| Literature DB >> 29845458 |
Jiao Chen1, Daphne Weihs2, Marcel Van Dijk3, Fred J Vermolen3.
Abstract
Cell migration plays an essential role in cancer metastasis. In cancer invasion through confined spaces, cells must undergo extensive deformation, which is a capability related to their metastatic potentials. Here, we simulate the deformation of the cell and nucleus during invasion through a dense, physiological microenvironment by developing a phenomenological computational model. In our work, cells are attracted by a generic emitting source (e.g., a chemokine or stiffness signal), which is treated by using Green's Fundamental solutions. We use an IMEX integration method where the linear parts and the nonlinear parts are treated by using an Euler backward scheme and an Euler forward method, respectively. We develop the numerical model for an obstacle-induced deformation in 2D or/and 3D. Considering the uncertainty in cell mobility, stochastic processes are incorporated and uncertainties in the input variables are evaluated using Monte Carlo simulations. This quantitative study aims at estimating the likelihood for invasion and the length of the time interval in which the cell invades the tissue through an obstacle. Subsequently, the two-dimensional cell deformation model is applied to simplified cancer metastasis processes to serve as a model for in vivo or in vitro biomedical experiments.Entities:
Keywords: Cancer metastasis; Cell deformation; Cell-based model; Monte Carlo simulations; Nucleus deformation
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29845458 PMCID: PMC6154301 DOI: 10.1007/s10237-018-1036-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomech Model Mechanobiol ISSN: 1617-7940
Fig. 6Consecutive snapshots of one cell penetration through an endothelial cell wall in 2D simulation. The migrating cell, nucleus and endothelial cells are visualized by red, green and gray colors, respectively. A blue asterisk denotes any type of sources. The CPU time of this model is 6.05 s
Comparison of CPU time and the cell penetration time
|
| 10 | 30 | 50 | 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPU time (s) | 2.43 | 5.07 | 7.81 | 14.85 |
| 0.3771 | 0.3735 | 0.3812 | 0.3906 |
Fig. 1A schematic of the distribution of the nodal points on the cell boundary membrane and the surface of the nucleus. The cytoskeleton is represented as a collection of springs. The red dots, , and , denote nodal points on the cell membrane, nucleus surface and x coordinate of the cell center of mass, respectively. The vectors and are represented in red arrows
Fig. 2An example of movement and polarity of the cell
Parameter values
| Constant | Notation | Value | Unit | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Radius of a circular cell in 2D |
| 12.5 |
| (Champion and Mitragotri |
| Radius of a spherical cell in 3D |
| 10 |
| (Champion and Mitragotri |
| Radius of a circular nucleus in 2D |
| 5 |
| (Friedl et al. |
| Radius of a spherical nucleus in 3D |
| 8 |
| (Friedl et al. |
| Cell deformation relaxation |
| 250 |
| estimated |
| Nucleus deformation relaxation |
| 2500 |
| estimated |
| Diffusivity of the chemokine |
| 3600 |
| (Jayaraman et al. |
| Mobility of points on cell membrane |
| 60 |
| (Vermolen and Gefen |
| Secretion rate of the chemokine |
| 1.2 |
| (Savinell et al. |
| Time step in 2D | 0.0001 | h | (Pinner and Sahai | |
| Time step in 3D | 0.01 | h | – | |
| Number of nodes on a 2D cell |
| 30 | – | – |
| Number of circles on a 3D cell |
| 30 | – | – |
Fig. 3Consecutive snapshots of one cell migrating along a rigid obstacle in a 2D simulation. The cell, nucleus and obstacle are visualized by red, green and gray colors, respectively. A blue asterisk denotes a source secreting a chemokine with the secretion rate of . The CPU time of this model takes 2.20 s
Fig. 4Consecutive snapshots of one cell migration along a rigid obstacle in 3D simulation. The cell, nucleus and obstacle are visualized by red, yellow and blue colors, respectively. A black asterisk denotes any type of sources. The CPU time of this model is 21.77 s
Fig. 5Consecutive snapshots of one cell penetration a cavity made of two obstacles in 2D simulation. The cell, nucleus and obstacles are visualized by red, green and gray colors, respectively. A blue asterisk denotes any type of sources. The CPU time of this model is 2.18 s
Fig. 8a The cell speed evolution in cell penetration model (Fig. 6); b the cell speed evolution in cell metastasis model (Fig. 7)
Fig. 7Consecutive snapshots of one cell about intravasation and extravasation of a blood or lymphatic vessel in 2D simulation. The migrating cell, nucleus and the vessel are visualized by red, green and gray colors, respectively. A blue asterisk denotes any type of sources. The CPU time of this model is 7.30 s
Fig. 9Sample quantity test for convergence of average penetration time . The penetration time is in hours
Parameter values
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value |
|
|
|
|
Fig. 10The histogram (a) and CDF plot (b) of cell penetration time in Monte Carlo simulations on parameters D, , ,
Fig. 11a Compares the CDF plots of cell penetration time in terms of various () with a fixed value (). b Compares the CDF plots of cell penetration time in terms of various () with a fixed value ()
Fig. 12Scatter plots about cell penetration time with respect to various variables D, , ,
Fig. 13The histogram (a) and CDF plot (b) of cell penetration time in Monte Carlo simulations on parameters and
Fig. 14Scatter plots about cell penetration time with respect to various variables and
Fig. 15The histogram (a) and CDF plot (b) of cell penetration time in Monte Carlo simulations on parameters D, , , , and
Fig. 16Scatter plots about cell penetration time with respect to various variables D,