The motility of normal and cancer cells in response to the combined influence of the substrate rigidity and anisotropic microstructure

Tzvetelina Tzvetkova-Chevolleau, Angélique Stéphanou, David Fuard, Jacques Ohayon, Patrick Schiavone, Philippe Tracqui

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

135 Scopus citations

Abstract

Cell adhesion and migration are strongly influenced by extracellular matrix (ECM) architecture and rigidity, but little is known about the concomitant influence of such environmental signals to cell responses, especially when considering cells of similar origin and morphology, but exhibiting a normal or cancerous phenotype. Using micropatterned polydimethylsiloxane substrates (PDMS) with tunable stiffness (500 kPa, 750 kPa, 2000 kPa) and topography (lines, pillars or unpatterned), we systematically analyse the differential response of normal (3T3) and cancer (SaI/N) fibroblastic cells. Our results demonstrate that both cells exhibit differential morphology and motility responses to changes in substrate rigidity and microtopography. 3T3 polarisation and spreading are influenced by substrate microtopography and rigidity. The cells exhibit a persistent type of migration, which depends on the substrate anisotropy. In contrast, the dynamic of SaI/N spreading is strongly modified by the substrate topography but not by substrate rigidity. SaI/N morphology and migration seem to escape from extracellular cues: the cells exhibit uncorrelated migration trajectories and a large dispersion of their migration speed, which increases with substrate rigidity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1541-1551
Number of pages11
JournalBiomaterials
Volume29
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2008

Keywords

  • Cell adhesion
  • Mechanotaxis
  • Micropatterning
  • Random walk

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Bioengineering
  • Ceramics and Composites
  • Biomaterials
  • Mechanics of Materials

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The motility of normal and cancer cells in response to the combined influence of the substrate rigidity and anisotropic microstructure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this