Cell mechanical properties and their association with diseases: A concise review of research progress
Abstract
Cell mechanical properties refer to the behaviors and characteristics of cells in response to mechanical stimuli and regulation of physiological functions, which profoundly affect the functions of cells and subcellular structures. This paper systematically reviews the determinants of cell mechanical properties, including cell membrane viscoelasticity, cytoskeleton dynamics, nuclear-cytoskeleton coupling, and extracellular matrix (ECM) interactions, while also reviews the cell mechanical models. A large number of experimental works have shown that pathological conditions significantly alter these mechanical properties: in malaria, sickle cell disease, and diabetes, red blood cells (RBCs) exhibit increased rigidity; compared with normal cells, tumor cells typically show decreased rigidity. This article reviews these changes, and discusses the microscopic and biological reasons. These findings further demonstrate that the study of cell mechanical properties and their association with diseases is a complex bio-chemical-mechanical coupling problem. This work can play a positive role to understand the relations between cellular mechanics and diseases.
References
1. Delaine-Smith RM, Reilly GC. Mesenchymal stem cell responses to mechanical stimuli. Muscles Ligaments Tendons Journal. 2012; 2: 169–180.
2. Vining KH, Mooney DJ. Mechanical forces direct stem cell behaviour in development and regeneration. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2017; 18: 728–742. doi: 10.1038/nrm.2017.108
3. Wang Y, Zhang J. Self-organization and mechanical properties of dynamic cytoskeletal networks in vitro. Journal of Functional Polymers. 2023; 36: 275–284. doi: 10.14133/j.cnki.1008-9357.20221231001
4. Gumbiner BM. Cell Adhesion: The molecular basis of tissue architecture and morphogenesis. Cell. 1996; 84: 345–357. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81279-9
5. Haase K, Pelling AE. Investigating cell mechanics with atomic force microscopy. Journal of The Royal Society Interface. 2015; 12: 20140970. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2014.0970
6. Carlo DD, Wu LY, Lee LP. Dynamic single cell culture array. Lab on a Chip. 2006; 6: 1445. doi: 10.1039/b605937f
7. Michaelson J, Hariharan V, Huang H. Hyperglycemic and hyperlipidemic conditions alter cardiac cell biomechanical properties. Biophysical Journal. 2014; 106: 2322–2329. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2014.04.040
8. Chang H-Y, Li X, Karniadakis GE. Modeling of biomechanics and biorheology of red blood cells in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Biophysical Journal. 2017; 113: 481–490. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2017.06.015
9. Ciasca G, Papi M, Di Claudio S, et al. Mapping viscoelastic properties of healthy and pathological red blood cells at the nanoscale level. Nanoscale. 2015; 7: 17030–17037. doi: 10.1039/c5nr03145a
10. Li P, Yang Z, Ji Y, et al. Effects of hyperoxic training on red blood cell deformability and mechanical properties in elite male endurance athletes: A randomized crossover study. Molecular & Cellular Biomechanics. 2025; 22: 590. doi: 10.62617/mcb590
11. Wang H, Qiao Y, Liu J, et al. Experimental study of the difference in deformation between normal and pathological, renal and bladder, cells induced by acoustic radiation force. European Biophysics Journal. 2020; 49: 155–161. doi: 1007/s00249-020-01422-3
12. Sauer F, Fritsch A, Grosser S, et al. Whole tissue and single cell mechanics are correlated in human brain tumors. Soft Matter. 2021; 17: 10744–10752. doi: 10.1039/d1sm01291f
13. Baker EL, Bonnecaze RT, Zaman MH. Extracellular matrix stiffness and architecture govern intracellular rheology in cancer. Biophysical Journal. 2009; 97: 1013–1021. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2009.05.054
14. Fletcher DA, Mullins RD. Cell mechanics and the cytoskeleton. Nature. 2010; 463: 485–492. doi: 1038/nature08908
15. Janmey PA, McCulloch CA. Cell mechanics: integrating cell responses to mechanical stimuli. Annual Review Biomedical Engineering. 2007; 9: 1–34. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.9.060906.151927
16. Hoffman BD, Crocker JC. Cell mechanics: dissecting the physical responses of cells to force. Annual Review Biomedical Engineering. 2009; 11: 259–288. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.10.061807.160511
17. Chaudhuri O, Cooper-White J, Janmey PA, et al. Effects of extracellular matrix viscoelasticity on cellular behaviour. Nature. 2020; 584: 535–546. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2612-2
18. Fang Y, Gong H, Yang R, et al. An active biomechanical model of cell adhesion actuated by intracellular tensioning-taxis. Biophysical Journal. 2020; 118: 2656–2669. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2020.04.016
19. Khatiwala CB, Peyton SR, Putnam AJ. Intrinsic mechanical properties of the extracellular matrix affect the behavior of pre-osteoblastic MC3T3-E1 cells. American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology. 2006; 290: C1640–1650. doi: 1152/ajpcell.00455.2005
20. Rodriguez ML, McGarry PJ, Sniadecki NJ. Review on cell mechanics: Experimental and modeling approaches. Applied Mechanics Reviews. 2013; 65: 060801. doi: 10.1115/1.4025355
21. Hochmuth RM, Evans EA, Wiles HC, et al. Mechanical measurement of red cell membrane thickness. Science. 1983; 220: 101–102. doi: 10.1126/science.6828875
22. Bo L, Waugh RE. Determination of bilayer membrane bending stiffness by tether formation from giant, thin-walled vesicles. Biophysical Journal. 1989; 55: 509–517. doi: 10.1016/s0006-3495(89)82844-9
23. Diez-Silva M, Dao M, Han J, et al. Shape and biomechanical characteristics of human red blood cells in health and disease. MRS Bulletin. 2010; 35: 382–388. doi: 1557/mrs2010.571
24. Niggli V, Burger MM. Interaction of the cytoskeleton with the plasma membrane. The Journal of Membrane Biolog. 1987; 100: 97–121. doi: 10.1007/bf02209144
25. Janmey P. Cell membranes and the cytoskeleton. Handbook of biological physics. North-Holland. 1995; 1: 805–849. doi: 10.1016/S1383-8121(06)80010-2
26. Sens P, Plastino J. Membrane tension and cytoskeleton organization in cell motility. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter. 2015; 27: 273103. doi: 10.1088/0953-8984/27/27/273103
27. Elson EL. Cellular mechanics as an indicator of cytoskeletal structure and function. Annual Review of Biophysics and Biophysical Chemistry. 1988; 17: 397–430. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bb.17.060188.002145
28. Gokhin DS, Nowak RB, Khoory JA, et al. Dynamic actin filaments control the mechanical behavior of the human red blood cell membrane. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2015; 26: 1699–1710. doi: 1091/mbc.e14-12-1583
29. Grady ME, Composto RJ, Eckmann DM. Cell elasticity with altered cytoskeletal architectures across multiple cell types. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2016; 61: 197–207. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.01.022
30. Isermann P, Lammerding J. Nuclear mechanics and mechanotransduction in health and disease. Current Biology. 2013; 23: R1113–1121. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.009
31. Friedl P, Wolf K, Lammerding J. Nuclear mechanics during cell migration. Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 2011; 23: 55–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2010.10.015
32. Wang X, Liu H, Zhu M, et al. Mechanical stability of the cell nucleus – roles played by the cytoskeleton in nuclear deformation and strain recovery. Journal of Cell Science. 2018; 131: jcs209627. doi: 10.1242/jcs.209627
33. Antonacci G, Braakman S. Biomechanics of subcellular structures by non-invasive Brillouin microscopy. Scientific Reports. 2016; 6: 37217. doi: 10.1038/srep37217
34. Lomakin AJ, Cattin CJ, Cuvelier D, et al. The nucleus acts as a ruler tailoring cell responses to spatial constraints. Science. 2020; 370: eaba2894. doi: 10.1101/863514
35. Sun B. The mechanics of fibrillar collagen extracellular matrix. Cell Reports Physical Science. 2021; 2: 100515. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrp.2021.100515
36. Wang N, Ingber DE. Control of cytoskeletal mechanics by extracellular matrix, cell shape, and mechanical tension. Biophysical Journal. 1994; 66: 2181–2189. doi: 10.1016/s0006-3495(94)81014-8
37. Stegemann JP, Hong H, Nerem RM. Mechanical, biochemical, and extracellular matrix effects on vascular smooth muscle cell phenotype. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2005; 98: 2321–2327. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01114.2004
38. Tranqui L, Tracqui P. Mechanical signalling and angiogenesis. The integration of cell–extracellular matrix couplings. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences-Series III-Sciences de la Vie. 2000; 323: 31–47. doi: 10.1016/s0764-4469(00)00110-4
39. Qian B, Qin Z, Liu S, et al. Teaching strategies for resolving gastrointestinal function from the perspective of cell biomechanics. Molecular & Cellular Biomechanics. 2024; 21: 683. doi: 10.62617/mcb683
40. Khoshgoftar M, Torzilli PA, Maher SA. Influence of the pericellular and extracellular matrix structural properties on chondrocyte mechanics. Journal of Orthopaedic Research®. 2018; 36: 721–729. doi: 10.1002/jor.23774
41. Zhang J, Wu G, Qiu J. Interactions between cells and biomaterials in tissue engineering: A review. Chinese Journal of Biotechnology. 2021; 37: 2668–2677. doi: 10.13345/j.cjb.200606
42. Wells RG. The role of matrix stiffness in regulating cell behavior. Hepatology. 2008; 47: 1394–1400.
43. Jahin I, Phillips T, Marcotti S, et al. Extracellular matrix stiffness activates mechanosensitive signals but limits breast cancer cell spheroid proliferation and invasion. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2023; 11: 1292775. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2023.1292775
44. Mierke CT. Viscoelasticity, Like Forces, Plays a role in mechanotransduction. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2022; 10: 789841. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2022.789841
45. Adar RM, Joanny J-F. Active-gel theory for multicellular migration of polar cells in the extra-cellular matrix. New Journal of Physics. 2022; 24: 073001. doi: 1088/1367-2630/ac78fc
46. Danielli JF, Davson H. A contribution to the theory of permeability of thin films. Journal of Cellular and Comparative Physiology. 1935; 5: 495–508. doi: 10.1002/jcp.1030050409
47. Singer SJ, Nicolson GL. The Fluid Mosaic Model of the Structure of Cell Membranes: Cell membranes are viewed as two-dimensional solutions of oriented globular proteins and lipids. 1972; 175: 720–731. doi: 10.1126/science.175.4023.720
48. Helfrich W. Elastic Properties of Lipid Bilayers: Theory and possible experiments. Zeitschrift Für Naturforschung 1973; 28: 693–703.
49. Fedosov DA, Caswell B, Karniadakis GE. A multiscale red blood cell model with accurate mechanics, rheology, and dynamics. Biophysical Journal. 2010; 98: 2215–2225. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2010.02.002
50. Yoon Y-Z, Kotar J, Yoon G, et al. The nonlinear mechanical response of the red blood cell. Physical Biology. 2008; 5: 036007. doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/5/3/036007
51. Dimitrakopoulos P. Analysis of the variation in the determination of the shear modulus of the erythrocyte membrane: Effects of the constitutive law and membrane modeling. Physical Review E. 2012; 85: 041917. doi: 10.1103/physreve.85.041917
52. Zhou EH, Xu F, Quek ST, et al. A power-law rheology-based finite element model for single cell deformation. Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology. 2012; 11: 1075–1084. doi: 10.1007/s10237-012-0374-y
53. Evans EA. Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Biomembranes. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1980.
54. Li H, Lykotrafitis G. Erythrocyte membrane model with explicit description of the lipid bilayer and the spectrin network. Biophysical Journal. 2014; 107: 642–653. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2014.06.031
55. Sun WT. Research advances in protein structure dynamics. Advances in Mechanics. 2009; 39: 129–153. doi: 10.6052/1000-0992-2009-2-J2008-045
56. Wu S. Study of the effect of mechanical properties of materials on cell behaviour based on molecular dynamics simulations. Molecular & Cellular Biomechanics. 2025; 22: 1184. doi: 10.62617/mcb1184
57. Wang N, Naruse K, Stamenović D, et al. Mechanical behavior in living cells consistent with the tensegrity model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2001; 98: 7765–7770. doi: 10.1073/pnas.141199598
58. Wang H, Hang J-T, Chang Z, et al. Static and dynamic mechanics of cell monolayers: A multi-scale structural model. Acta Mechanica Sinica. 2022; 38: 222006. doi: 10.1007/s10409-022-22006-x
59. Liang H, Fang W, Feng X-Q. A multiscale dynamic model of cell–substrate interfaces. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids. 2024; 189: 105725. doi: 10.1016/j.jmps.2024.105725
60. Versypt ANF. Multiscale modeling in disease. Current Opinion in Systems Biology. 2021; 27: 100340. doi: 10.1016/j.coisb.2021.05.001
61. Alert R, Trepat X. Physical models of collective cell migration. Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics. 2020; 11: 77–101. doi: 10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031218-013516
62. Jafari Nivlouei S, Soltani M, Carvalho J, et al. Multiscale modeling of tumor growth and angiogenesis: Evaluation of tumor-targeted therapy. PLoS Computational Biology. 2021; 17: e1009081. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009081
63. Skalak R, Tozeren A, Zarda RP, et al. Strain energy function of red blood cell membranes. Biophysical Journal. 1973; 13: 245–64. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(73)85983-1
64. Eschenbruch J, Dreissen G, Springer R, et al. From microspikes to stress fibers: actin remodeling in breast acini drives myosin II-mediated basement membrane invasion. Cells. 2021; 10: 1979. doi: 10.3390/cells10081979
65. Hollósi A, Pászty K, Bunta BL, et al. BRAF increases endothelial cell stiffness through reorganization of the actin cytoskeleton. FASEB Journal. 2022; 36(e22478): 1–6. doi: 10.1096/fj.202200344R
66. Fedosov DA, Caswell B, Karniadakis GE. Wall shear stress-based model for adhesive dynamics of red blood cells in malaria. Biophysical Journal. 2011; 100: 2084–2093. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2011.03.027
67. Chen Y, Habeck M. Data-driven coarse graining of large biomolecular structures. PLoS One. 2017; 12: e0183057. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183057
68. Schmitt MS, Colen J, Sala S, et al. Zyxin is all you need: machine learning adherent cell mechanics. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv: 2303.00176. 2023. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2303.00176
69. Balogh P, Gounley J, Roychowdhury S, et al. A data-driven approach to modeling cancer cell mechanics during microcirculatory transport. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11: 15232. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-94445-5
70. Lin Z, Bai J, Li S, et al. A physics-informed neural network framework for simulating creep buckling in growing viscoelastic biological tissues. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2026; 452: 118715. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2025.118715
71. Ahmed WW, Fodor É, Betz T. Active cell mechanics: Measurement and theory. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Molecular Cell Research. 2015; 1853: 3083–3094. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2015.05.022
72. Mogilner A, Manhart A. Intracellular fluid mechanics: Coupling cytoplasmic flow with active cytoskeletal gel. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 2018; 50: 347–370. doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010816-060238
73. Heng Y, Yan J, Yu W, et al. Measurement methods and application of mechanical properties of cells (in Chinese). Scientia Sinica Vitae. 2023; 53: 1247–1273. doi: 10.1360/ssv-2022-0197
74. Wu PH, Aroush DRB, Asnacios A, et al. A comparison of methods to assess cell mechanical properties. Nature 2018; 15: 491–498. 10.1038/s41592-018-0015-1
75. Wyss HM. Cell Mechanics: Combining speed with precision. Biophysical Journal. 2015; 109: 1997–1998. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2015.10.019
76. Qi H, Zhang SH, Wang YY. Mechanical measurement study based on three-dimensional traction microscopy (in Chinese). Metrology & Measurement Technology. 2025; 45: 40–47.
77. Thomas G, Burnham NA, Camesano TA, et al. Measuring the mechanical properties of living cells using atomic force microscopy. Journal of Visualized Experiments: JoVE. 2013; 76: 50497. doi: 10.3791/50497
78. Ducker WA, Senden TJ, Pashley RM. Direct measurement of colloidal forces using an atomic force microscope. Nature. 1991; 353: 239–241. doi: 10.1038/353239a0
79. Guerrero-Felix JG, Lopez-Miras J, Rodriguez-Valverde MA, et al. Automation of an atomic force microscope via Arduino. HardwareX. 2023; 15: e00447. doi: 10.1016/j.ohx.2023.e00447
80. Huang B, Li Z, Li J. An artificial intelligence atomic force microscope enabled by machine learning. Nanoscale. 2018; 10: 21320–21326. doi: 10.1039/c8nr06734a
81. Bustamante CJ, Chemla YR, Liu S, et al. Optical tweezers in single-molecule biophysics. Nature Reviews Methods Primers. 2021; 1: 1–25. doi: 1038/s43586-021-00021-6
82. Avsievich T, Zhu R, Popov A, et al. The advancement of blood cell research by optical tweezers. Reviews in Physics. 2020; 5: 100043. doi: 1016/j.revip.2020.100043
83. Liang Y, Yao B, Lei M. Applications of holographic optical tweezers in biological research (in Chinese). Chinese Journal of Lasers. 2020; 47: 257–272.
84. Caselli N, García-Verdugo M, Calero M, et al. Red blood cell flickering activity locally controlled by holographic optical tweezers. Iscience. 2024; 27: 109915. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109915
85. Wang X, Law J, Luo M, et al. Magnetic measurement and stimulation of cellular and intracellular structures. ACS nano. 2020; 14: 3805–3821. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.0c00959
86. Kilinc D, Lee GU. Advances in magnetic tweezers for single molecule and cell biophysics. Integrative Biology. 2014; 6: 27–34. doi: 10.1039/c3ib40185e
87. Sarkar R, Rybenkov VV. A guide to magnetic tweezers and their applications. Frontiers in Physics. 2016; 4: 48. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2016.00048
88. Neuman KC, Nagy A. Single-molecule force spectroscopy: optical tweezers, magnetic tweezers and atomic force microscopy. Nature methods. 2008; 5: 491–505. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1218
89. Wang X, Ho C, Tsatskis Y, et al. Intracellular manipulation and measurement with multipole magnetic tweezers. Science Robotics. 2019; 4: eaav6180. doi: 1126/scirobotics.aav6180
90. Wang X, Wang T, Zhang Z, et al. Biophysical measurement of cellular and intracellular structures using magnetic tweezers. Field-Driven Micro and Nanorobots for Biology and Medicine. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2021. pp. 269–284. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-80197-7_11
91. Lam WA, Rosenbluth MJ, Fletcher DA. Chemotherapy exposure increases leukemia cell stiffness. Blood. 2007; 109: 3505–3508. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-08-043570
92. Nyberg KD, Hu KH, Kleinman SH, et al. Quantitative deformability cytometry: Rapid, calibrated measurements of cell mechanical properties. Biophysical Journal. 2017; 113: 1574–1584. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2017.06.073
93. Zheng Z, Zhang S, Liu Y, et al. Mechanobiology studies of bladder tumor cells using laterally squeezing microfluidic flow cytometry. Talanta. 2025; 282: 127090. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2024.127090
94. Chen Z, Zhu Y, Xu D, et al. Cell elasticity measurement using a microfluidic device with real-time pressure feedback. Lab on a Chip. 2020; 20: 2343–2353. doi: 10.1039/d0lc00092b
95. Qi X, Li X. Research progress on mechanical and flow properties of blood cells in microcirculation using microfluidic devices (in Chinese). Journal of Experiments in Fluid Mechanics. 2020; 34: 1–10. doi: 10.11729/syltlx20190158
96. Bento D, Rodrigues RO, Faustino V, et al. Deformation of red blood cells, air bubbles, and droplets in microfluidic devices: Flow visualizations and measurements. Micromachines. 2018; 9: 151. doi: 10.3390/mi9040151
97. Otto O, Rosendahl P, Mietke A, et al. Real-time deformability cytometry: On-the-fly cell mechanical phenotyping. Nature Methods. 2015; 12: 199–202. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3281
98. Urbanska M, Rosendahl P, Kraeter M, et al. High-throughput single-cell mechanical phenotyping with real-time deformability cytometry. Methods in Cell Biology. 2018; 147: 175–198. doi: 10.1016/bs.mcb.2018.06.009
99. Herbig M, Jacobi A, Wobus M, et al. Machine learning assisted real-time deformability cytometry of CD34+ cells allows to identify patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12: 870. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-04939-z
100. Park Y, Best CA, Badizadegan K, et al. Measurement of red blood cell mechanics during morphological changes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2010; 107: 6731–6736. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0909533107
101. Hénon S, Lenormand G, Richert A, et al. A new determination of the shear modulus of the human erythrocyte membrane using optical tweezers. Biophysical Journal. 1999; 76: 1145–1151. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(99)77279-6
102. Lenormand G, Hénon S, Richert A, et al. Direct measurement of the area expansion and shear moduli of the human red blood cell membrane skeleton. Biophysical Journal. 2001; 81: 43–56. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(01)75678-0
103. Liu X, Tang Z, Zeng Z, et al. The measurement of shear modulus and membrane surface viscosity of RBC membrane with Ektacytometry: A new technique. Math Biosciences. 2007; 209: 190–204. doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2006.09.026
104. Evans EA. Bending elastic modulus of red blood cell membrane derived from buckling instability in micropipet aspiration tests. Biophysical Journal. 1983; 43: 27–30. doi: 10.1016/s0006-3495(83)84319-7
105. Daily B, Elson EL, Zahalak GI. Cell poking. Determination of the elastic area compressibility modulus of the erythrocyte membrane. Biophysical Journal. 1984; 45: 671–682. doi: 10.1016/s0006-3495(84)84209-5
106. Kim Y, Kim K, Park Y. Measurement techniques for red blood cell deformability: Recent advances. Blood Cell—An Overview of Studies in Hematology. 2012; 10: 167–194.
107. Lekka M, Fornal M, Pyka-Fościak G, et al. Erythrocyte stiffness probed using atomic force microscope. Biorheology. 2005; 42: 307–317. doi: 10.1177/0006355x2005042004004
108. Barns S, Balanant MA, Sauret E, et al. Investigation of red blood cell mechanical properties using AFM indentation and coarse-grained particle method. Biomedical Engineering Online. 2017; 16: 140. doi: 10.1186/s12938-017-0429-5
109. Tomaiuolo G. Biomechanical properties of red blood cells in health and disease towards microfluidics. Biomicrofluidics. 2014; 8: 051501. doi: 10.1063/1.4895755
110. Barshtein G, Pajic-Lijakovic I, Gural A. Deformability of stored red blood cells. Frontiers in Physiology. 2021; 12: 722896. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.722896
111. Fedosov DA, Caswell B, Karniadakis GE. Coarse-grained red blood cell model with accurate mechanical properties, rheology and dynamics. In: 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Minneapolis, MN: IEEE; 2009. pp. 4266–4269. doi: 10.1109/iembs.2009.5334585
112. Li Y, Wen C, Xie H, et al. Mechanical property analysis of stored red blood cell using optical tweezers. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces. 2009; 70: 169–173. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2008.11.012
113. Papi M, Ciasca G, Palmieri V, et al. Nano-Mechanical Response of Red Blood Cells. In: Korach CS, Tekalur SA, Zavattieri P, editors. Mechanics of Biological Systems and Materials, Volume 6. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. pp. 11–16. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-41351-8_2
114. Puig-de-Morales-Marinkovic M, Turner KT, Butler JP, et al. Viscoelasticity of the human red blood cell. American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology. 2007; 293(2): C597–C605. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00562.2006
115. Fontes A, Fernandes HP, De Thomaz AA, et al. Measuring electrical and mechanical properties of red blood cells with double optical tweezers. Journal of Biomedical Optics.2008; 13: 014001. doi: 10.1117/1.2870108
116. Saffman PG, Delbrück M. Brownian motion in biological membranes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1975; 72: 3111–3113. doi: 1073/pnas.72.8.3111
117. Li X, Peng Z, Lei H, et al. Probing red blood cell mechanics, rheology and dynamics with a two-component multi-scale model. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 2014; 372: 20130389. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2013.0389
118. Craiem D, Magin RL. Fractional order models of viscoelasticity as an alternative in the analysis of red blood cell (RBC) membrane mechanics. Physical Biology. 2010; 7: 013001. doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/7/1/013001
119. Paul R, Zhou Y, Nikfar M, et al. Quantitative absorption imaging of red blood cells to determine physical and mechanical properties. RSC Advances. 2020; 10: 38923–38936. doi: 10.1039/d0ra05421f
120. Haldar K, Murphy SC, Milner DA, et al. Malaria: Mechanisms of erythrocytic infection and pathological correlates of severe disease. Annual Reviews Pathology Mechanisms Disease. 2007; 2: 217–249. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pathol.2.010506.091913
121. Warncke JD, Beck H-P. Host cytoskeleton remodeling throughout the blood stages of plasmodium falciparum. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 2019; 83: e00013–19. doi: 10.1128/mmbr.00013-19
122. Serebrennikova YM, Patel J, Milhous WK, et al. Quantitative analysis of morphological alterations in Plasmodium falciparum infected red blood cells through theoretical interpretation of spectral measurements. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2010; 265: 493–500. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.05.037
123. Barber BE, Russell B, Grigg MJ, et al. Reduced red blood cell deformability in Plasmodium knowlesi malaria. Blood Advances. 2018; 2: 433–443. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2017013730
124. Rey J, Buffet PA, Ciceron L, et al. Reduced erythrocyte deformability associated with hypoargininemia during Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Scientific Reports. 2014; 4: 3767. doi: 10.1038/srep03767
125. Fedosov DA, Lei H, Caswell B, et al. Multiscale modeling of red blood cell mechanics and blood flow in malaria. PLoS Computational Biology. 2011; 7: e1002270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002270
126. Hosseini SM, Feng JJ. How malaria parasites reduce the deformability of infected red blood cells. Biophysical Journal. 2012; 103: 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2012.05.026
127. Liu ZL, Li H, Qiang Y, et al. Computational modeling of biomechanics and biorheology of heated red blood cells. Biophysical Journal. 2021; 120: 4663–4671. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2021.09.038
128. Dulińska I, Targosz M, Strojny W, et al. Stiffness of normal and pathological erythrocytes studied by means of atomic force microscopy. Journal of Biochemical and Biophysical Methods. 2006; 66: 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jbbm.2005.11.003
129. Lima CN, Moura DS, Silva YSS, et al. Evaluating viscoelastic properties and membrane electrical charges of red blood cells with optical tweezers and cationic quantum dots–applications to β-thalassemia intermedia hemoglobinopathy. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces. 2020; 186: 110671. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2019.110671
130. Nash GB. Red cell mechanics: What changes are needed to adversely affect in vivo circulation1. Biorheology. 1991; 28: 231–239. doi: 10.3233/BIR-1991-283-414
131. Fisseha D, Katiyar VK. Analysis of mechanical behavior of red cell membrane in sickle cell disease. Joural Applied Mathematics. 2012; 2: 40–46. doi: 10.5923/j.am.20120202.08
132. Zheng Y, Cachia MA, Ge J, et al. Mechanical differences of sickle cell trait (SCT) and normal red blood cells. Lab on a Chip. 2015; 15: 3138–3146. doi: 10.1039/c5lc00543d
133. Li X, Dao M, Lykotrafitis G, et al. Biomechanics and biorheology of red blood cells in sickle cell anemia. Journal of Biomechanics. 2017; 50: 34–41. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.11.022
134. Nunes JM, Pretorius E. Red blood cell membrane cholesterol in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Thrombosis Research. 2019; 178: 91–98. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2019.04.005
135. Yale P, N’Guessan AA, Regnima GO, et al. Impact of sugar on the mechanical properties of RBCs assessed by optical tweezers. Journal of Biosciences and Medicines. 2025; 13: 386–393. doi: 10.4236/jbm.2025.1312029
136. Barshtein G, Livshits L, Gural A, et al. Hemoglobin binding to the red blood cell (RBC) membrane is associated with decreased cell deformability. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024; 25: 5814. doi: 10.3390/ijms25115814
137. Xu Z, Dou W, Wang C, et al. Stiffness and ATP recovery of stored red blood cells in serum. Microsystems & Nanoengineering. 2019; 5: 51. doi: 10.1038/s41378-019-0097-7
138. Pitocco D, Hatem D, Riente A, et al. Evaluating red blood cells’ membrane fluidity in diabetes: insights, mechanisms, and future aspects. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews. 2025; 41: e70011. doi: 1002/dmrr.70011
139. Szablewski L, Sulima A. The structural and functional changes of blood cells and molecular components in diabetes mellitus. Biological Chemistry. 2017; 398: 411–423. doi: 10.1515/hsz-2016-0196
140. Agrawal R, Smart T, Nobre-Cardoso J, et al. Assessment of red blood cell deformability in type 2 diabetes mellitus and diabetic retinopathy by dual optical tweezers stretching technique. Scientific Reports. 2016; 6: 15873. doi: 10.1038/srep15873
141. Sohn M, Lee JE, Ahn M, et al. Correlation of dynamic membrane fluctuations in red blood cells with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risks. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11: 7007. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-86528-0
142. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The Hallmarks of Cancer. Cell. 2000; 100: 57–70.
143. Cao X. Big data analysis and visualization platform in cell engineering research—Intelligent analysis method based on mechanical properties and cellular interactions. Molecular & Cellular Biomechanics. 2025; 22: 682.
144. Lekka M. Discrimination between normal and cancerous cells using AFM. BioNanoScience. 2016; 6: 65–80. doi: 10.1007/s12668-016-0191-3
145. Rebelo LM, De Sousa JS, Mendes Filho J, et al. Comparison of the viscoelastic properties of cells from different kidney cancer phenotypes measured with atomic force microscopy. Nanotechnology. 2013; 24: 055102. doi: 10.1088/0957-4484/24/5/055102
146. Xie Y, Wang M, Cheng M, et al. The viscoelastic behaviors of several kinds of cancer cells and normal cells. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2019; 91: 54–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.11.029
147. Barber J, Zhu L. Two-dimensional finite element model of breast cancer cell motion through a microfluidic channel. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology. 2019; 81: 1238–1259. doi: 10.1007/s11538-018-00557-x
148. Li JF, Lowengrub J. The effects of cell compressibility, motility and contact inhibition on the growth of tumor cell clusters using the Cellular Potts Model. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2014; 343: 79–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.10.008
149. Szabó A, Merks RMH. Cellular potts modeling of tumor growth, tumor invasion, and tumor evolution. Frontiers in Oncology. 2013; 3: 87. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00087.
150. Prasanna CVS, Jolly MK, Bhat R. Spatial heterogeneity in tumor adhesion qualifies collective cell invasion. Biophysical Journal. 2024; 123: 1635–1647. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2024.05.005
151. Massey A, Stewart J, Smith C, et al. Mechanical properties of human tumour tissues and their implications for cancer development. Nature Reviews Physics. 2024; 6: 269–282. doi: 10.1038/s42254-024-00707-2
152. Lu T, Anvari B. Characterization of the viscoelastic properties of ovarian cancer cells membranes by optical tweezers and quantitative phase imaging. Frontiers in Physics. 2020; 8: 582956. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2020.582956
153. Brás MM, Cruz TB, Maia AF, et al. Mechanical properties of colorectal cancer cells determined by dynamic atomic force microscopy: A novel biomarker. Cancers. 2022; 14: 5053. doi: 10.3390/cancers14205053
154. Kwon S, Yang W, Moon D, et al. Comparison of cancer cell elasticity by cell type. Journal of 2020; 11: 5403–5412. doi: 10.7150/jca.45897
155. Bergman E, Goldbart R, Traitel T, et al. Cell stiffness predicts cancer cell sensitivity to ultrasound as a selective superficial cancer therapy. Bioengineering & Translational Medicine. 2021; 6: e10226. doi: 10.1002/btm2.10226
156. Wullkopf L, West A-KV, Leijnse N, et al. Cancer cells’ ability to mechanically adjust to extracellular matrix stiffness correlates with their invasive potential. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2018; 29: 2378–2385. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E18-05-0319
157. Dessard M, Manneville J-B, Berret J-F. Cytoplasmic viscosity is a potential biomarker for metastatic breast cancer cells. Nanoscale Advances. 2024; 6: 1727–1738. doi: 1039/d4na00003j
158. Remmerbach TW, Wottawah F, Dietrich J, et al. Oral cancer diagnosis by mechanical phenotyping. Cancer Research. 2009; 69: 1728–1732. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4073
159. Gajda AM, Rodríguez-López R, Er EE. Targeting cancer cell stiffness and metastasis with clinical therapeutics. Clinical & Experimental Metastasis. 2025; 42: 34. doi: 10.1007/s10585-025-10353-2
160. Rubtsova SN, Zhitnyak IY, Gloushankova NA. Phenotypic plasticity of cancer cells based on remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton and adhesive structures. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021; 22: 1821. doi: 10.3390/ijms22041821
161. Hervas-Raluy S, Garcia-Aznar JM, Gomez-Benito MJ. Modelling actin polymerization: The effect on confined cell migration. Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology. 2019; 18: 1177–1187. doi: 10.1007/s10237-019-01136-2
162. Chen YC, Sahoo S, Brien R, et al. Single-cell RNA-sequencing of migratory breast cancer cells: Discovering genes associated with cancer metastasis. Analyst. 2019; 144: 7296–7309. doi: 10.1039/c9an01358j
163. Li QS, Lee GYH, Ong CN, et al. AFM indentation study of breast cancer cells. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2008; 374: 609–613. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2008.07.078
164. Friedl P, Wolf K. Proteolytic and non-proteolytic migration of tumour cells and leucocytes. Biochemical Society Symposia. 2003; 70: 277–285. doi: 10.1042/bss0700277
165. Lamouille S, Xu J, Derynck R. Molecular mechanisms of epithelial–mesenchymal transition. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2014; 15: 178–196. doi: 10.1038/nrm3758
166. Loh C-Y, Chai JY, Tang TF, et al. The E-cadherin and N-cadherin switch in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition: Signaling, therapeutic implications, and challenges. Cells. 2019; 8: 1118. doi: 10.3390/cells8101118
167. Arneth B. Tumor Microenvironment. Medicina (Mex). 2019; 56: 15. doi: 10.1002/jcb.21320
168. Chen CS, Mrksich M, Huang S, et al. Geometric control of cell life and death. Science. 1997; 276: 1425–1428. doi: 10.1126/science.276.5317.1425
169. Yu W, Sharma S, Rao E, et al. Cancer cell mechanobiology: a new frontier for cancer research. Journal of the National Cancer Center. 2022; 2: 10–17. doi: 10.1016/j.jncc.2021.11.007
170. Fan T-J, Tian M, Zhao J. Progress in the regulation of extracellular matrix on cell behavior (in Chinese). Chinese Bulletin of Life Science. 2021; 33: 844–852. doi: 10.13376/j.cbls/2021091
171. Lo C-M, Wang H-B, Dembo M, et al. Cell movement is guided by the rigidity of the substrate. Biophysical Journal. 2000; 79: 144–152. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(00)76279-5
172. Paszek MJ, Zahir N, Johnson KR, et al. Tensional homeostasis and the malignant phenotype. Cancer Cell. 2005; 8: 241–254. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2005.08.010
173. Mosaddad SA, Salari Y, Amookhteh S, et al. Response to mechanical cues by interplay of YAP/TAZ transcription factors and key mechanical checkpoints of the cell: A comprehensive review. Cellular Physiology Biochemistry. 2021; 55: 33–60. doi: 10.33594/000000325
174. Lin H-H, Lin H-K, Lin I-H, et al. Mechanical phenotype of cancer cells: cell softening and loss of stiffness sensing. Oncotarget. 2015; 6: 20946–20958. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.4173
175. Tilghman RW, Cowan CR, Mih JD, et al. Matrix rigidity regulates cancer cell growth and cellular phenotype. PLoS One. 2010; 5: e12905. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012905
176. Wang T-C, Sawhney S, Morgan D, et al. Genetic variation drives cancer cell adaptation to ECM stiffness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2024; 121: e2403062121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2403062121
177. Kopanska KS, Alcheikh Y, Staneva R, et al. Tensile forces originating from cancer spheroids facilitate tumor invasion. PLOS One. 2016; 11: e0156442. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156442
178. Fischer T, Hayn A, Mierke CT. Effect of nuclear stiffness on cell mechanics and migration of human breast cancer cells. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2020; 8: 393. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2020.00393
179. Yamamoto A, Doak AE, Cheung KJ. Orchestration of collective migration and metastasis by tumor cell clusters. Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease. 2023; 18: 231–256. doi: 10.1146/annurev-pathmechdis-031521-023557
180. Friedl P, Gilmour D. Collective cell migration in morphogenesis, regeneration and cancer. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2009; 10: 445–457. doi: 10.1038/nrm2720
181. Aceto N, Bardia A, Miyamoto DT, et al. Circulating tumor cell clusters are oligoclonal precursors of breast cancer metastasis. Cell. 2014; 158: 1110–1122. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.07.013
182. Cheung KJ, Gabrielson E, Werb Z, et al. Collective invasion in breast cancer requires a conserved basal epithelial program. Cell. 2013; 155: 1639–1651. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.029
Copyright (c) 2026 Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright on all articles published in this journal is retained by the author(s), while the author(s) grant the publisher as the original publisher to publish the article.
Articles published in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, which means they can be shared, adapted and distributed provided that the original published version is cited.
Submit a Paper
