Skip to main content

Biphasic Material Properties of Lytic Bone Metastases


It is necessary to prescribe the mechanical properties of tumor tissue when modeling the metastatically involved skeleton for clarifying the mechanisms of fracture. This study provides mechanical property data for lytic bone metastases. Specimens of human lytic tumor were tested under a confined compression uniaxial creep protocol and the mechanical behavior of the tumor tissue was modeled using linear biphasic theory. The tumor tissue was found to have an aggregate modulus (HA)of 3.6 ±1.6kPa and a hydraulic permeability (k) of 0.59 ± 0.46 mm4 N1>s1.Tumors with a higher percentage of stromal content were found to be stiffer and more permeable than those with a more cellular composition. No significant differences in aggregate modulus or hydraulic permeability were found between lytic metastases of different types. These data are useful for the development of models to simulate the behavior of the metastatically involved skeleton using theoretical or finite-element analysis techniques and also have significance for developing effective tumor–drug-transport models. We anticipate that specification of the mechanical behavior of this tissue may help to better focus future treatment of lytic bony metastases through better assessment of fracture risk and improved drug delivery. © 2000 Biomedical Engineering Society.

PAC00: 8719Rr, 8710+e

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1

    Ateshian, G. A., W. H. Warden, J. J. Kim, R. P. Grelsamer, and V. C. Mow. Finite deformation biphasic material properties of bovine articular cartilage from confined compression experiments. J. Biomech. 30:1157–1164, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Bass, E. C., N. A. Duncan, J. S. Hariharan, J. Dusick, H. U. Bueff, and J. C. Lotz. Frozen storage affects the compressive creep behavior of the porcine intervertebral disc. Spine 22:2867–2876, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Biot, M. A. Theory of elasticity and consolidation for a porous anisotropic solid. J. Appl. Phys. 26:182–185, 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Boucher, Y., P. A. Netti, L. T. Baxter, and R. K. Jain. Intratumoral infusion of fluid: Estimation of hydraulic conductivity and implications for the delivery of therapeutic agents. Br. J. Cancer 78:1442–1448, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    DiResta, G. R., J. Lee, S. M. Larson, and E. Arbit. Characterization of neuroblastoma xenograft in rat flank. I. Growth, interstitial fluid pressure, and interstitial fluid velocity distribution profiles. Microvasc. Res. 46:158–177, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    el-Kareh, A. W., and T. W. Secomb. Theoretical models for drug delivery to solid tumors. Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 25:503–71, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Jain, R. K. Transport of molecules in the tumor interstitium: A review. Cancer Res. 47:3039–3051, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Klish, S. A continuum mixture theory with internal constraints for annulus fibrosis. Ph.D. Thesis, U.C. Berkeley, 1999.

  9. 9

    Krol, A., J. Maresca, M. W. Dewhirst, and F. Yuan. Available volume fraction of macromolecules in the extravascular space of a fibrosarcoma: Implications for drug delivery. Cancer Res. 59:4136–4141, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Laible, J. P., D. S. Pflaster, M. H. Krag, B. R. Simon, and L. D. Haugh. A poroelastic-swelling finite-element model with application to the intervertebral disc. Spine 18:659–70, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    McGowan, D., J. Hipp, T. Takeuchi, A. White III, and W. Hayes. Strength reductions from trabecular destruction within thoracic vertebrae. J. Spinal Disord. 6:130–136, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Mizrahi, J., M. Silva, and W. Hayes. Finite-element stress analysis of simulated metastatic lesions in the lumbar vertebral body. J. Biomed. Eng. 14:467–475, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Mow, V. C., A. Ratcliffe, and A. R. Poole. Cartilage and diarthrodial joints as paradigms for hierarchical materials and structures. Biomaterials 13:67–97, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Mow, V. C., S. C. Kuei, W. M. Lai, and C. G. Armstrong. Biphasic creep and stress relaxation of articular cartilage in compression: Theory and experiments. J. Biomech. Eng. 102:73–84, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Netti, P. A., L. T. Baxter, Y. Boucher, R. Skalak, and R. K. Jain. A poroelastic model for interstitial pressure in tumors. Biorheology 32:346, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Rooney, F., M. Ferrari, and A. Imam. On the pressure dis-tribution within tumors. Math. Model. Sci. Comput. 6:715–721, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Sarntinoranont, M. A time-dependent mathematical model for concentration of therapeutic agents in neoplasm. Masters Thesis, U.C. Berkeley, 1996.

  18. 18

    Sarntinoranont, M. A mechanical model of a growing solid tumor with applications to vessel collapse collapse and drug transport. Ph.D. Thesis, U.C. Berkeley, 1999.

  19. 19

    Silva, M., J. Hipp, D. McGowan, T. Takeuchi, and W. Hayes. Strength reductions of thoracic vertebrae in the pres-ence of transcortical osseus defects: Effects of defect location, pedicle disruption, and defect size. Eur. Spine J. 2:118–125, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Simon, B. R., J. S. S. Wu, M. W. Carlton, L. E. Kazarian, E. P. France, J. H. Evans, and O. C. Zienkiewicz. Poroelastic dynamic structural models of Rhesus spinal motion segments. Spine 10:494–507, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Swabb, E. A., J. Wei, and P. M. Gullino. Diffusion and convection in normal and neoplastic tissues. Cancer Res. 34:2814–2821, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Whyne, C.M., Hu, S.S., Workman, K.L. et al. Biphasic Material Properties of Lytic Bone Metastases. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 28, 1154–1158 (2000).

Download citation

  • Biomechanics
  • Poroelasticity
  • Tumor
  • Hydraulic permeability
  • Aggregate modulus