| Title |
Cell-based microfluidic device for screening anti-proliferative activity of drugs in vascular smooth muscle cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Microdevices, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10544-012-9679-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, X. Muñoz-Berbel, S. Demming, S. Büttgenbach, M. D. Herrera, A. Llobera |
| Abstract |
This paper presents a microfluidic device consisting of five parallel microchambers with integrated readout-grid for the screening of anti-proliferative activity of drugs in vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMC). A two-level SU-8 master was fabricated and replicated with poly(dimethylsiloxane), PDMS, using standard soft-lithographic methods. The relative small height (4-10 μm) of the integrated grid allowed the identification of single-cells or cell groups and the monitoring of their motility, morphology and size with time, without disturbing their proliferation pattern. This is of particular interest when considering VSMC which, apart of being crucial in the atherosclerotic process, do not proliferate in a single layer but in a non-homogenous hill and valley phenotype. The performance of the microfluidic device has been validated by comparison with conventional culturing methods, proving that the cell proliferation remains unaffected by the microchamber structure (with the integrated grid) and the experimental conditions. Finally, the microfluidic device was also used to evaluate the anti-proliferative activity of curcumin and colchicine in VSMC. With this cellular type, the anti-proliferative activity of curcumin (IC(50) =35 ± 5 μM) was found to be much lower than colchicine (IC(50) =3.2 ± 1.2 μM). These results demonstrate the good performance of the microfluidic device in the evaluation of the anti-proliferative activity (or cytotoxicity) of drugs. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 24% |
| Engineering | 8 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2014.
All research outputs
#7,185,611
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#221
of 746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,614
of 164,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 746 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 164,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.