Geometric characteristics of cubically symmetric and triply periodic scaffolds for optimal cell migration

Abstract

In tissue engineering, it is important to conceive and construct artificial bio-mimetic scaffolds that mimic the native extracellular matrix and are able to foster cell migration, which represents a fundamental process in wound healing and tissue regeneration. In order to do that, cubically symmetric and triply periodic porous structures have emerged as promising candidates, for instance for the in vitro reconstruction of cartilage and bones, also due to their tunable mechanical characteristics and highly interconnected porous architectures that resemble trabecular bone hyperboloidal topography. The problem addressed in this article is the identification of the geometrical characteristics of such scaffolds that best favor cell migration into the porous structures to speed-up their re-population. The method is based on the observation that cell nucleus deformations should be avoided, because they can slow down cell migration, while the pore size should remain sufficiently small to favor cell adhesion to the scaffold walls and the generation of traction forces, that are fundamental for more efficient movements of the cells. Mathematically speaking, at the cellular scale, this leads to the calculation of the size of the largest sphere that can traverse the bio-mimetic scaffold, without being stuck, eventually yielding for each studied geometry a specific ratio between the periodic cell size and the nucleus diameter. These microscopic geometrical descriptors could provide inputs for subsequent macroscopic models of cell migration, where effective motility can be related to the architecture of the scaffold.

Keywords

cell migration / bio-mimetic scaffolds / triply periodic surfaces / cubically symmetric lattices / non-interpenetration of matter

References

[1] X. Trepat, Z. Chen, K. Jacobson, Cell migration, Compr. Physiol., 2 (2012), 2369-2392. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2040-4603.2012.tb00467.x

[2] K. Wolf, P. Friedl, Molecular mechanisms of cancer cell invasion and plasticity, Br. J. Dermatol., 154 (2006), 11-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07231.x

[3] D. A. Lauffenburger, A. F. Horwitz, Cell migration: a physically integrated molecular process, Cell, 84 (1996), 359-369.

[4] A. D. Doyle, F. W. Wang, K. Matsumoto, K. M. Yamada, One-dimensional topography underlies three-dimensional fibrillar cell migration, J. Cell Biol., 184 (2009), 481-490. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200810041

[5] C. G. Rolli, T. Seufferlein, R. Kemkemer, J. P. Spatz, Impact of tumor cell cytoskeleton organization on invasiveness and migration: a microchannel-based approach, PLoS One, 5 (2010), e8726. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008726

[6] K. Wolf, P. Friedl, Extracellular matrix determinants of proteolytic and non-proteolytic cell migration, Trends Cell Biol., 21 (2011), 736-744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2011.09.006

[7] V. te Boekhorst, L. Preziosi, P. Friedl, Plasticity of cell migration in vivo and in silico, Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol., 32 (2016), 491-526. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-cellbio-111315-125201

[8] P. Friedl, E. B. Bröcker, The biology of cell locomotion within three-dimensional extracellular matrix, Cell. Mol. Life Sci., 57 (2000), 41-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s000180050498

[9] P. Friedl, K. Wolf, Tumour-cell invasion and migration: diversity and escape mechanisms, Nat. Rev. Cancer, 3 (2003), 362-374. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1075

[10] R. M. Kuntz, W. M. Saltzman, Neutrophil motility in extracellular matrix gels: mesh size and adhesion affect speed of migration, Biophys. J., 72 (1997), 1472-1480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(97)78793-9

[11] F. Sabeh, R. Shimizu-Hirota, S. J. Weiss, Protease-dependent versus-independent cancer cell invasion programs: three-dimensional amoeboid movement revisited, J. Cell Biol., 185 (2009), 11-19. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200807195

[12] C. Giverso, A. Arduino, L. Preziosi, How nucleus mechanics and ECM microstructure influence the invasion of single cells and multicellular aggregates, Bull. Math. Biol., 80 (2018), 1017-1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-017-0262-9

[13] C. Giverso, A. Grillo, L. Preziosi, Influence of nucleus deformability on cell entry into cylindrical structures, Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol., 13 (2014), 481-502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-013-0510-3

[14] M. Scianna, L. Preziosi, A cellular Potts model for analyzing cell migration across constraining pillar arrays, Axioms, 10 (2021), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms10010032

[15] M. Scianna, L. Preziosi, Modeling the influence of nucleus elasticity on cell invasion in fiber networks and microchannels, J. Theor. Biol., 317 (2013), 394-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.003

[16] M. Scianna, L. Preziosi, K. Wolf, A cellular Potts model simulating cell migration on and in matrix environments, Math. Biosci. Eng., 10 (2013), 235-261. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2013.10.235

[17] J. Chen, D. Weihs, M. van Dijk, F. J. Vermolen, A phenomenological model for cell and nucleus deformation during cancer metastasis, Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol., 17 (2018), 1429-1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-018-1036-5

[18] O. Maxian, A. Mogilner, W. Strychalski, Computational estimates of mechanical constraints on cell migration through the extracellular matrix, PLoS Comput. Biol., 16 (2020), e1008160. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008160

[19] C. Giverso, G. Jankowiak, L. Preziosi, C. Schmeiser, The influence of nucleus mechanics in modelling adhesion-independent cell migration in structured and confined environments, Bull. Math. Biol., 85 (2023), 88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-023-01187-8

[20] S. R. Peyton, A. J. Putnam, Extracellular matrix rigidity governs smooth muscle cell motility in a biphasic fashion, J. Cell. Physiol., 204 (2005), 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.20274

[21] B. A. Harley, H. Kim, M. H. Zaman, I. V. Yannas, D. A. Lauffenburger, L. J. Gibson, Microarchitecture of three-dimensional scaffolds influences cell migration behavior via junction interactions, Biophys. J., 95 (2008), 4013-4024. https://doi.org/10.1529/biophysj.107.122598

[22] M. H. Zaman, L. M. Trapani, A. L. Sieminski, D. Mackellar, H. Gong, R. D. Kamm, et al., Migration of tumor cells in 3D matrices is governed by matrix stiffness along with cell-matrix adhesion and proteolysis, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103 (2006), 10889-10894. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0604460103

[23] S. J. P. Callens, R. J. C. Uyttendaele, L. E. Fratila-Apachitei, A. A. Zadpoor, Substrate curvature as a cue to guide spatiotemporal cell and tissue organization, Biomaterials, 232 (2020), 119739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119739

[24] A. P. G. Castro, T. Pires, J. E. Santos, B. P. Gouveia, P. R. Fernandes, Permeability versus design in TPMS scaffolds, Materials, 12 (2019), 1313. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12081313

[25] R. Pugliese, S. Graziosi, Biomimetic scaffolds using triply periodic minimal surface- based porous structures for biomedical applications, SLAS Technol., 28 (2023), 165-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.slast.2023.04.004

[26] E. Yang, M. Leary, B. Lozanovski, D. Downing, M. Mazur, A. Sarker, et al., Effect of geometry on the mechanical properties of Ti-6Al-4V Gyroid structures fabricated via SLM: a numerical studyy, Mater. Des., 184 (2019), 108165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108165

[27] L. Yuan, S. Ding, C. Wen, Additive manufacturing technology for porous metal implant applications and triple minimal surface structures: a review, Bioact. Mater., 4 (2019), 56-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2018.12.003

[28] L. Li, J. Shi, K. Zhang, L. Yang, F. Yu, L. Zhu, et al., Early osteointegration evaluation of porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds designed based on triply periodic minimal surface models, J. Orthop. Transl., 19 (2019), 94-105, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2019.03.003

[29] S. Vijayavenkataraman, L. Zhang, S. Zhang, J. Y. H. Fuh, W. F. Lu, Triply periodic minimal surfaces sheet scaffolds for tissue engineering applications: an optimization approach toward biomimetic scaffold design, ACS Appl. Bio Mater., 1 (2018), 259-269. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.8b00052

[30] C. Lonati, A. Marzocchi, On self-contact and non-interpenetration of elastic rods, Math. Mech. Solids, 30 (2025), 450-469. https://doi.org/10.1177/10812865231226311

[31] M. P. Do Carmo, Differential geometry of curves and surfaces: revised and updated second edition , Courier Dover Publications, 2016.

[32] A. Moure, H. Gomez, Phase-field modeling of individual and collective cell migration, Arch. Comput. Methods Eng., 28 (2021), 311-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09377-1