Breast Fibroblasts and ECM Components Modulate Breast Cancer Cell Migration through the Secretion of MMPs in a 3D Microfluidic Co-Culture Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extracellular matrix (ECM) composition greatly influences cancer progression, leading to differential invasion, migration, and metastatic potential. In breast cancer, ECM components, such as fibroblasts and ECM proteins, have the potential to alter cancer cell migration. However, the lack of in vitro migration models that can vary ECM composition limits our knowledge of how specific ECM components contribute to cancer progression. Here, a microfluidic model was used to study the effect of 3D heterogeneous ECMs (i.e., fibroblasts and different ECM protein compositions) on the migration distance of a highly invasive human breast cancer cell line, MDA-MB-231. Specifically, we show that in the presence of normal breast fibroblasts, a fibronectin-rich matrix induces more cancer cell migration. Analysis of the ECM revealed the presence of ECM tunnels. Likewise, cancer-stromal crosstalk induced an increase in the secretion of metalloproteinases (MMPs) in co-cultures. When MMPs were inhibited, migration distance decreased in all conditions except for the fibronectin-rich matrix in the co-culture with human mammary fibroblasts (HMFs). This model mimics the in vivo invasion microenvironment, allowing the examination of cancer cell migration in a relevant context. In general, this data demonstrates the capability of the model to pinpoint the contribution of different components of the tumor microenvironment (TME).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".