Cited by 2253D Printing in Biomedical ResearchMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 121 of the 127 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 35 of the 64 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Microfluidics: A New Tool for Modeling Cancer–Immune Interactions

Open access

Abstract

In recognition of the enormous potential of immunotherapies against cancer, research into the interactions between tumor and immune cells has accelerated, leading to the recent FDA approval of several drugs that reduce cancer progression. Numerous cellular and molecular interactions have been identified by which immune cells can intervene in the metastatic cascade, leading to the development of several in vivo and in vitro model systems that can recapitulate these processes. Among these, microfluidic technologies hold many advantages in terms of their unique ability to capture the essential features of multiple cell type interactions in three-dimensions while allowing tight control of the microenvironment and real-time monitoring. Here, we review current assays and discuss the development of new microfluidic technologies for immunotherapy.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.trecan.2015.12.003

Cites

121 of 121 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

35 of 64 cited sources checked · 20 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 32 claims

  • Borderline: one of the tests for a substantial claim is unclear. 1
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 16
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 8
23 of 23
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No in vitro system, including microfluidic ones, can reproduce every aspect of in vivo complexity.

    “Finally, care should be taken in extrapolating results from any in vitro study, including microfluidic ones, since they can never fully replicate all aspects of in vivo complexity.”
1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 127 references

6 of the 127 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 225

Metadata

Authors
Boussommier-Calleja, A., Li, R., Chen, M. B., Wong, S. C., & Kamm, R. D.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Agency for Science, Technology and Research (SG)
Corresponding author
Kamm, Roger D.
Venue
Trends in Cancer
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
6-19
ISSN
  • 2405-8025 (ISSN-L)
  • 2405-8033
OpenAlex
W2279226389
Cited by
224
References
127
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 6
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Cancer Research Institute
  • National Cancer Institute (R33CA174550, U01CA202177)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Microfluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Microfluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Keywords
microfluidics, tumor-immune interactions, tumor microenvironment, immunotherapy, metastasis, tumor-immune cell interactions, 3D cell culture, in vitro model, real-time monitoring, microfluidic assay

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review