Effects of energy metabolism on the mechanical properties of breast cancer cells
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Levayer, R. Solid stress, competition for space and cancer: The opposing roles of mechanical cell competition in tumour initiation and growth. Semin. Cancer Biol. 63, 69–80 (2020).
Mierke, C. T. The matrix environmental and cell mechanical properties regulate cell migration and contribute to the invasive phenotype of cancer cells. Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 064602 (2019).
Salbreux, G., Charras, G. & Paluch, E. Actin cortex mechanics and cellular morphogenesis. Trends Cell Biol. 22, 536–545 (2012).
Diz-Muñoz, A., Weiner, O. D. & Fletcher, D. A. In pursuit of the mechanics that shape cell surfaces. Nat. Phys. 14, 648–652 (2018).
Fritzsche, M., Erlenkämper, C., Moeendarbary, E., Charras, G. & Kruse, K. Actin kinetics shapes cortical network structure and mechanics. Sci. Adv. 2, e1501337 (2016).
Lee, W. H. et al. TRPV4 regulates breast cancer cell extravasation, stiffness and actin cortex. Sci. Rep. 6, 27903 (2016).
Cross, S. E., Jin, Y.-S., Rao, J. & Gimzewski, J. K. Nanomechanical analysis of cells from cancer patients. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2, 780–783 (2007).
Li, Q., Lee, G. Y., Ong, C. N. & Lim, C. T. AFM indentation study of breast cancer cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 374, 609–613 (2008).
Alibert, C., Goud, B. & Manneville, J. B. Are cancer cells really softer than normal cells? Biol. Cell 109, 167–189 (2017).
Stylianou, A., Lekka, M. & Stylianopoulos, T. AFM assessing of nanomechanical fingerprints for cancer early diagnosis and classification: from single cell to tissue level. Nanoscale 10, 20930–20945 (2018).
Katira, P., Zaman, M. H. & Bonnecaze, R. T. How changes in cell mechanical properties induce cancerous behavior. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 028103 (2012).
Stewart, M. P. et al. Hydrostatic pressure and the actomyosin cortex drive mitotic cell rounding. Nature 469, 226 (2011).
Calzado-Martín, A., Encinar, M., Tamayo, J., Calleja, M. & San Paulo, A. Effect of actin organization on the stiffness of living breast cancer cells revealed by peak-force modulation atomic force microscopy. ACS Nano 10, 3365–3374 (2016).
Oei, R. W. et al. Convolutional neural network for cell classification using microscope images of intracellular actin networks. PLoS ONE 14, e0213626 (2019).
Murrell, M., Oakes, P. W., Lenz, M. & Gardel, M. L. Forcing cells into shape: the mechanics of actomyosin contractility. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 16, 486–498 (2015).
Turlier, H. et al. Equilibrium physics breakdown reveals the active nature of red blood cell flickering. Nat. Phys. 12, 513–519 (2016).
Chugh, P. et al. Actin cortex architecture regulates cell surface tension. Nat. Cell Biol. 19, 689–697 (2017).
Mandriota, N. et al. Cellular nanoscale stiffness patterns governed by intracellular forces. Nat. Mater. 18, 1071–1077 (2019).
Liberti, M. V. & Locasale, J. W. The Warburg effect: how does it benefit cancer cells? Trends Biochem. Sci. 41, 211–218 (2016).
Pavlova, N. N. & Thompson, C. B. The emerging hallmarks of cancer metabolism. Cell Metab. 23, 27–47 (2016).
Trepat, X. et al. Universal physical responses to stretch in the living cell. Nature 447, 592–595 (2007).
Rigato, A., Miyagi, A., Scheuring, S. & Rico, F. High-frequency microrheology reveals cytoskeleton dynamics in living cells. Nat. Phys. 13, 771–775 (2017).
Kollmannsberger, P. & Fabry, B. Linear and nonlinear rheology of living cells. Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 41, 75–97 (2011).
Gavara, N. Combined strategies for optimal detection of the contact point in AFM force-indentation curves obtained on thin samples and adherent cells. Sci. Rep. 6, 21267 (2016).
Efremov, Y. M., Okajima, T. & Raman, A. Measuring viscoelasticity of soft biological samples using atomic force microscopy. Soft Matter 16, 64–81 (2020).
Garcia, P. D. & Garcia, R. Determination of the elastic moduli of a single cell cultured on a rigid support by force microscopy. Biophys. J. 114, 2923–2932 (2018).
Efremov, Y. M., Wang, W. H., Hardy, S. D., Geahlen, R. L. & Raman, A. Measuring nanoscale viscoelastic parameters of cells directly from AFM force-displacement curves. Sci. Rep. 7, 1541 (2017).
Ting, T. C. T. The contact stresses between a rigid indenter and a viscoelastic half-space. J. Appl. Mech. 33, 845–854 (1966).
Xu, W. et al. Cell stiffness is a biomarker of the metastatic potential of ovarian cancer cells. PLoS ONE 7, e46609 (2012).
Nguyen, A. V. et al. Stiffness of pancreatic cancer cells is associated with increased invasive potential. Integr. Biol. 8, 1232–1245 (2016).
Nguyen, A. V. et al. Differential Contributions of Actin and Myosin to the Physical Phenotypes and Invasion of Pancreatic. Cancer Cells Cell. Mol. Bioeng. 13, 27–44 (2020).
Wirtz, D., Konstantopoulos, K. & Searson, P. C. The physics of cancer: the role of physical interactions and mechanical forces in metastasis. Nat. Rev. Cancer 11, 512–522 (2011).
Betapudi, V., Licate, L. S. & Egelhoff, T. T. Distinct roles of nonmuscle myosin II isoforms in the regulation of MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell spreading and migration. Cancer Res. 66, 4725–4733 (2006).
Georgouli, M. et al. Regional activation of myosin II in cancer cells drives tumor progression via a secretory cross-talk with the immune microenvironment. Cell 176, 757-774.e723 (2019).
Picariello, H. S. et al. Myosin IIA suppresses glioblastoma development in a mechanically sensitive manner. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 15550–15559 (2019).
Casella, J. F., Flanagan, M. D. & Lin, S. Cytochalasin D inhibits actin polymerization and induces depolymerization of actin filaments formed during platelet shape change. Nature 293, 302–305 (1981).
Allingham, J. S., Smith, R. & Rayment, I. The structural basis of blebbistatin inhibition and specificity for myosin II. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 12, 378–379 (2005).
Kovács, M., Tóth, J., Hetényi, C., Málnási-Csizmadia, A. & Sellers, J. R. Mechanism of blebbistatin inhibition of myosin II. J. Biol. Chem. 279, 35557–35563 (2004).
Guo, M. et al. Probing the stochastic, motor-driven properties of the cytoplasm using force spectrum microscopy. Cell 158, 822–832 (2014).
Atkinson, S. J., Hosford, M. A. & Molitoris, B. A. Mechanism of actin polymerization in cellular ATP depletion. J. Biol. Chem. 279, 5194–5199 (2004).
Moeendarbary, E. et al. The cytoplasm of living cells behaves as a poroelastic material. Nat. Mater. 12, 253–261 (2013).
Hu, J. et al. Size-and speed-dependent mechanical behavior in living mammalian cytoplasm. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 9529–9534 (2017). (2017).
Bonfanti, A., Kaplan, J. L., Charras, G. & Kabla, A. J. Fractional viscoelastic models for power-law materials. Soft Matter 16, 6002–6020 (2020).
Buelto, D. & Duncan, M. C. Cellular energetics: actin and myosin abstain from ATP during starvation. Curr. Biol. 24, R1004–R1006 (2014).
Efremov, Y. M. et al. The effects of confluency on cell mechanical properties. J. Biomech. 46, 1081–1087 (2013).
Schierbaum, N., Rheinlaender, J. & Schäffer, T. E. Viscoelastic properties of normal and cancerous human breast cells are affected differently by contact to adjacent cells. Acta Biomater. 55, 239–248 (2017).
Straight, A. F. et al. Dissecting temporal and spatial control of cytokinesis with a myosin II inhibitor. Science 299, 1743–1747 (2003).
Pogoda, K. et al. Depth-sensing analysis of cytoskeleton organization based on AFM data. Eur. Biophys. J. 41, 79–87 (2012).
Ayala, Y. A. et al. Effects of cytoskeletal drugs on actin cortex elasticity. Exp. Cell Res. 351, 173–181 (2017).
Wakatsuki, T., Schwab, B., Thompson, N. C. & Elson, E. L. Effects of cytochalasin D and latrunculin B on mechanical properties of cells. J. Cell Sci. 114, 1025–1036 (2001).
Duxbury, M. S., Ashley, S. W. & Whang, E. E. Inhibition of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cellular invasiveness by blebbistatin: a novel myosin II inhibitor. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 313, 992–997 (2004).
Hayot, C. et al. Characterization of the activities of actin-affecting drugs on tumor cell migration. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 211, 30–40 (2006).