Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Jun 4:20:49-72.
doi: 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-062117-121011. Epub 2018 Jan 12.

Engineering Approaches to Study Cellular Decision Making

Affiliations
Review

Engineering Approaches to Study Cellular Decision Making

Pamela K Kreeger et al. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. .

Abstract

In their native environment, cells are immersed in a complex milieu of biochemical and biophysical cues. These cues may include growth factors, the extracellular matrix, cell-cell contacts, stiffness, and topography, and they are responsible for regulating cellular behaviors such as adhesion, proliferation, migration, apoptosis, and differentiation. The decision-making process used to convert these extracellular inputs into actions is highly complex and sensitive to changes both in the type of individual cue (e.g., growth factor dose/level, timing) and in how these individual cues are combined (e.g., homotypic/heterotypic combinations). In this review, we highlight recent advances in the development of engineering-based approaches to study the cellular decision-making process. Specifically, we discuss the use of biomaterial platforms that enable controlled and tailored delivery of individual and combined cues, as well as the application of computational modeling to analyses of the complex cellular decision-making networks.

Keywords: cell–cell communication; extracellular matrix; growth factors; intracellular signaling; microfluidics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of cues that are received by cells and the engineering approaches covered in this review that can help decode the effects of these cues on cellular decisions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cellular responses to variations in a single cue can vary depending on the cue. However, when the same cues are varied in concert, the resulting behavioral landscape can be complex and not obvious from the results of experiments that examined only individual variations.

References

    1. Downward J 2001. The ins and outs of signalling. Nature 411:759–62 - PubMed
    1. Clarke DC, Brown ML, Erickson RA, Shi Y, Liu X. 2009. Transforming growth factor β depletion is the primary determinant of Smad signaling kinetics. Mol. Cell. Biol 29:2443–55 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tian D, Kreeger PK. 2014. Analysis of the quantitative balance between insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1 ligand, receptor, and binding protein levels to predict cell sensitivity and therapeutic efficacy. BMC Syst. Biol 8:98. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reddy CC, Wells A, Lauffenburger DA. 1996. Receptor-mediated effects on ligand availability influence relative mitogenic potencies of epidermal growth factor and transforming growth factor alpha. J. Cell Physiol 166:512–22 - PubMed
    1. Chang SL, Cavnar SP, Takayama S, Luker GD, Linderman JJ. 2015. Cell, isoform, and environment factors shape gradients and modulate chemotaxis. PLOS ONE 10:e0123450. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources