Nanotopography-induced changes in focal adhesions, cytoskeletal organization, and mechanical properties of human mesenchymal stem cells.

The growth of stem cells can be modulated by physical factors such as extracellular matrix nanotopography. We hypothesize that nanotopography modulates cell behavior by changing the integrin clustering and focal adhesion (FA) assembly, leading to changes in cytoskeletal organization and cell mechanical properties. Human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) cultured on 350 nm gratings of tissue-culture polystyrene (TCPS) and polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) showed decreased expression of integrin subunits alpha2, alpha , alpha V, beta2, beta 3 and beta 4 compared to the unpatterned controls. On gratings, the elongated hMSCs exhibited an aligned actin cytoskeleton, while on unpatterned controls, spreading cells showed a random but denser actin cytoskeleton network. Expression of cytoskeleton and FA components was also altered by the nanotopography as reflected in the mechanical properties measured by atomic force microscopy (AFM) indentation. On the rigid TCPS, hMSCs on gratings exhibited lower instantaneous and equilibrium Young's moduli and apparent viscosity. On the softer PDMS, the effects of nanotopography were not significant. However, hMSCs cultured on PDMS showed lower cell mechanical properties than those on TCPS, regardless of topography. These suggest that both nanotopography and substrate stiffness could be important in determining mechanical properties, while nanotopography may be more dominant in determining the organization of the cytoskeleton and FAs.

Importance of prostate volume in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculators: results from the prostate biopsy collaborative group.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the predictive performance and potential clinical usefulness of risk calculators of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC RC) with and without information on prostate volume. METHODS: We studied 6 cohorts (5 European and 1 US) with a total of 15,300 men, all biopsied and with pre-biopsy TRUS measurements of prostate volume. Volume was categorized into 3 categories (25, 40, and 60 cc), to reflect use of digital rectal examination (DRE) for volume assessment. Risks of prostate cancer were calculated according to a ERSPC DRE-based RC (including PSA, DRE, prior biopsy, and prostate volume) and a PSA + DRE model (including PSA, DRE, and prior biopsy). Missing data on prostate volume were completed by single imputation. Risk predictions were evaluated with respect to calibration (graphically), discrimination (AUC curve), and clinical usefulness (net benefit, graphically assessed in decision curves). RESULTS: The AUCs of the ERSPC DRE-based RC ranged from 0.61 to 0.77 and were substantially larger than the AUCs of a model based on only PSA + DRE (ranging from 0.56 to 0.72) in each of the 6 cohorts. The ERSPC DRE-based RC provided net benefit over performing a prostate biopsy on the basis of PSA and DRE outcome in five of the six cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying men at increased risk for having a biopsy detectable prostate cancer should consider multiple factors, including an estimate of prostate volume.