4.6 Review

Interrogation of single-cell communications on microfluidic platforms

Journal

CELL REPORTS PHYSICAL SCIENCE
Volume 3, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.xcrp.2022.101129

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [22004135, 32000939]
  2. Shenzhen Science and TechnologyProgram [GXWD20201231165807008, 20200824162253002, RCBS202 10706092409020, JCYJ20190807160401657, JCYJ20190807160415074]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Heterogeneous cell-cell communications are crucial for regulating biological processes and diseases. Traditional cell co-culture methods provide bulk-averaged results, while single-cell co-culture based on microfluidic platforms can reveal heterogeneous interactions between different cell types at single-cell resolution.
Heterogeneous cell-cell communications are essential for organisms to regulate many biological processes, including development, dif-ferentiation, and immune regulation. They are also closely related to the occurrence and progression of a wide range of diseases. In vitro cell co-culture assay that cultivates different types of cells together is an effective approach to studying cell-cell communica-tions. However, conventional co-culture methods rely on popula-tions of cells, therefore only giving bulk-averaged results. In recent years, single-cell co-culture based on microfluidic platforms has emerged as a novel cultivation technique. It uses rationally designed microfluidic platforms to trap and cultivate different types of single cells together. Using this method, the heterogeneous interactions between different types of cells can be revealed at single-cell res-olution. This review summarizes the current advances in microflui-dics-based single-cell co-culture techniques, critically discusses their advantages and disadvantages, and summarizes the challenges and opportunities in this field.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available