to the baseline current
and the current drop by a cell transiting a node-pore, a contraction
channel, and a node-pore after the contraction channel, respectively.
Numbers in parentheses (1–4) correspond to the same specific segments of
the microchannel (pore, node, and contraction channel) in (a). ΔTcont corresponds to the
time duration of a cell passing through the contraction channel, and
ΔTr indicates the time needed for ΔIr to equal ΔInp (see Supplementary Figure S6 for detailed
information). (inset) An actual current pulse caused by a human mammary
epithelial cell traversing the channel. (c) Time-snapshots of an MCF-7 cell (bordered by a white
circle) in each of the different segments of the microfluidic channel
(white dashed line; see Supplementary Videos
1 and 2 for
detailed information). Numbers in parentheses (1–4) correspond to the same
specific segments of the microchannel (pore, node, and contraction
channel) in (a). (d) Cross-sectional
diagram of the channel segments occupied by a cell. ‘AA’ and ‘BB’ indicate
the corresponding cross-sections in (c).
wpore,
wnode,
wc, and hchannel correspond to the widths of
the pore, node, and the contraction channel, and the height of the
channel, respectively. Dcell and Ldeform correspond to the free-cell
diameter in the node-pore channel and the elongated length of the deformed
cell in the contraction channel, respectively.
Principle of mechanical phenotyping via mechano-NPS. (a) A photographic image of the microfluidic
platform. The scale bar corresponds to 4 mm. Red-dashed box shows a
close-up view of the entire microfluidic channel. The microfluidic channel
(pore) is segmented by nodes and a contraction channel. Two electrodes at
both ends of the channel apply a constant voltage (1 V), and two inner
electrodes measure the change of current across the channel. The regions
where free-cell diameter, deformed diameter, and cell recovery are
measured are as indicated. (b) Expected
current pulse generated by a cell transiting the microfluidic channel.
I, ΔInp, ΔIc, and ΔIr correspond to the baseline current
and the current drop by a cell transiting a node-pore, a contraction
channel, and a node-pore after the contraction channel, respectively.
Numbers in parentheses (1–4) correspond to the same specific segments of
the microchannel (pore, node, and contraction channel) in (a). ΔTcont corresponds to the
time duration of a cell passing through the contraction channel, and
ΔTr indicates the time needed for ΔIr to equal ΔInp (see Supplementary Figure S6 for detailed
information). (inset) An actual current pulse caused by a human mammary
epithelial cell traversing the channel. (c) Time-snapshots of an MCF-7 cell (bordered by a white
circle) in each of the different segments of the microfluidic channel
(white dashed line; see Supplementary Videos
1 and 2 for
detailed information). Numbers in parentheses (1–4) correspond to the same
specific segments of the microchannel (pore, node, and contraction
channel) in (a). (d) Cross-sectional
diagram of the channel segments occupied by a cell. ‘AA’ and ‘BB’ indicate
the corresponding cross-sections in (c).
wpore,
wnode,
wc, and hchannel correspond to the widths of
the pore, node, and the contraction channel, and the height of the
channel, respectively. Dcell and Ldeform correspond to the free-cell
diameter in the node-pore channel and the elongated length of the deformed
cell in the contraction channel, respectively.Power analysis was employed to ensure that our sample size for
mechanical phenotyping offers adequate power (≥0.80) to detect differences between
experimental groups within a 95% confidence interval[41] from the measured data set.
For all cases which have a P-value<0.05, the
analyzed sample size (Na) provided sufficient power value to measure
statistical differences (Supplementary Table
S1). Statistical significance was determined by performing a
paired t-test or χ2-test. To ensure repeatability of
results, all data presented in this study were measured using multiple
microfluidic devices. The wCDI of MCF-7 cells obtained with different device
replicas showed no statistical difference (Supplementary Figure S3, P=0.173).
Device fabrication
To make the PDMS molds of our microfluidic platform, we employ
standard soft-lithography. Briefly, we fabricate negative-relief masters onto
polished silicon wafers. After mixing and degassing, we pour a 9:1 pre-polymer:
curing agent mixture of PDMS (Sylgard 184, Dow Corning) onto the masters and
subsequently cure them at 80 °C for 60 min. A slab of PDMS with the embedded
microfluidic channel is excised from the master, and entry and exit ports are
cored with a 1 mm diameter biopsy punch. To complete the device, we first expose
the PDMS mold and a glass substrate with pre-defined electrodes to an oxygen
plasma (470 mTorr, 80 W, 1 min), then align and mate the two together, and finally
place the device onto a hotplate set to 80 °C for 60 min. For the specific
surface-treatment experiments described, we injected either poly-D-lysine (PDL,
1 μg mL−1 in PBS) or bovineserum albumin (BSA, 2%
w/v in PBS) into the completed device. After incubating for 2 h at 37 °C, we
flushed the device with PBS and immediately began screening cells.To fabricate the Pt electrodes and the Au contact pads onto glass
substrates, we utilize standard photolithography for patterning. Using
electron-gun evaporation, we deposit a 75/250/250 Å Titanium (Ti)/Pt/Au thin film
onto the patterned substrates. We then use a gold wet etch (GOLD ETCHANT TFA,
Transene Company) to expose the Pt electrodes.
Cell culture
MCF-10A cells (ATCC CRL-10317) were cultured in MEBM medium,
supplemented with 0.1% insulin, 0.1% hEGF, 0.4% hydrocortisone, and 10% cholera
toxin. MCF-7 cells (ATCC HTB-22) were cultured in DMEM (Fisher Scientific,
BW12719F), supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 0.1 mM MEM
Non-Essential Amino Acids (NEAA), 2 mM L-glutamine, and 1% Pen-Strep. BEAS-2B
cells (ATCC CRL-9609) were cultured in BEGM BulletKit (Lonza, CC-3170). A549 cells
(ATCC CRM-CCL-185) were cultured in F-12K medium (Fisher Scientific, MT10025CV),
supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% of Pen-Strep. Jurkat cells (ATCC TIB-152) were
cultured in RPMI 1640 medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Grand Island, NY USA),
supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), and 1% Pen-Strep. All cell
cultures were maintained at 37 °C in 5% CO2 and routinely
passaged, per published protocols[42,43], once they reached 80% confluence.Cells were dissociated by treatment with 0.25% trypsin/EDTA for
either 3 min (MCF-7 and A549 cells) or 5 min (MCF-10A and BEAS-2B cells) at 37 °C
(Refs. 44–46), washed with the respective growth media,
centrifuged at 0.2 RCF, and re-suspended at a concentration of ~20 000 cells per
mL in PBS. To ensure cell viability, cells were injected into the prepared devices
for screening immediately following re-suspension.
Primary human mammary epithelial cells
Primary HMEC strains were generated and maintained as described
previously[47,48]. HMECs were grown in M87A medium containing
cholera toxin and oxytocin at 0.5 ng mL−1 and 0.1 nM,
respectively. Details on the derivation and culture of these HMEC can be found at
Human Mammary Epithelial Cell (HMEC) Bank Website[49]. Research was conducted under
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Human Subjects Committee IRB protocols
305H002 and 108H004, which allows for the use of HMEC samples for future
scientific research.
Pharmacological inhibition of cytoskeletal components
We disrupted actin polymerization with Latrunculin A and B (Enzo
Life Sciences, Farmingdale, NY USA)[50]. Prior to deformability measurements, MCF-7
and MCF-10A cells were incubated with 2.5 or 5 μg mL−1
LatA or LatB in each cell’s respective growth medium for one hour at 37 °C and 5%
CO2 (Refs. 29,51,52). Cells were then released from culture
flasks with 0.25% trypsin/EDTA, rinsed once with PBS, centrifuged at 0.2 RCF, and
re-suspended in PBS at a concentration of ~100 000 cells per mL. To confirm that
actin polymerization was successfully inhibited after incubation, cells were fixed
by 4% (w/v) paraformaldehyde in PBS for 15 min. They were then permeabilized with
0.1% Triton-X 100 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) in PBS for 5 min. Cell
nuclei and F-actin were then counter-stained with 4’,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI, Sigma-Aldrich, 10236276001) and rhodamine phalloidin (Thermo Fisher
Scientific, R415), respectively, per manufacturer’s protocol, and then imaged with
a Zeiss LSM710 confocal microscope.
Discriminating cell types based on the whole cell deformability index
(wCDI)
We derived a dimensionless parameter, which we refer to as the
whole cell deformability index (wCDI), to distinguish cell populations based on
mechanical phenotype. We assume a functional relationship among the biophysical
parameters of a cell and fluid flow as follows, where E,
Dcell,
hchannel,
Uflow, Uc, μ, and
Lc correspond to elastic modulus, free cell
diameter, height of the microfluidic channel, flow velocity within the node
segment leading to the contraction channel, the transit velocity of cells in the
contraction channel, fluid viscosity, and the length of the contraction channel,
respectively. Three fundamental dimensions (n=3)—mass (M), length (L), and time (T)—are
included in each of these six parameters (n’=7)
as follows,Following the Buckingham π
theorem[53], the relationship among these parameters can be
written in terms of a set of four dimensionless parameters (n′−n=4). To find these dimensionless parameters
(π; i=1, 2, 3, and
4), we select repeating variables (hchannel,
Uflow, and μ), where the number of required variables is equal to the number of
fundamental dimensions (n=3). Multiplying one
of the nonrepeating variables with the product of the repeating variables, we can
define the following π terms,We define the dimensionless parameter, wCDI (Equation (6)), to be
the product of π2×π3×π4. The wCDI could also be defined as a
function of π1, in which
(π1=f(π2, π3, π4)), but the exact analytical expression can
only be determined by experiment[53]. Comparing the wCDI with cellular cortical
tension and the previously reported elastic modulus (E) of various cell lines (Supplementary
Figure S4), we experimentally determined that the wCDI is
inversely related to these traditional parameters.
Cortical tension measurement using micropipette aspiration
Cortical tension was measured by micropipette aspiration as
described previously[54,55]. Briefly, cells were trypsinized and resuspended
in growth medium, and were transferred to the imaging chamber. Suction pressures
in the range of 0.03–0.3 kPa were applied to the cells through an 8–10 μm glass
micropipette. At each pressure, the cellular deformation inside the pipette was
allowed to stabilize for 20–30 s before imaging. The average measurement from
three images was used to calculate the length of deformation (Lp). Subsequently, applied
pressure was increased in 0.03 kPa increments till the Lp exceeded the radius of the pipette
(Rp). Any cell that
blebbed was discarded. The critical pressure (Pcrit) is defined as the pressure at which
the deformation inside the pipette is hemispherical, that is, Lp=Rp. The cortical tension (Teff) was then calculated using
the following equation, where Rc is:The cortical tension measurements from Jurkat, NIH 3T3, and HeLa
cells are plotted from Schiffhauer et
al.[56].
Results
Population characterization of mechanical phenotypes at single-cell
resolution
The repeated expansion and contraction of the width of our overall
microfluidic channel shown in Figure 1a
produces a unique and symmetric current pulse, consisting of sub-pulses, for each
cell that transits the channel. Upon entering the microfluidic channel, a cell
partially blocks the flow of current, and consequently, the measured current
immediately drops from a baseline value, I
(Figure 1b). When the cell enters the
first node, the current returns to baseline only to drop again once the cell exits
that node. This is a hallmark of node-pore sensing (NPS)[37,38]. The rise and fall of current repeats as the
cell enters and exists the next two nodes. Upon entering the contraction channel
where the width is narrower than the diameter of the cell, the cell deforms as
shown in Figures 1c and d. Because the
cell blocks nearly all of the current flow in this part of the channel, the
current drop from baseline is far more dramatic than that resulting from the cell
transiting the earlier pores (Supplementary Figure
S5 and Supplementary Video
1). The cell subsequently enters and exits a series of node-pore
pairs following the contraction channel, ultimately leading to the symmetrical
shape of the overall current pulse. This symmetry is intentional by design and
critically allows the monitoring of a cell’s recovery from constant strain
deformation (Supplementary Video
2).The magnitude of the current sub-pulse produced in the node-pore
sequence (ΔInp) and the
contraction channel (ΔIc) corresponds to the free-cell diameter
(Dcell) and cell
elongation length (Ldeform), respectively (Figure 1d). The relationship among the current drop
(∆I), baseline current (I), particle diameter (d), the overall channel length (L), and the channel’s effective diameter (De) is defined as[39,57,58],To determine De, we measure polystyrene microspheres of
known size with the microfluidic channel (Supplementary Table S2). Using the values of ∆I/I arising from the
microspheres, along with the known values of L
and d (the size of the microspheres in this
instance), we can numerically solve for De in Equation (5). Once De is known, we can subsequently
determine Dcell of a
screened cell by numerically solving for d in
Equation (5) using the obtained values of ΔInp/I. We
can also determine the volume of the deformed cell, Vdeform, by the
relationship[39,57,58], ΔIc/I~Vdeform/Vcontraction, where Vcontraction is the volume of the contraction
channel. To calculate Ldeform, we assume the cell undergoes an
isometric deformation in the direction of both the channel’s longitudinal axis and
channel height, resulting in an oblate-spheroid shape. From the relationship
between the volume and major radius of the oblate spheroid, Vdeform=πwcLdeform2/6 where
wc is the
contraction-channel width, we can determine Ldeform from ΔIc/I. We
quantify the transverse deformation of the cell, δdeform=Ldeform/Dcell, as it transits the contraction
channel.As a cell traverses through each section of the channel, the
duration of the resulting sub-pulse produced by a cell corresponds to the cell’s
transit time (ΔT) through that part of the
channel. To quantify the resistance to compressive deformation, we utilize
ΔTcont. To determine
the recovery time of a cell from compressive deformation (ΔTr), we note the time required for the
sub-pulses produced by the cell after exiting the contraction channel to return to
the same shape and magnitude as those produced by the cell prior to entering the
contraction channel, that is, when the cell returns to its original size and shape
(Figure 1b and Supplementary Figure S6). Given the number of
node-pore pairs and the overall length of the node-pore sequence we employ after
the contraction channel, our device’s temporal window for measuring cell recovery
is 40 ms. The flexibility of our device design and ease of fabrication allow for
the inclusion of many more node-pore pairs after the contraction channel, which in
turn would lead to an increase in time over which to observe recovery (Methods:
Experimental Design). Based on all the recovery times we recorded with our
particular device, we discriminate among three different cell-recovery
types—instant (ΔTr~0 ms), transient (0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), and prolonged
(ΔTr>40 ms)
(Supplementary Figure S6).Thus, from just a single current pulse produced by a cell
transiting through the entire microfluidic channel, four biophysical properties of
that cell—size (Dcell),
resistance to compressive deformation (ΔTcont), transverse deformation (δdeform), and recovery from
deformation (ΔTr)—are
extracted. These parameters are what we collectively use to mechanically phenotype
a single cell, distinguish among cell types in a heterogeneous population, and
determine subtle cellular changes.
Distinguishing malignant and non-malignant epithelial cell lines based on
mechanical phenotyping
We investigated whether mechano-NPS could distinguish between
immortal malignant and non-malignant states in two different epithelial tissue
types based on their mechanical properties alone. We compared the mechanical
properties of malignant MCF-7 with non-malignant MCF-10A breast epithelial cells
and malignant A549 with non-malignant BEAS-2B lung epithelial cells when
individual cells were subjected to a constant applied strain along the length of
the contraction channel they traversed. Because strain, ε, is a function of both cell size and contraction channel width
(w), ε=(Dcell−wc)/Dcell, and prior independent measurement of
Dcell showed that
malignant MCF-7 and A549 cells are, on average, larger than non-malignant MCF-10A
and BEAS-2B cells (Supplementary Table
S3), we utilized a 12 μm-wide contraction channel to measure MCF-7
and A549 cells and a 10 μm-wide contraction channel to measure MCF-10A and BEAS-2B
in order to achieve the same average ε (~0.3)
for all cell types (Supplementary Table
S3). As shown in the four dimensional (4D) graphs in Figure 2a, Dcell and Ldeform of MCF-10A and BEAS-2B cells are
significantly different from those of MCF-7 and A549 cells, respectively.
Moreover, MCF-10A and BEAS-2B cells transit the contraction channel more slowly as
compared to MCF-7 and A549 cells, respectively. When comparing transverse
deformation (δdeform),
we find that while A549 deform significantly less than BEAS-2B cells, MCF-7 and
MCF-10A cells have similar deformation (Figure
2b).
Figure 2
Mechanical phenotyping of malignant and non-malignant epithelial
cells. (a) 4D plot of the free cell
diameter (Dcell), elongation length (Ldeform) due to an
applied strain ε~0.3, transit time
through the contraction channel (ΔTcont), and recovery time from
compressive deformation (ΔTr) of malignant (MCF-7, n=99) and non-malignant (MCF-10A, n=99) breast cells, and malignant (A549,
n=100) and non-malignant (BEAS-2B,
n=100) lung cells. Dotted ovals group
each cell line (MCF-10A: black, MCF-7: green, BEAS-2B: gray A549: blue).
(b) Transverse deformation (δdeform) of MCF-10A,
MCF-7, BEAS-2B, and A549 cells. Statistical differences were determined by
a paired t-test (****P⩽0.0001). (c)
wCDI distribution of MCF-10A, MCF-7, BEAS-2B, and A549 cells. Statistical
differences were determined by a paired t-test. (MCF-10A vs MCF-7: P=3.90e-58, BEAS-2B vs A549: P=1.10e−80). The solid lines correspond to the fitted normal
wCDI distribution for malignant and non-malignant cells, respectively.
MCF-10A: ; MCF-7: ; BEAS-2B: ; and A549: . (d) The proportion of
cells screened that recovered instantaneously (ΔTr~0), required 40 ms or less
(0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or did not recover within
the window of time measured (ΔTr>40 ms). A Chi-square test was
employed to determine the statistical differences between the proportions
of cell recovery types. There was no statistical difference in recovery
types between MCF10A and MCF7 cells. In contrast, there was a significant
statistical difference between BEAS-2B and A549 cells regarding
instantaneous recovery (P⩽0.0001) and
transient recovery (P⩽0.0001).
Mechanical phenotyping of malignant and non-malignant epithelial
cells. (a) 4D plot of the free cell
diameter (Dcell), elongation length (Ldeform) due to an
applied strain ε~0.3, transit time
through the contraction channel (ΔTcont), and recovery time from
compressive deformation (ΔTr) of malignant (MCF-7, n=99) and non-malignant (MCF-10A, n=99) breast cells, and malignant (A549,
n=100) and non-malignant (BEAS-2B,
n=100) lung cells. Dotted ovals group
each cell line (MCF-10A: black, MCF-7: green, BEAS-2B: gray A549: blue).
(b) Transverse deformation (δdeform) of MCF-10A,
MCF-7, BEAS-2B, and A549 cells. Statistical differences were determined by
a paired t-test (****P⩽0.0001). (c)
wCDI distribution of MCF-10A, MCF-7, BEAS-2B, and A549 cells. Statistical
differences were determined by a paired t-test. (MCF-10A vs MCF-7: P=3.90e-58, BEAS-2B vs A549: P=1.10e−80). The solid lines correspond to the fitted normal
wCDI distribution for malignant and non-malignant cells, respectively.
MCF-10A: ; MCF-7: ; BEAS-2B: ; and A549: . (d) The proportion of
cells screened that recovered instantaneously (ΔTr~0), required 40 ms or less
(0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or did not recover within
the window of time measured (ΔTr>40 ms). A Chi-square test was
employed to determine the statistical differences between the proportions
of cell recovery types. There was no statistical difference in recovery
types between MCF10A and MCF7 cells. In contrast, there was a significant
statistical difference between BEAS-2B and A549 cells regarding
instantaneous recovery (P⩽0.0001) and
transient recovery (P⩽0.0001).Although our results clearly show that the transit time through the
contraction channel (ΔTcont) is dependent on cell type (that is,
malignant vs. non-malignant), so too could cell
diameter affect transit time (Figure
2a)[59-61]. Because this could lead to difficulties in
distinguishing cells within a heterogeneous population (Supplementary Figure S7), we employ the Buckingham
π-technique[53] to define a new dimensionless
parameter, the whole-cell deformability index (wCDI), which relates Dcell and ΔTcont by the following:
where Uflow
is the fluid velocity in the node section leading into the contraction channel,
Lc is the length of
contraction channel, and hchannel is the contraction-channel height
(see detailed information in Methods: discriminating cell types based on the
wCDI). Uflow, Lc and hchannel are fixed values for any given
experiment, and consequently, Dcell and ΔTcont become the key parameters. Physically,
the wCDI describes the deformability of the cell as a whole, including the
cytoskeleton, nucleus, and organelles. Cells that are more deformable (that is,
less stiff) transit through the contraction channel more easily, and subsequently
at higher velocities, than those that are less deformable (that is, more stiff).
Correspondingly, these cells will have a higher wCDI as compared to the latter, in
accordance with Equation (6). Moreover, cells which are larger (smaller) will
transit the contraction channel more slowly (quickly), and Equation (6)
effectively negates this cell-size effect. While the Buckingham π-technique relates the wCDI to the cell’s elastic
modulus, E, (see Methods, Equation (3a)), it
does not define the explicit relationship between the two. We, therefore,
performed side-by-side measurements of different cell lines (Jurkat, MCF-7, and
MCF-10A) with the gold standard, micropipette aspiration, and also compared our
measurements of MCF-7, MCF-10A, A549, and BEAS-2B cell lines with those obtained
by AFM in the published literature[15,17,62-67]. Our results and subsequent analysis
(Supplementary Figure S4) show that
the wCDI is inversely proportional to both cortical tension and E, confirming our original physical description of the
wCDI. While future studies are necessary to determine the exact analytical
expression between the wCDI and E,
mechano-NPS’s ability to mechanically phenotype cells successfully for cell-type
discrimination is clearly demonstrated.Figure 2c shows the wCDI
distribution of non-malignant vs. malignant
cells. The solid lines correspond to the fitted normal distribution of each
population and the red-shaded region is the overlap area of the two distributions.
As shown in Figure 2c, the wCDI of MCF-7
cells is significantly greater than that of MCF-10A cells with a 2.6% overlap.
Similarly, A549 cells have a greater numerical wCDI than BEAS-2B cells, but with
only a 1.6% overlap. Given the sensitivity demonstrated using the wCDI vs.
ΔTcont or cell size,
alone (Figure 2c vs. Supplementary Figure S7), mechano-NPS and
correspondingly the wCDI could potentially be utilized as a method for detecting
subtle heterogeneities within cell populations such as those found in primary
tissue[68,69], heterogeneous cell lines and
strains[70], and biopsied tissue
samples[71,72].Clear differences were observed in the recovery time after
mechanical strain between breast and lung epithelial cell lines and, in the case
of the latter, between malignant and non-malignant cell lines. Figure 2d shows that there was no statistical
difference (using a Chi-square Analysis) regarding instantaneous recovery from
mechanical deformation among breast epithelial cells (38.3% malignant MCF-7 cells
vs. 50% MCF10-A cells, P=0.101). This is in
striking contrast to lung epithelial cells in which there was a strong statistical
difference (P<0.0001) between malignant and
non-malignant cell lines: 37.0% of malignant A549 cells recovered instantaneously
vs. 82.0% of non-malignant BEAS-2B cells screened (Figure 2d). Even though both are malignant cell lines, MCF-7 and
A549 cell populations show surprising differences in their composition of
transient and prolonged cell-recovery types. Whereas the majority of screened A549
cells transiently recovered (53.0%), MCF-7 cells were nearly evenly divided
between transient and prolonged recovery (38.3% and 47.5%, respectively).
Evaluating the contribution of cell-surface interactions and the
cytoskeletal component, F-actin, to the mechanical phenotypes measured
To determine whether cell-surface interactions greatly affect the
passage of a cell within the contraction channel, and in turn contribute
significantly to its wCDI, we screened MCF-7 cells in channels coated with either
PDL or BSA and compared the resulting wCDI with that obtained by screening with a
bare-PDMS channel (Figure 3a). PDL
increases cell-surface interactions by adding positive charges on the PDMS channel
walls[73,74] and would therefore lead to a
lower wCDI. In contrast, BSA inhibits cellular adhesion to the PDMS
surface[75] and would result in a higher wCDI. Figure 3b compares the wCDI obtained when MCF-7 cells
were measured with bare-PDMS and PDL- and BSA-coated channels at different inlet
pressures, that is, flow speeds. At low pressures (Pinlet=7 kPa and 14 kPa), the average wCDI is
appreciably lower in the PDL-coated channel and higher in the BSA-channel as
compared to the bare-PDMS control channel. At Pinlet=21 kPa, the inlet pressure at which we
performed all our experiments, cells flow at a sufficiently high enough rate that
cell-surface interactions are minimized within the contraction channel. As shown
in Figure 3b, the obtained wCDI at this
inlet pressure for either the PDL- or BSA-coated channel is not a dramatic shift
from that measured with the bare-PDMS control channel. Moreover, the difference in
wCDI among the different surface treatments vs. the bare-PDMS control channel at
21 kPa inlet pressure is significantly less than that measured between malignant
and non-malignant epithelial cell types (Figure
2b). We, therefore, conclude that while surface-interactions do
contribute to the wCDI, they are not the dominant factor at the higher inlet
pressures or flow rates used for these studies.
Figure 3
Contribution of cell-surface interaction and cytoskeletal
component, F-actin, to the mechanical phenotypes of epithelial cells.
(a) Schematic of experimental
conditions used to measure the effects of cell-surface interaction on the
wCDI. While poly-D-lysine (PDL) increases the positive charges on the
channel wall for increased cell-surface interaction, bovine serum albumin
(BSA) minimizes cellular adhesion to the channel wall. The control for all
experiments was bare PDMS. (b) The
difference in wCDI measured when MCF-7 cells transit a bare PDMS
contraction channel (control) and a PDL-coated channel or a BSA-coated
channel (n=99 for all cases) under
various fluidic conditions. The difference in wCDI becomes smaller with
greater Pinlet.
Within each box, the central red line corresponds to the median, and the
edges of the box to 25% and 75% of the population. (c) Fluorescence images of MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells after
treatment with Latrunculin A (LatA, 5 μg mL−1,
1 h) or Latrunculin B (LatB, 5 μg mL−1, 1 h).
Cell nuclei and F-actin are stained with 4ʹ,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI, blue) and rhodamine Phalloidin (red), respectively. Scale bar
corresponds to 20 μm. (d) Transverse
deformation (δdeform) of untreated, LatA-, and
LatB-treated MCF7 and MCF10A cells (n=99). Statistical differences were determined by a paired
t-test. (e) wCDI distribution of MCF-7 (n=99, Ctrl vs LatA: P=0.0074, Ctrl vs LatB: P=0.0253) and MCF-10A cells (n=99, Ctrl vs LatA: P=4.8940e-7, Ctrl vs LatB: P=0.9758), in which cells were either untreated or treated
with LatA or LatB. Statistical differences were determined by a paired
t-test. Within each box, the central
red line corresponds to the median, and the edges of the box to 25% and
75% of the population. (f) The proportion
of untreated and treated MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells screened that recovered
instantaneously (ΔTr~0), required 40 ms or less
(0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or did not recover within
window time measured (ΔTr>40 ms). The
statistical differences between the proportions of recovery types of
untreated and treated cells were evaluated by a Chi-square test. For all
graphs, *, **, ***, and **** indicate P⩽0.05, P⩽0.01, P⩽0.001, and P⩽0.0001, respectively.
Contribution of cell-surface interaction and cytoskeletal
component, F-actin, to the mechanical phenotypes of epithelial cells.
(a) Schematic of experimental
conditions used to measure the effects of cell-surface interaction on the
wCDI. While poly-D-lysine (PDL) increases the positive charges on the
channel wall for increased cell-surface interaction, bovineserum albumin
(BSA) minimizes cellular adhesion to the channel wall. The control for all
experiments was bare PDMS. (b) The
difference in wCDI measured when MCF-7 cells transit a bare PDMS
contraction channel (control) and a PDL-coated channel or a BSA-coated
channel (n=99 for all cases) under
various fluidic conditions. The difference in wCDI becomes smaller with
greater Pinlet.
Within each box, the central red line corresponds to the median, and the
edges of the box to 25% and 75% of the population. (c) Fluorescence images of MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells after
treatment with Latrunculin A (LatA, 5 μg mL−1,
1 h) or Latrunculin B (LatB, 5 μg mL−1, 1 h).
Cell nuclei and F-actin are stained with 4ʹ,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI, blue) and rhodamine Phalloidin (red), respectively. Scale bar
corresponds to 20 μm. (d) Transverse
deformation (δdeform) of untreated, LatA-, and
LatB-treated MCF7 and MCF10A cells (n=99). Statistical differences were determined by a paired
t-test. (e) wCDI distribution of MCF-7 (n=99, Ctrl vs LatA: P=0.0074, Ctrl vs LatB: P=0.0253) and MCF-10A cells (n=99, Ctrl vs LatA: P=4.8940e-7, Ctrl vs LatB: P=0.9758), in which cells were either untreated or treated
with LatA or LatB. Statistical differences were determined by a paired
t-test. Within each box, the central
red line corresponds to the median, and the edges of the box to 25% and
75% of the population. (f) The proportion
of untreated and treated MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells screened that recovered
instantaneously (ΔTr~0), required 40 ms or less
(0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or did not recover within
window time measured (ΔTr>40 ms). The
statistical differences between the proportions of recovery types of
untreated and treated cells were evaluated by a Chi-square test. For all
graphs, *, **, ***, and **** indicate P⩽0.05, P⩽0.01, P⩽0.001, and P⩽0.0001, respectively.Because we propose that mechano-NPS distinguishes cells based on
mechanical differences, we should detect cytoskeletal perturbations. Thus, we
treated MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells with the actin polymerization inhibitors,
Latrunculin A (LatA) or B (LatB) (Figure
3c), and subsequently screened them under a strain magnitude,
εavg~0.3. We found
that the cellular deformation in the transverse direction (δdeform) of both MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells
treated with LatA and LatB was significantly reduced compared to their respective
controls (Figure 3d), with MCF-7 cells
generally more so than MCF-10A cells. Furthermore, we found that the wCDI
increased for both LatA- and LatB-treated MCF-7 cells, and for LatA-treated
MCF-10A cells as compared to the untreated control cells (Figure 3e). In subsequent experiments, we observed
that the change in wCDI caused by LatA treatment correspondingly increased with
concentration for both MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells, with the latter more sensitive to
the treatment (Supplementary Figure S8).
This is in contrast, however, to no detectable change in wCDI of MCF-10A cells no
matter the LatB concentration. Overall, the different response of MCF-7 and
MCF-10A cells to LatA and LatB may be due to differences in F-actin content, but
further experiments are warranted here. As we confirmed with staining and confocal
microscopy that the F-actin filaments were indeed inhibited in the Lat A- and
B-treated cells (more so with Lat-A than with Lat-B as shown in Figure 3c), we conclude that mechano-NPS successfully
detects cytoskeletal perturbations induced by exogenous chemicals.While differences between the wCDI of LatA-treated cells are more
pronounced with MCF-10A cells than MCF-7 cells, the differences in recovery time
for Lat A- and LatB-treated cells in both cell types vs. the control are far more
significant. Figure 3f shows that
Latrunculin treatment results in the slow recovery of both MCF-7 and MCF-10A cells
from the sudden relief of deformation. Moreover, there is a statistically
significant difference between untreated and treated cells regarding recovery. In
the case of MCF-7, only 8.1% of LatA-treated and 24.2% of LatB-treated cells
instantaneously recover vs. 38.3% of untreated cells. For MCF-10A, the majority of
LatA- and LatB-treated cells (66.7% and 41.4%, respectively) do not recover within
the 40 ms time window our device offers (vs. 9.7% of untreated control cells). As
we also found, the changes in cellular recovery are generally more pronounced at
higher concentrations of Latrunculin treatment (Supplementary Figure S8). These results support the notion that
actin filaments contribute to the ability of cells to retain their original
shape[36,76]. Moreover, mechano-NPS
detects differences in recovery from deformation, either transiently or not at
all, between LatA- and LatB-treatment that are consistent with LatA being the more
avid inhibitor of actin polymerization.
Mechanical phenotyping of human mammary epithelial cells
To determine whether our platform could discriminate different
lineages within a population of primary epithelial cells, we screened the
mechanical phenotypes of HMECs, which broadly consist of two lineages:
myoepithelial (MEP) cells and luminal epithelial (LEP) cells (Figure 4a). MEP and LEP cells have distinct roles in
breast tissue. MEP cells play active roles in ductal contraction and in tumor
suppression, and LEP cells produce milk and may represent a target-cell-type for
carcinogenesis[78]. Previous studies of mammary epithelia have
implicated profound roles of cytoskeletal components in
morphogenesis[11,79,80]. We measured the mechanical
characteristics of these two lineages of cells. Since both MEP and LEP cells have
a similar size range (Supplementary Figure
S7), we employed a 10 μm-wide contraction channel, corresponding
to an εavg~0.4 for all
measurements. Figure 4b shows the
relationship among the measured parameters of MEP and LEP cells (derived from a
66-year old woman, strain 237) that were FACS-enriched ahead of mechano-NPS
characterization. Although LEP cells, on average, had a similar transverse
deformation as that of MEP cells, they required less time to pass through the
contraction channel (Figure 4b), thus
suggesting that they are more deformable to an applied strain in the channel-width
direction. Furthermore, while the deformed diameter and transit time of both
lineages are dependent on the free cellular diameter, there are clear differences
between the wCDI distribution of MEP () and LEP () cells (Figure 4c). In
terms of cell recovery, MEP and LEP cells show a similar distribution of recovery
types (Figure 4d).
Figure 4
Mechanical phenotyping of HMECs. (a) Cellular structure of the human mammary gland. The
mammary duct consists of an outer layer of myoepithelial cells (red) that
surround an inner layer of luminal epithelial cells (blue). (b) 4D plot of the cell diameter (Dcell), elongated length
(Ldeform),
transit time through the contraction channel (ΔTcont), and recovery time (ΔTr) of myoepithelial
(MEP, n=99) and luminal epithelial
(LEP, n=104) breast cells. Dotted ovals
group each sub-lineage (MEP: red and LEP: blue). Pre-sorted MEP and LEP
cells were screened with an applied strain magnitude ε~0.4. (c)
wCDI distributions of MEP and LEP lineages (P=1.2047e-25). Statistical differences were determined by a
paired t-test. The red and blue lines
correspond to the fitted normal distribution of MEP () and LEP () cells, respectively. The wCDI overlap between the two
lineages is 29.3%. (d) Distribution of
pre-sorted MEP and LEP cells that have instant (ΔTr ~0,), transient (0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or prolonged
(ΔTr>40 ms)
recovery. (e and g) wCDI distribution of HMECs derived from young (e, y=age, 240L; n=54, 59L; n=53, 51L;
n=50, 124; n=54) and old women (g,
112R; n=62, 237; n=59, 122L; n=54, 29; n=60). Outliers
over 3 standard deviation of the mean were removed. The black dashed line
corresponds to the fitted normal distribution of HMEC cells (MEP+LEP). The
red and blue solid lines represent the normal distribution of MEP and LEP
cells, respectively, with the ratio (α)
of each lineage in the HMEC population as determined by the
Expectation-Maximization algorithm[77]. (f and h) The
proportion of HMECs from young (e) and
old (g) women that have instant,
transient, or prolonged recovery from applied strain.
Mechanical phenotyping of HMECs. (a) Cellular structure of the human mammary gland. The
mammary duct consists of an outer layer of myoepithelial cells (red) that
surround an inner layer of luminal epithelial cells (blue). (b) 4D plot of the cell diameter (Dcell), elongated length
(Ldeform),
transit time through the contraction channel (ΔTcont), and recovery time (ΔTr) of myoepithelial
(MEP, n=99) and luminal epithelial
(LEP, n=104) breast cells. Dotted ovals
group each sub-lineage (MEP: red and LEP: blue). Pre-sorted MEP and LEP
cells were screened with an applied strain magnitude ε~0.4. (c)
wCDI distributions of MEP and LEP lineages (P=1.2047e-25). Statistical differences were determined by a
paired t-test. The red and blue lines
correspond to the fitted normal distribution of MEP () and LEP () cells, respectively. The wCDI overlap between the two
lineages is 29.3%. (d) Distribution of
pre-sorted MEP and LEP cells that have instant (ΔTr ~0,), transient (0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or prolonged
(ΔTr>40 ms)
recovery. (e and g) wCDI distribution of HMECs derived from young (e, y=age, 240L; n=54, 59L; n=53, 51L;
n=50, 124; n=54) and old women (g,
112R; n=62, 237; n=59, 122L; n=54, 29; n=60). Outliers
over 3 standard deviation of the mean were removed. The black dashed line
corresponds to the fitted normal distribution of HMEC cells (MEP+LEP). The
red and blue solid lines represent the normal distribution of MEP and LEP
cells, respectively, with the ratio (α)
of each lineage in the HMEC population as determined by the
Expectation-Maximization algorithm[77]. (f and h) The
proportion of HMECs from young (e) and
old (g) women that have instant,
transient, or prolonged recovery from applied strain.We also measured the mechanical properties of primary HMEC cultures
that consisted of mixtures of MEP and LEP cells from eight women of different
chronological age (four pre-menopausal women aged <30 years and four
post-menopausal women aged >55 years). Using the Expectation-Maximization
algorithm[77], in which the wCDI distribution function of
sorted MEP and LEP cells obtained in our earlier experiments (Figure 4c) were used as initial values, we determined
the ratio (α) of MEP and LEP cells within each
primary HMEC strain (Figures 4e and g) and
subsequently compared this ratio to FACS analysis of CD10+/CD227− MEP and
CD10−/CD227+ LEP (Supplementary Figure
S9). The component ratios of MEP and LEP cells, as determined by
the wCDI distributions, match exceptionally well with those obtained from FACS, as
confirmed by a Chi-square test with a P-value=0.05 (Supplementary Table
S4). Indeed, the two methods are statistically indistinguishable.
Although age-dependent differences in wCDI were not detected, age-dependent
differences were readily apparent in recovery. Figures
4f and h show the composition of cell-recovery type for MEP and
LEP cells of the young and old HMEC strains. Younger HMEC strains strikingly have
a higher proportion of cells that recover instantaneously (an average of 47.8%) as
compared to older strains (an average of 19.9%), suggesting that the cytoskeleton
in younger cells is more resilient or more active, and in turn more responsive, to
mechanical deformation.We next determined whether HMEC traversing the stages of malignant
progression have distinctive mechanical signatures that could be used to track
these stages. We previously reported a method for producing post-stasis and
immortal HMEC cell lines in the absence of gross, and confounding, genomic
errors[81]. In this experiment, expression of p16 shRNA or
cyclin D1 was used to bypass the stress-induced stasis barrier, and expression of
c-myc was used to bypass the replicative senescence barrier and generate immortal
non-malignant cell lines (Figure 5a). We
used mechano-NPS to generate wCDI profiles and the recovery-type distribution of
primary normal HMEC strains (240L and 122L), post-stasis finite strains
(240L-p16sh, 240L-D1, 122L-p16sh, 122L-D1,), and immortal non-malignant cell lines
(240Lp16sMY, 240LD1MY, 122Lp16sMY, 122LD1MY). Each stage of malignant progression
had a unique wCDI distribution. 240LD1MY, 122LD1MY, and 122Lp16sMY are known to
have molecular and biochemical signatures of the luminal cancer
subtype[82]. Their wCDI profiles show a mean that is greater
than those of their normal isogenic HMEC predecessors, which also is consistent
with a more LEP phenotype (Figure 5b). In
contrast, 240p16sMY have a molecular and biochemical phenotype of basal breast
cancers, which bear more similarity to MEP than to LEP lineage, and the wCDI
distribution was more consistent with that of MEP (Figure 5b). The post-stasis finite strains exhibited wCDI
distributions that were intermediate phenotypes between normal HMEC and the
isogenic immortal malignant cell lines, in a manner consistent with the eventual
intrinsic luminal- or basal-like subtype of the immortal lines (Figure 5b). Interestingly, all immortal non-malignant
cell lines screened have a greater fraction of cells that exhibit instant or
transient recovery as compared to those of post-stasis finite strains
(Figure 5c). When comparing the older
pre-stasis strain, 122L to the isogenic immortal cell lines, there was a
particularly stark decrease in recovery time (Figure
5c). Thus, we observed two different types of mechanical
signatures: wCDI differed between the MEP and LEP lineages, whereas recovery from
deformation was a distinguishing characteristic of chronological age. Moreover,
these data provide functional evidence to suggest that the process of
immortalization is associated with fundamental changes in the ability of
cytoskeletons to respond to deformation.
Figure 5
Mechanical phenotyping of HMECs undergoing immortalization.
(a) The stages of malignant progression
in breast epithelia. (b) wCDI
distribution of HMECs per the outlined immortalization steps when cells
were screened with an applied strain of ε~0.4 (n=54 for all
cases) Compared to primary cells (240L and 122L, respectively), each
population has following P values,
240L-p16sh: P=0.5306, 240Lp16sMY:
P=0.0003, 240L-D1: P=0.0005, 240LD1MY: P=0.0094, 122L-p16sh: P=0.0205, 122Lp16sMY: P=0.5668, 122L-D1: P=0.023,
and 122LD1MY: P=0.011. Statistical
differences were determined by a paired t-test. Within each box, the central red line is the median,
the red cross is an outlier, and the edges of the box correspond to 25 and
75% of the population. (c) Distribution
of instant (ΔTr~0,), transient (0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or prolonged
(ΔTr>40 ms)
recovery within each HMEC population per immortalization step. The
statistical differences between the proportions of recovery types of
primary cells and each stage of malignant progression were evaluated by a
χ2 test.
For all graphs, *, **, ***, and **** indicate p⩽0.05, p⩽0.01, p⩽0.001, and p⩽0.0001, respectively.
Mechanical phenotyping of HMECs undergoing immortalization.
(a) The stages of malignant progression
in breast epithelia. (b) wCDI
distribution of HMECs per the outlined immortalization steps when cells
were screened with an applied strain of ε~0.4 (n=54 for all
cases) Compared to primary cells (240L and 122L, respectively), each
population has following P values,
240L-p16sh: P=0.5306, 240Lp16sMY:
P=0.0003, 240L-D1: P=0.0005, 240LD1MY: P=0.0094, 122L-p16sh: P=0.0205, 122Lp16sMY: P=0.5668, 122L-D1: P=0.023,
and 122LD1MY: P=0.011. Statistical
differences were determined by a paired t-test. Within each box, the central red line is the median,
the red cross is an outlier, and the edges of the box correspond to 25 and
75% of the population. (c) Distribution
of instant (ΔTr~0,), transient (0<ΔTr⩽40 ms), or prolonged
(ΔTr>40 ms)
recovery within each HMEC population per immortalization step. The
statistical differences between the proportions of recovery types of
primary cells and each stage of malignant progression were evaluated by a
χ2 test.
For all graphs, *, **, ***, and **** indicate p⩽0.05, p⩽0.01, p⩽0.001, and p⩽0.0001, respectively.
Discussion
Mechano-NPS is a versatile technique that can analyze populations of
single cells for a number of biophysical properties, simultaneously. Our newly
defined dimensionless parameter, wCDI, which corresponds to whole-cell
deformability, allows us to compare different cell types directly. Complementing the
wCDI, the quantification of the cellular deformation in the transverse direction
when cells are subject to compressive deformation, cell recovery from deformation,
and the subsequent distribution of different cell-recovery types provide unique
information about a cell population. Utilizing just these three parameters, we have
shown stark differences between, and even patterns of cell recovery among, malignant
and non-malignant cells, sub-lineages and chronological age groups, along with
changes in the cytoskeleton. In general, the multi-variable phenotyping achieved by
mechano-NPS provides a comprehensive understanding of single-cell mechanical
behavior. Hierarchical clustering analysis of the mechano-NPS-screened mechanical
phenotypes demonstrates a relationship among specific mechanical phenotypes with
respect to different cell lines and with respect to the malignant progression of
HMECs (Supplementary Figures S11 and S12).
In future studies, single-cell level mechano-profiling should enable the
identification of rare and/or masked sub-populations that comprise a bulk cell
population, as well as characterization of cell states during dynamics processes—not
just those studied here—solely based on mechanical phenotype.While we have focused on the wCDI, transverse deformation, and cell
recovery here, additional biophysical parameters could be measured with mechano-NPS
simply by adding more node-pore sequences, which would, for instance, increase the
time resolution needed for investigating the mechanical plasticity of cells. We
could also utilize different contraction channel geometries. For example, employing
a sinusoidal contraction channel would induce periodic deformation to probe cellular
viscoelastic properties, which depend non-linearly on the frequency of deformation.
Taken together, the many biophysical properties that could be measured with
mechano-NPS would lead to a better understanding of the origins of specific cellular
mechanical properties and the mechanical contributions of different cellular
components (for example, cytoskeleton, nuclear envelope, organelles, and their own
associated non-linear properties). In general, however, mechano-NPS in its present
form successfully mechanically phenotypes cells for identification. Additional
attractive features of mechano-NPS include that it is label-free, screened cells
remain viable (Supplementary Figure S12),
and the potential to couple this technique with microfluidic cell-sorting
technologies. We screened up to 350 cells per min with our mechano-NPS device in the
experiments we have presented. Because of the overall length of the channel,
coincidence events, in which more than one cell occupies the channel at any given
time, occur on occasion, especially when screening a high concentration of cells.
Because of their complexity, current pulses arising from these events are presently
removed from analysis. Implementing advanced signal processing, such as match
filtering, could deconvolve these particular pulses and substantially increase
throughput by enabling higher flow rate and higher concentration of
cells[83,84]. Although it currently has
significantly lower throughput compared to hydrodynamic stretching
cytometry[27], deformability cytometry[31,32], and RT-DC[30], mechano-NPS does not rely on
optical imaging and therefore can easily be scaled up. Many mechano-NPS channels can
be operated in parallel, resulting in overall increased throughput (potentially on
the order of many thousands of cells per min), while importantly still maintaining
the ability to examine cell recovery. Equally important, the simplicity of
mechano-NPS, even in multiplexed form, is preserved.Mechanical phenotyping of cells is a nascent and active area of
research. Cellular mechanical properties can reflect malignancy of cancer cells and
their metastatic potential[85]. Using mechano-NPS and various other different
methods to measure cell-to-cell mechanical properties opens up new possibilities to
understanding the biological underpinnings of the different measurements.
Mechano-NPS reveals and quantifies emergent functional properties of the
cytoskeleton of cells. Consequently, mechano-NPS can evaluate cytoskeleton-targeted
drugs (for example, estramustine, colchicine, and paclitaxel), which are often
employed in cancer therapies[86,87],
and may provide a new window into drug resistance of cancer cells, which could be
caused in part by their cytoskeletal components[88,89]. The ability of our platform to rapidly
characterize mechanical properties in populations of cells lends itself to numerous
applications in cell biology and basic research. For example, mechano-NPS could be
used to assay rapidly common laboratory cell lines cultured under different
conditions and confluences, and to determine whether cells coming out of culture are
in a similar state from day-to-day. Clinically, mechano-NPS may yield a new approach
to early detection of breast and other types of cancer genesis through analyzing
epithelial cells and their composition ratio. Indeed, we have already demonstrated
mechano-NPS’s ability to distinguish between LEP and MEP lineages in mixed
populations, between epithelial cells from pre- or post-menopausal women, and
between normal and immortal transformed epithelial cells from the same individual.
The proportions of MEP and LEP subpopulations in mammary epithelium is highly
associated with age of women[47], and when combined with distinct deformation
recovery phenotypes in normal and transformed cells, mechano-NPS may yield valuable
information regarding risk or diagnosis of breast cancer. We previously reported
that the intrinsic subtype of immortal transformed HMEC was observable at the
earliest stage of progression, bypass of stress-induced stasis, using molecular and
biochemical markers of lineage. Here, we show that the stage of progression and the
intrinsic subtypes are associated with distinctive mechanical phenotypes, opening up
the possibility that wCDI could be used in a diagnostic setting as well.
Conclusion
Mechano-NPS is a multi-parametric, electronic-based, single-cell
analysis method that can quantify cell diameter, resistance to compressive
deformation, transverse deformation under constant strain, and recovery time after
deformation, simultaneously. As demonstrated, the newly defined index wCDI,
transverse deformation, and recovery time provide a quantitative mechanical metric
for discriminating among different cell types, identifying sub-lineages of primary
human mammary epithelial cells, and analyzing phenotypes that correlate with
chronological age and malignant progression of human mammary epithelial cells.
Mechano-NPS thus has great potential to be utilized as an efficient, label-free
mechanical phenotyping tool for basic and clinical applications requiring
characterization of cellular mechanics at the single-cell level.Supplementary Information (PDF 9151 kb)Supplementary Video S1 (MPG 117 kb)Supplementary Video S2 (MPG 289 kb)
Authors: Daniel R Gossett; Henry T K Tse; Serena A Lee; Yong Ying; Anne G Lindgren; Otto O Yang; Jianyu Rao; Amander T Clark; Dino Di Carlo Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Oliver Otto; Philipp Rosendahl; Alexander Mietke; Stefan Golfier; Christoph Herold; Daniel Klaue; Salvatore Girardo; Stefano Pagliara; Andrew Ekpenyong; Angela Jacobi; Manja Wobus; Nicole Töpfner; Ulrich F Keyser; Jörg Mansfeld; Elisabeth Fischer-Friedrich; Jochen Guck Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2015-02-02 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: Brian Li; Kristen L Cotner; Nathaniel K Liu; Stefan Hinz; Mark A LaBarge; Lydia L Sohn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-10-25 Impact factor: 3.240