AIMS Biophysics, 2017, 4(3): 400-414. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2017.3.400

Research article

Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Cellular deformation characterization of human breast cancer cells under hydrodynamic forces

Optical-Bio Microsystems Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Concordia University, 1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd. W. Montreal, Quebec, H3G 1M8, Canada

Understanding how cells sense mechanical forces, and how respond biologically to themis an interesting and quickly-progressing area. Cells within their microenvironment are subjected tovarious physical forces such as mechanical loads and shear stress. Cells respond and adjust to theseforces by mechanotransduction mechanism in which deformation and mechanical forces are convertedinto biomechanical signals. To quantify mechanotransduction responses and to correctly interpretthe behavior of cell under in vitro stimulation, magnitude and distribution of the stresses on the cellmembrane should be characterized. In this study, a 2D Finite Element Model is introduced to simulatethe deformation of individual benign (MCF10A) and malignant (MCF7) human breast cancer cellsunder hydrodynamic forces. A fluid-structure interaction method is implemented to model fluid flowand the adherent single cells inside a microchannel to study the nature of mechanical forces (viscousand pressure) and to determine their contribution to the deformation of cells. Due to the differentmechanical properties, cells respond differently to the forces exerted by the fluid flow. It was foundthat the maximum stress and strain take place at the interface of the adherent cell and channel wall. Also, under the same boundary conditions, nucleolus and cytoplasm of an individual malignant cellundergo more deformation comparing a single benign cell. Furthermore, it was observed that both two cell lines experience much more stress when their attached area to the substrate is reduced.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

References

1. Zheng Y, Nguyen J,Wei Y, et al. (2013) Recent advances in microfluidic techniques for single-cell biophysical characterization. Lab Chip 13: 2464–2483.    

2. Kim DH, Wong PK, Park J, et al. (2009) Microengineered platforms for cell mechanobiology. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 11: 203–233.    

3. Rodriguez ML, McGarry PJ, Sniadecki NJ (2013) Review on cell mechanics: experimental and modeling approaches. Appl Mech Rev 65: 060801.    

4. Sakamoto N (2014) Responses of Living Cells to Hydrodynamic Stimuli Due to Fluid Flow, In: Visualization and Simulation of Complex Flows in Biomedical Engineering, Springer Netherlands, 165–180.

5. Yao W, Ding GH (2011) Interstitial fluid flow: simulation of mechanical environment of cells in the interosseous membrane. Acta Mech Sin 27: 602–610.    

6. Brindley D, Moorthy K, Lee JH, et al. (2011) Bioprocess forces and their impact on cell behavior: implications for bone regeneration therapy. J Tissue Eng 620247.

7. Fan R, Emery T, Zhang Y, et al. (2016) Circulatory shear flow alters the viability and proliferation of circulating colon cancer cells. Sci Rep 6.

8. Wang J, Heo J, Hua SZ (2010) Spatially resolved shear distribution in microfluidic chip for studying force transduction mechanisms in cells. Lab Chip 10: 235–239.    

9. Shemesh J, Jalilian I, Shi A, et al. (2015) Flow-induced stress on adherent cells in microfluidic devices. Lab Chip 15: 4114–4127.    

10. Lee GY, Lim CT (2007) Biomechanics approaches to studying human diseases. Trends Biotechnol 25: 111–118.    

11. Hou HW, Lee WC, Leong MC, et al. (2011) Microfluidics for applications in cell mechanics and mechanobiology. Cell Mol Bioeng 4: 591–602.    

12. Corbin EA, Kong F, Lim CT, et al. (2015) Biophysical properties of human breast cancer cells measured using silicon MEMS resonators and atomic force microscopy. Lab Chip 15: 839–847.    

13. McGarry JG, Klein-Nulend J, Mullender MG, et al. (2005) A comparison of strain and fluid shear stress in stimulating bone cell responses-a computational and experimental study. FASEB J 19: 482–484.

14. Ni A, Cheema TA, Park CW (2015) Numerical Study of RBC Motion and Deformation through Microcapillary in Alcohol Plasma Solution. Open J Fluid Dyn 5: 26.    

15. Mitchell MJ, King MR (2013) Computational and experimental models of cancer cell response to fluid shear stress. Front Oncol 3: 44.

16. Ramsey F, Cathie P, Gabor F, et al. (1996) Surface tensions of embryonic tissues predict their mutual envelopment behavior. The Company of Biologists Ltd 122: 1611–1620

17. Ding Y , Xu GK ,Wang GF (2017) On the determination of elastic moduli of cells by AFM based indentation. Sci Rep 7.

18. Brown TD (2000) Techniques for mechanical stimulation of cells in vitro: a review. J Biomech 33: 3–14.    

19. Benra FK, Dohmen HJ, Pei J, et al. (2011) A comparison of one-way and two-way coupling methods for numerical analysis of fluid-structure interactions. J Appl Math 2011.

20. Bruus H (2008) Theoretical microfluidics, Springer Netherlands, 165–180.

21. Basak S, Raman A, Garimella SV (2006) Hydrodynamic loading of microcantilevers vibrating in viscous fluids J Appl Phys 99: 114906.

22. Guck J, Schinkinger S, Lincoln B, et al. (2005) Optical deformability as an inherent cell marker for testing malignant transformation and metastatic competence. Biophys J 88: 3689–3698.    

23. Liu Z, Lee Y, hee Jang J, et al. (2015) Microfluidic cytometric analysis of cancer cell transportability and invasiveness. Sci Rep 5: 14272.    

24. Caille N, Thoumine O, Tardy Y, et al. (2002) Contribution of the nucleus to the mechanical properties of endothelial cells. J Biomech 35: 177–178.    

25. Geltmeier A, Rinner B, Bade D, et al. (2015) Characterization of dynamic behaviour of MCF7 and MCF10A cells in ultrasonic field using modal and harmonic analyses. PloS one 10: e0134999.    

26. SAS I (2012) ANSYS Mechanical APDL Theory Reference.

27. Vaughan TJ, Mullen CA, Verbruggen SW, et al. (2015) Bone cell mechanosensation of fluid flow stimulation: a fluid-structure interaction model characterising the role integrin attachments and primary cilia. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 14: 703–718.    

28. Cooper GM, Hausman RE (2000) The cell. Sinauer Associates 725–730.

29. Martin TA, Ye L, Sanders AJ, et al. (2013) Cancer invasion and metastasis: molecular and cellular perspective. Landes Bioscience.

Copyright Info: © 2017, Muthukumaran Packirisamy, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline
Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved