# Modeling of Cell Aggregation Dynamics Governed by Receptor–Ligand Binding Under Shear Flow

- 154 Downloads
- 5 Citations

## Abstract

Shear-induced cell aggregation and disaggregation, governed by specific receptor–ligand binding, play important roles in many biological and biophysical processes. While a lot of studies have focused on elucidating the shear rate and shear stress dependence of cell aggregation, the majority of existing models based on population balance equation (PBE) has rarely dealt with cell aggregation dynamics upon intrinsic molecular kinetics. Here, a kinetic model was developed for further understanding cell aggregation and disaggregation in a linear shear flow. The novelty of the model is that a set of simple equations was constructed by coupling two-body collision theory with receptor–ligand binding kinetics. Two cases of study were employed to validate the model: one is for the homotypic aggregation dynamics of latex beads cross-linked by protein G-IgG binding, and the other is for the heterotypic aggregation dynamics of neutrophils-tumor cells governed by β_{2}-integrin–ligand interactions. It was found that the model fits the data well and the obtained kinetic parameters are consistent with the previous predictions and experimental measurements. Moreover, the decay factor defined biophysically to account for the chemokine- and shear-induced regulation of receptor and/or ligand expression and conformation was compared at molecular and cellular levels. Our results provided a universal framework to quantify the molecular kinetics of receptor–ligand binding in shear-induced cell aggregation dynamics.

## Keywords

Two-dimensional kinetics Cone-plate viscometer Homotypic aggregation Heterotypic aggregation Bell model Protein G-IgG bond β_{2}-Integrin and ICAM-1 bond

## List of Symbols

*a*Bond interaction range (nm)

*A*_{c}Contact area between two contact spheres (

*μ*m^{2})*A*_{c}*m*_{r}*m*_{l}*k*_{f}, (*A*_{c}*m*_{r}*m*_{l}*k*_{f})^{0}Effective forward rate, value at the moment immediately after PMN stimulation (s

^{−1})*C*;*C*_{1},*C*_{10};*C*_{2},*C*_{20}Concentration of sphere; value of sphere 1, initial value; value of sphere 2, initial value (m

^{−3})*C*_{f}, 〈*C*_{f}〉Angle factor (=(sin

^{2}*θ*_{1}sin 2*ϕ*_{1})_{max}), mean value*C*_{O}Orbit constant

*E*,*E*_{0}Adhesion efficiency, value at the moment immediately after PMN stimulation

*f*_{c},*f*_{c0}Two-body collision frequency per unit volume per sphere 2, initial value (s

^{−1})*F*;*F*_{N},*F*_{N,max};*F*_{S},*F*_{S,max}Applied force; normal force, maximum value; shear force, maximum value (pN)

*G*Shear rate (s

^{−1})*k*_{B}Boltzmann constant (=1.38 × 10

^{−23}N m K^{−1})*k*_{f},*k*_{f}^{L},*k*_{f}^{H}Forward rate, values from low and high shear rate, respectively (

*μ*m^{2}s^{−1})*k*_{r},*k*_{r}^{(n)},*k*_{r}^{0}Reverse rate, value for dissociation of

*n*-th bond, value at zero force (s^{−1})*M*Number of data points

*n*, 〈*n*〉Number of bonds, mean value

*N*Maximum number of bonds possibly to link the doublet

*p*_{n},*p*_{cn}Probability of having

*n*bonds, probability of having*n*bonds at the end moment of two-body collision (*n*= 0, 1, 2…)*P*_{a},*P*_{a}^{30}Probability of adhesion, equilibrium aggregation percentage at 30 min for latex bead homotypic aggregation

*P*_{b}Fraction of doublet break-up

*r*,*r*_{1},*r*_{2}Radius of sphere, value of sphere 1, value of sphere 2 (

*μ*m)*r*_{e}Equivalent axis ratio of doublet

*t*Arbitrary time (s)

*T*Period of doublet rotation (s)

*T*_{K}Absolute temperature (K)

*u*_{1},*u*_{2},*u*_{3}Fluid velocity,

*u*_{1}=*u*_{2}= 0 and*u*_{3}=*GX*_{2}(*μ*m s^{−1})*X*_{1},*X*_{2},*X*_{3}Cartesian coordinates (

*μ*m)*y*_{i},*y*(*x*_{i})Measurement and prediction values at

*x*_{ i }*α*_{c},*α*_{m}Decay factors at cellular and molecular level, respectively (s

^{−1})*α*_{N},*α*_{S}Normal and shear force coefficients, respectively

*ε*Two-body collision capture efficiency

*η*Medium viscosity (cP, = mPa s = 10

^{−3}N s m^{−2})*θ*_{1},*ϕ*_{1}Polar and azimuthal angles of doublet major axis with respect to

*X*_{1}*θ*_{2}Polar angle of doublet axis respect to

*X*_{2}*ϕ*_{1}^{0}Contact angle of two colliding spheres

*σ*_{i}Standard deviation

*τ*, \( \bar{\tau } \)Two-body collision duration, mean value (s)

*χ*^{2}Chi-square statistic

## Notes

### Acknowledgments

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China grants 30730032, 11072251, 10902117, and 10702075, Chinese Academy of Sciences grants KJCX2-YW-L08 and Y2010030, and National Key Basic Research Foundation of China grant 2011CB710904.

## References

- 1.Adler, P. M. Interaction of unequal spheres. 1. Hydrodynamic interaction—colloidal forces.
*J. Colloid Interf. Sci.*84(2):461–474, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 2.Bartok, W., and S. G. Mason. Particle motions in sheared suspensions V. Rigid rods and collision doublets of spheres.
*J. Colloid Interf. Sci.*12(3):243–262, 1957.Google Scholar - 3.Bell, G. I. Models for specific adhesion of cells to cells.
*Science*200(4342):618–627, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 4.Capo, C., F. Garrouste, A. M. Benoliel, P. Bongrand, A. Ryter, and G. I. Bell. Concanavalin-A-mediated thymocyte agglutination—a model for a quantitative study of cell-adhesion.
*J. Cell Sci.*56(1):21–48, 1982.Google Scholar - 5.Chesla, S. E., P. Selvaraj, and C. Zhu. Measuring two-dimensional receptor–ligand binding kinetics by micropipette.
*Biophys. J.*75(3):1553–1572, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 6.Coussens, L. M., and Z. Werb. Inflammation and cancer.
*Nature*420(6917):860–867, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 7.Cozens-Roberts, C., D. A. Lauffenburger, and J. A. Quinn. Receptor-mediated cell attachment and detachment kinetics. 1. Probabilistic model and analysis.
*Biophys. J.*58(4):841–856, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 8.Gachet, C. Regulation of platelet functions by P2 receptors.
*Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.*46:277–300, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 9.Goldsmith, H. L., T. A. Quinn, G. Drury, C. Spanos, F. A. McIntosh, and S. I. Simon. Dynamics of neutrophil aggregation in Couette flow revealed by videomicroscopy: effect of shear rate on two-body collision efficiency and doublet lifetime.
*Biophys. J.*81(4):2020–2034, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 10.Hentzen, E. R., S. Neelamegham, G. S. Kansas, J. A. Benanti, L. V. McIntire, C. W. Smith, and S. I. Simon. Sequential binding of CD11a/CD18 and CD11b/CD18 defines neutrophil capture and stable adhesion to Intercellular adhesion molecule-1.
*Blood*95(3):911–920, 2000.Google Scholar - 11.Hoskins, M. H., and C. Dong. Kinetics analysis of binding between melanoma cells and neutrophils.
*Mol. Cell. Biomech.*3(2):79–87, 2006.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 12.Huang, P. Y., and J. D. Hellums. Aggregation and disaggregation kinetics of human blood-platelets. 1. Development and validation of a population balance method.
*Biophys. J.*65(1):334–343, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 13.Huang, P. Y., and J. D. Hellums. Aggregation and disaggregation kinetics of human blood-platelets. 2. Shear-induced platelet-aggregation.
*Biophys. J.*65(1):344–353, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 14.Huang, P. Y., and J. D. Hellums. Aggregation and disaggregation kinetics of human blood-platelets. 3. The disaggregation under shear-stress of platelet aggregates.
*Biophys. J.*65(1):354–361, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 15.Huh, S. J., S. Liang, A. Sharma, C. Dong, and G. P. Robertson. Transiently entrapped circulating tumor cells interact with neutrophils to facilitate lung metastasis development.
*Cancer Res.*70(14):6071–6082, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 16.Im, J. H., W. L. Fu, H. Wang, S. K. Bhatia, D. A. Hammer, M. A. Kowalska, and R. J. Muschel. Coagulation facilitates tumor cell spreading in the pulmonary vasculature during early metastatic colony formation.
*Cancer Res.*64(23):8613–8619, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 17.Jadhav, S., B. S. Bochner, and K. Konstantopoulos. Hydrodynamic shear regulates the kinetics and receptor specificity of polymorphonuclear leukocyte-colon carcinoma cell adhesive interactions.
*J. Immunol.*167(10):5986–5993, 2001.Google Scholar - 18.Jadhav, S., and K. Konstantopoulos. Fluid shear- and time-dependent modulation of molecular interactions between PMNs and colon carcinomas.
*Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.*283(4):C1133–C1143, 2002.Google Scholar - 19.Konstantopoulos, K., S. Kukreti, and L. V. McIntire. Biomechanics of cell interactions in shear fields.
*Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.*33(1–2):141–164, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 20.Kroll, M. H., J. D. Hellums, L. V. McIntire, A. I. Schafer, and J. L. Moake. Platelets and shear stress.
*Blood*88(5):1525–1541, 1996.Google Scholar - 21.Kwong, D., D. F. J. Tees, and H. L. Goldsmith. Kinetics and locus of failure of receptor–ligand-mediated adhesion between latex spheres. 2. Protein–protein bond.
*Biophys. J.*71(2):1115–1122, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 22.Laurenzi, I. J., and S. L. Diamond. Monte Carlo simulation of the heterotypic aggregation kinetics of platelets and neutrophils.
*Biophys. J.*77(3):1733–1746, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 23.Liang, S., M. J. Slattery, and C. Dong. Shear stress and shear rate differentially affect the multi-step process of leukocyte-facilitated melanoma adhesion.
*Exp. Cell Res.*310(2):282–292, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 24.Liang, S. L., C. L. Fu, D. Wagner, H. G. Guo, D. Y. Zhan, C. Dong, and M. Long. Two-dimensional kinetics of beta(2)-integrin and ICAM-1 bindings between neutrophils and melanoma cells in a shear flow.
*Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.*294:C743–C753, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 25.Liang, S. L., A. Sharma, H. H. Peng, G. Robertson, and C. Dong. Targeting mutant (V600E) B-Raf in melanoma interrupts immunoediting of leukocyte functions and melanoma extravasation.
*Cancer Res.*67(12):5814–5820, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 26.Lomakina, E. B., and R. E. Waugh. Micromechanical tests of adhesion dynamics between neutrophils and immobilized ICAM-1.
*Biophys. J.*86(2):1223–1233, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 27.Long, M., H. L. Goldsmith, D. F. J. Tees, and C. Zhu. Probabilistic modeling of shear-induced formation and breakage of doublets cross-linked by receptor–ligand bonds.
*Biophys. J.*76(2):1112–1128, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 28.McCarty, O. J. T., S. Jadhav, M. M. Burdick, W. R. Bell, and K. Konstantopoulos. Fluid shear regulates the kinetics and molecular mechanisms of activation-dependent platelet binding to colon carcinoma cells.
*Biophys. J.*83(2):836–848, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 29.McQuarrie, D. A. Kinetics of small systems. I.
*J. Chem. Phys.*38(2):433–436, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 30.Merkel, R. Force spectroscopy on single passive biomolecules and single biomolecular bonds.
*Phys. Rep.*346(5):344–385, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 31.Neelamegham, S., A. D. Taylor, A. R. Burns, C. W. Smith, and S. I. Simon. Hydrodynamic shear shows distinct roles for LFA-1 and Mac-1 in neutrophil adhesion to intercellular adhesion molecule-1.
*Blood*92(2):1626–1638, 1998.Google Scholar - 32.Neelamegham, S., A. D. Taylor, J. D. Hellums, M. Dembo, C. W. Smith, and S. I. Simon. Modeling the reversible kinetics of neutrophil aggregation under hydrodynamic shear.
*Biophys. J.*72(4):1527–1540, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 33.Neelamegham, S., A. D. Taylor, H. Shankaran, C. W. Smith, and S. I. Simon. Shear and time-dependent changes in Mac-1, LFA-1, and ICAM-3 binding regulate neutrophil homotypic adhesion.
*J. Immunol.*164(7):3798–3805, 2000.Google Scholar - 34.Neumann, F. J., N. Marx, M. Gawaz, K. Brand, I. Ott, C. Rokitta, C. Sticherling, C. Meinl, A. May, and A. Schomig. Induction of cytokine expression in leukocytes by binding of thrombin-stimulated platelets.
*Circulation*95(10):2387–2394, 1997.Google Scholar - 35.Ott, I., F. J. Neumann, M. Gawaz, M. Schmitt, and A. Schomig. Increased neutrophil–platelet adhesion in patients with unstable angina.
*Circulation*94(6):1239–1246, 1996.Google Scholar - 36.Palabrica, T., R. Lobb, B. C. Furie, M. Aronovitz, C. Benjamin, Y. M. Hsu, S. A. Sajer, and B. Furie. Leukocyte accumulation promoting fibrin deposition is mediated invivo by P-selectin on adherent platelets.
*Nature*359(6398):848–851, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 37.Press, W. H., B. P. Flannery, S. A. Teukolsky, and W. T. Vetterling. Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77: The Art of Scientific Computing (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 675–683, 1992.Google Scholar
- 38.Sahai, E. Illuminating the metastatic process.
*Nat. Rev. Cancer*7(10):737–749, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 39.Shankaran, H., and S. Neelamegham. Hydrodynamic forces applied on intercellular bonds, soluble molecules, and cell-surface receptors.
*Biophys. J.*86(1):576–588, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 40.Simon, S. I., J. D. Chambers, and L. A. Sklar. Flow cytometric analysis and modeling of cell–cell adhesive interactions—the neutrophil as a model.
*J. Cell Biol.*111(6):2747–2756, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 41.Simon, S. I., and C. E. Green. Molecular mechanics and dynamics of leukocyte recruitment during inflammation.
*Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng.*7:151–185, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 42.Simson, D. A., M. Strigl, M. Hohenadl, and R. Merkel. Statistical breakage of single protein A-IgG bonds reveals crossover from spontaneous to force-induced bond dissociation.
*Phys. Rev. Lett.*83(3):652–655, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 43.Slattery, M. J., S. Liang, and C. Dong. Distinct role of hydrodynamic shear in leukocyte-facilitated tumor cell extravasation.
*Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.*288(4):C831–C839, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 44.Smoluchowski, M. V. Versuch einer mathematischen Theorie der Koagulationskinetik kolloider Losungen.
*Z. Phys. Chem.*92:129–168, 1917.Google Scholar - 45.Tandon, P., and S. L. Diamond. Hydrodynamic effects and receptor interactions of platelets and their aggregates in linear shear flow.
*Biophys. J.*73(5):2819–2835, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 46.Tandon, P., and S. L. Diamond. Kinetics of beta(2)-integrin and L-selectin bonding during neutrophil aggregation in shear flow.
*Biophys. J.*75(6):3163–3178, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 47.Taylor, A. D., S. Neelamegham, J. D. Hellums, C. W. Smith, and S. I. Simon. Molecular dynamics of the transition from L-selectin- to beta(2)-integrin-dependent neutrophil adhesion under defined hydrodynamic shear.
*Biophys. J.*71(6):3488–3500, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 48.Tees, D. F. J., O. Coenen, and H. L. Goldsmith. Interaction forces between red-cells agglutinated by antibody. 4. Time and force dependence of break-up.
*Biophys. J.*65(3):1318–1334, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 49.Tees, D. F. J., and H. L. Goldsmith. Kinetics and locus of failure of receptor–ligand-mediated adhesion between latex spheres. 1. Protein–carbohydrate bond.
*Biophys. J.*71(2):1102–1114, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 50.van de Ven, T. G. M., and S. G. Mason. Microrheology of colloidal dispersions. 4. Pairs of interacting spheres in shear-flow.
*J. Colloid Interf. Sci.*57(3):505–516, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 51.Zhang, P., T. Ozdemir, C. Y. Chung, G. P. Robertson, and C. Dong. Sequential binding of alphaVbeta3 and ICAM-1 determines fibrin-mediated melanoma capture and stable adhesion to CD11b/CD18 on neutrophils.
*J. Immunol.*186(1):242–254, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 52.Zhu, C. Kinetics and mechanics of cell adhesion.
*J. Biomech.*33(1):23–33, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 53.Zhu, C., M. Long, S. E. Chesla, and P. Bongrand. Measuring receptor/ligand interaction at the single-bond level: Experimental and interpretative issues.
*Ann. Biomed. Eng.*30(3):305–314, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 54.Zwartz, G., A. Chigaev, T. Foutz, R. S. Larson, R. Posner, and L. A. Sklar. Relationship between molecular and cellular dissociation rates for VLA-4/VCAM-1 interaction in the absence of shear stress.
*Biophys. J.*86(2):1243–1252, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar