4.7 Article

Label-Free Cell Migration Assay Using Magnetic Exclusion

期刊

ADVANCED MATERIALS TECHNOLOGIES
卷 7, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/admt.202101033

关键词

bioprinting; cell migration; in vitro; magnetophoresis; wound healing

资金

  1. MITACS Accelerate Fund [IT18550]
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [RGPIN-2019-06571]
  3. Idea 2 Innovation Grant [I2IPJ 555927-20]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a rapid, insert-free magnetic exclusion technique using magnetic fields to create reproducible cell aggregates. The technique is inexpensive, easy to use, and amenable to automation, with potential applications in cancer research, high throughput drug discovery, and screening.
In vitro wound healing assays are widely used to investigate cell migration during various physiologic and pathologic processes. However, traditional scratch-based assays produce cell-free areas that are not reproducible, whereas the alternate insert-based exclusion method is expensive and time-consuming. Here, a rapid, label-free, insert-free magnetic exclusion technique, where magnetic fields are used to create cell-free areas is described. Suspensions of diamagnetic cells in a paramagnetic culture medium are seeded into microwells placed on an array of the coaxially arranged ring and cylinder magnets. In the presence of an inhomogeneous field, the magnetic susceptibility difference drives the cells toward an annular region of the lowest field strength. Annular cell aggregates of reproducible dimensions are produced on tissue culture-treated and collagen I-fibronectin coated surfaces within 3 h. The effects of the paramagnetic agent on cell viability, metabolism, and gene expression are investigated. A mathematical model reveals the dynamics of the cell-free area closure. The magnetic exclusion technique is inexpensive, easy to use, and amenable to automation. Potential applications include cancer research, high throughput drug discovery, and screening.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据