RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 2D or 3D? How <em>in vitro</em> cell motility is conserved across dimensions, and predicts <em>in vivo</em> invasion
JF bioRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
SP 627281
DO 10.1101/627281
A1 Sualyneth Galarza
A1 Hyuna Kim
A1 Naciye Atay
A1 Shelly R Peyton
A1 Jennifer M Munson
YR 2019
UL http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2019/05/05/627281.abstract
AB Cell motility is a critical aspect of wound healing, the immune response, and is deregulated in cancer. Current limitations in imaging tools make it difficult to study cell migration in vivo. To overcome this, and to identify drivers from the microenvironment that regulate cell migration, bioengineers have developed 2D and 3D tissue model systems in which to study cell motility in vitro, with the aim of mimicking the environments in which cells move in vivo. However, there has been no systematic study to explicitly relate and compare cell motility measurements between these geometries/systems. Here, we provide such analysis on our own data, as well as across data in existing literature to understand whether, and which, in vitro models are predictive of in vivo cell motility. To our surprise, many metrics of cell movement on 2D surfaces significantly and positively correlate with cell migration in 3D environments, and cell invasion in 3D is negatively correlated with glioblastoma invasion in vivo. Finally, to best compare across complex model systems, in vivo data, and data from different labs, we suggest that groups report an effect size, a statistical tool that is most translatable across experiments and labs, when conducting experiments that affect cellular motility.