Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
Trends Cell Biol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 April 1.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC3615095

Bringing balance by force: live cell extrusion controls epithelial cell numbers


To function as an intact barrier, epithelia must maintain constant cell numbers despite high rates of turnover. If the rate of death exceeds proliferation, epithelial barrier function could become compromised; if it lags behind proliferation, cells could amass into tumors. Although the balance between cell death and division is critical for preventing pathology, most studies focus on each process in isolation. Loss of contact inhibition is a hallmark of cancer cells and cell contacts appear important for linking rates of cell division and death. However, epithelial cells continuously divide and die while maintaining contacts with each other, so other factors must control this balance. Recent studies find that cell crowding forces from cell proliferation can drive cells to die by extrusion from the epithelium. Factors that alter this response to cell crowding may lead to barrier function diseases or promote hyperplasia and cancer.

Epithelial tissue homeostasis and contact inhibition

Epithelia are composed of tightly adherent cells that coat and protect our organs and body. Cells within epithelia have some of the highest rates of turnover in the body [13], where the number of dividing cells is tightly balanced by a similar number of dying cells. Since most cancers arise in cell populations with high turnover rates such as the blood and epithelia, it is likely that they arise from misregulation of cell number homeostasis. Because most solid tumors originate from epithelia, understanding what controls the link between cell division and cell death in epithelia is critical to our understanding of how tumors initiate. However, most studies have focused separately on either what controls cell death in response to apoptotic stimuli or what controls cell division in response to mitogens. Remarkably few studies investigate how these two processes are coordinated in vivo to maintain overall cell numbers.

The studies most relevant to cell number homeostasis started over sixty years ago with the discovery of contact inhibition. Contact inhibition actually refers to two separate fundamental findings: contact inhibition of growth and contact inhibition of locomotion. The former is based on the fact that cells dramatically reduce their rate of mitosis when they contact each other and establish a monolayer [4, 5]. Contact inhibition of locomotion instead refers to the fact that migrating cells will stop moving once they contact each other to form a monolayer [6]. By contrast, cancer cells are not contact inhibited either in their growth or motility and will instead pile upon one another and continue dividing [79]. The absence of contact inhibition forms the basis for testing if cells are transformed by their ability to grow in soft agar. But what does contact inhibition mean in vivo for epithelial cells that are continuously migrating and dividing, despite the fact that they must maintain tight contacts with each other to preserve their function as a barrier? How, then, do epithelial cells adhered to one another in an epithelium maintain constant cell numbers?

Although establishment of cell contacts may not be sufficient to control cell numbers in epithelia, the extent of cell contacts with each other and their substratum may, instead, control whether cells divide or die. Contact inhibition of growth and migration in vivo may depend on cells reaching a threshold number of cell-cell or cell-matrix contacts, since both types of inhibition are dependent on cell density rather than the formation of cell-cell contacts [10]. However, when cells reach still higher densities, crowding may lead to fewer engaged cell-cell and/or cell-matrix adhesions compared to neighboring cells, which can promote anoikis, or cell death by loss of adhesion-based cell survival signaling [11]. In mathematical models, epithelial crowding can lead to increased mechanical tension on cells, which promotes cell loss [12, 13] to regulate epithelial tissue homeostasis [14]. Thus, the mechanical strain and alterations of cell contacts in crowded epithelial regions may be at the heart of contact inhibition. Here, we discuss how cell contacts and density within epithelia may impact whether cells divide or die (Figure 1A).

Figure 1
Crowding-Induced Live Cell Extrusion in Epithelia. (A) Schematic outlining the life cycle of epithelial cells. [1] In sparsely populated cells, proliferation occurs where cell-ECM contacts are high but cell-cell contacts are low. [2] Once cells reach ...

Density-dependent control of cell proliferation

Exactly how cell contacts affect the decision for a cell to proliferate is not entirely clear, however, hints come from discovery of the Hippo pathway. In Drosophila and mammals, mutations in the Hippo pathway lead to tissue overgrowth [1522], suggesting that this pathway is critical for regulating proliferation and cell numbers. E-cadherin and alpha-catenin, essential proteins for cell-cell adhesion, control proliferation in response to changes in cell density by regulating the subcellular localization of critical Hippo downstream effectors, yes-associated protein (YAP) and TAZ [23, 24]. YAP is predominately cytoplasmic in confluent cells, but at lower cell densities accumulates in the nucleus where it acts as a transcriptional coactivator to promote proliferation [2326]. Disrupting cell-cell contacts or cell-extracellular matrix (ECM) interactions is sufficient to shift YAP to the nucleus [23, 27]. Thus, the Hippo pathway is emerging as the long sought-after pathway for controlling cell proliferation in response to cells contacts, yet its regulation does not depend merely on cells making contacts with one another but upon the density of contacted cells. Mechanical forces generated from matrix stiffness can also activate YAP/TAZ independently of the Hippo pathway [28], suggesting that crowding forces independent of cell-cell contact could also signal density-dependent proliferation. We do not elaborate on contact-dependent regulation of cell proliferation here as a recent review covers this topic in depth [29], but instead consider how cell density affects cell death.

Density-dependent control of cell death: epithelial cell extrusion

In addition to cell-cell contacts and density controlling whether a cell within an epithelium will proliferate, they also control whether it will die. Recent studies from a variety of epithelia, including developing Drosophila and zebrafish, human adult colon epithelia, and tissue culture epithelial monolayers, show that cells in crowded regions of epithelia extrude and later die [30, 31]. Cells routinely were found to proliferate at defined regions within the epithelium where cells were least crowded. Cells then migrate away from sites of proliferation within the monolayer to converge at regions of high density, where they get shoved out, or extruded. This conveyor belt model of cells within an epithelium is exemplified by intestinal epithelia (Figure 1B), but is also apparent in different epithelia in vivo, such as the edge of the fin epidermis in developing zebrafish [30]. The surprising finding from these studies was that cells rarely died by apoptosis in situ. Instead, live epithelial cells in crowded regions extrude [30, 31] (Figure 1C) and later die by anoikis [11, 32, 33], or cell death due to detachment from the matrix. These studies support the idea that mechanical stresses and tension promote cell death by extrusion independent of the apoptotic pathway [34]. Although it is not clear what marks a particular cell for extrusion, loss of a threshold number of cell contacts with other cells and the underlying matrix may be a factor.

Cell extrusion was originally identified as a process that maintains the barrier function of an epithelium when cells within that layer die [35]. All epithelia observed have been found to extrude dying cells, ranging from C. elegans, Drosophila, mouse, chick, zebrafish, and human epithelia [30, 31, 3437]. Induction of apoptosis in cell culture monolayers and zebrafish has been critical for elucidating the mechanisms that control apoptotic cell extrusion in vertebrate epithelia. From these studies, we know that inducing apoptosis in epithelia through either the intrinsic or extrinsic pathways [38] results in extrusion of cells (Figure 2A). Additionally, these experiments defined a conserved mechanism for cell extrusion in vertebrate epithelia. To extrude, the cell destined to die produces and secretes sphingosine-1 phosphate (S1P) [39] to signal its live neighboring cells to form a ring of actin and myosin IIA around the dying cell [40]. Contraction of the multi-cellular actomyosin ring ejects the dying cell out of the tissue and closes any gaps that may have resulted from its exit. It is not clear if this mechanism and signaling pathway is conserved throughout all species since cells can extrude apically or basally, depending on the organism. In Drosophila, cells extrude predominantly basally, in a process typically referred to as cell delamination [31, 34, 37], whereas vertebrates extrude epithelial cells predominantly apically. Whether a cell is shed apically or basally could depend on different signaling pathway or molecular alterations in a conserved pathway [40, 41]. Mutant or transformed cells may also use extrusion to exit an epithelium. Expression of oncogenic K-Ras Src, or mutant DPP/BMP cells leads to preferential elimination of those cells when mixed with wild type neighboring cells in cell culture or the epidermis of developing Drosophila and zebrafish [4246], although it is currently unclear if these delaminations use the same mechanism as apoptotic and homeostatic extrusions. Regardless of whether a common mechanism is responsible for extrusion in all organisms, extrusion appears to serve the same purpose throughout all species: it ejects cells while preventing any breaches to the barrier function, a function essential to all epithelia.

Figure 2
Schematic of damage-induced and crowding-induced extrusion in epithelia. (A) During damage-induced extrusion, apoptotic stimuli trigger a cell to simultaneously die and extrude to preserve epithelial barrier function (pink cell). (B) During live cell ...

How does the apoptotic extrusion pathway relate to the live cell extrusion that occurs in response to cell crowding during normal homeostasis in the body? Live cell extrusion, like apoptotic extrusion, requires S1P signaling to activate ROCK-mediated actomyosin contraction [30]. Yet, blocking apoptosis by Bcl-2 over-expression, which blocks apoptotic cell extrusion [38], does not inhibit live cell extrusion. Likewise, blocking cell death in developing Drosophila by overexpressing p35 does not affect extrusion [31, 42]. Instead, live cell extrusion from crowding strain during homeostasis requires stretch-activated signaling, presumably upstream of S1P signaling. Inhibiting stretch-activated signaling or knocking down Piezo1, a recently identified stretch-activated channel (SAC) that transmits calcium currents [47, 48], prevents live cell extrusion in vivo. Importantly, SAC inhibition also leads to accumulations of epithelial cell masses at sites where extrusions would have occurred, suggesting that extrusion is the chief mechanism for controlling epithelial cell death in vivo [30]. Thus, while the S1P pathway controls both apoptotic and homeostatic cell extrusion, SACs control live cell extrusion during homeostasis (Figure 2B). This raises the question of how cell-crowding strain may activate SACs to induce extrusion of live cells.

Sensing the strain: Cell density changes promote live cell extrusion

How do epithelia sense crowding and activate stretch-activated signals in response to strain? Interestingly, extrusion in vivo always occurs in regions of the epithelium that are 1.8-fold more crowded than other areas [30]. Importantly, this is a scaling effect, as the crowding response is relative to the size of other cells within the epithelium rather than an absolute cell size. This suggests that cells, like people, have a sense of personal space that is defined by the tissue, and when they become too crowded, some must leave for the group to return to comfortable densities. Interestingly, mathematical simulations have predicted a similar threshold in tension to promote “pressure-induced apoptosis” in response to cell growth [13] (Figure 3A). Pressures near extrusion-induced apoptosis have been measured by membrane recoil following laser ablation and suggest that the amount of local mechanical tensions influences the frequency of extrusions [31, 34, 37]. Crowding driven extrusion was also shown experimentally where cells are crowded in a stretching device used in reverse. Over a six-hour period following crowding, epithelia equilibrate to homeostatic cell densities by activating cellular extrusion [30]. Increasing the amount of cellular crowding, both in mathematical models [31] and in experiments [30], increases the amount of live cell extrusion (Figure 3B&C). As the increase in cell density surpasses a fold change of 1.4–1.6, the number of live cells ejected from the tissue dramatically increases (Figure 3C). In vivo, extrusion may actually initiate at similar crowding densities, but the lag in extrusion activation may make it appear to occur at the 1.8-fold density measured. The in vitro crowding studies establish a critical crowding concentration where cells activate extrusion that may be used to predict situations where cells will be extruded.

Figure 3
Increased cell density induces live cell epithelial extrusion.(A) Mathematical simulations showing increasing pressures due to cell growth can prevent proliferation and eventually cause cell loss by apoptosis (CIG = Contact Inhibition of Growth) (modified ...

How do cells sense crowding at a molecular level? One might expect cells experiencing compression in crowded zones of the epithelium to become thinner and taller. However, crowding instead causes the total cell volume to decrease [30]. Because SACs likely play a role in translating the crowding strain force into activation of proteins controlling extrusion, changes in cell volume could ultimately affect the expression or activity of SACs [49, 50]. A key requirement for mechanosensitivity is that membrane stress reaches the channel so it can change shapes between open and closed states [5154]. Therefore, cell density could directly impact SACs in the membrane. Either aqueous influx or resistance due to the state of the cytoskeleton could counteract increased pressure on a cell [5557]. Interestingly, we have found an early role for potassium channels in promoting apoptotic cell extrusion, as addition of 4-aminopyridine, a potassium channel inhibitor, blocks cell death and extrusion following UV-C exposure [35]. Although a role for potassium channels has not yet been established for crowding-activated live cell extrusion, these channels might also enable cells to condense and activate SACs. Further, both actin/myosin contraction and destabilized microtubules [40] have been noted early in the extruding cell, both of which could compact the cell and activate SACs. Likewise, rearrangements in the actin and microtubule cytoskeleton occur in both the extruding cell and its neighbors during cell delamination in the Drosophila amnioserosa [34]. Alternatively, cell condensation could affect the number of cell-cell or cell-matrix contacts, which could target particular cells in crowded regions for extrusion. Although the Hippo pathway plays a role in controlling contact inhibition of proliferation, mediators of this pathway, YAP and TAZ, could also act to control extrusion in response to crowding, as cytoplasmic phosphorylated YAP increases when cells are plated in a small, restricted pattern of matrix [28]. Recent mathematical simulations also show the activity of the Drosophila YAP homolog, yorkie, can be influenced by mechanical stresses during development [58]. Further, activation of the S1P/S1P2/Rho pathway that controls extrusion also activates YAP [59]. While YAP and TAZ regulate proliferation through transcriptional activation in the nucleus, during crowding, they could act in the cytoplasm to regulate extrusion.

Cell crowding and epithelial pathologies

As extrusion appears to be critical for regulating overall cell numbers during epithelial homeostasis, alterations of any step in pathway controlling cell extrusion could lead to epithelial pathologies that either disrupt barrier function or lead to hyperplasia and cancer (Figure 4). Here, we discuss how defects in the ability to sense and respond to cellular crowding may promote common epithelial diseases.

Figure 4
Cellular Crowding and Epithelial Pathologies. Schematics depicting scenarios of altered extrusion events in epithelia. (A) Blocking crowding-induced live cell extrusion leads to cells amassing in the tissue (based on in vivo evidence in [30]). (B) Epithelial ...


An inability to sense engaged cell contacts and crowding could also prevent extrusion of cells, leading to the accumulation of defective cells that then develop into a carcinoma (Figure 4A). In support of this, colon adenomas (polyps) are comprised of densely crowded epithelia that lack extruding cells [30]. The idea that preventing the ability to sense crowding could lead to hyperplasia is supported by the fact that blocking the stretch-activated channel Piezo1 results in epithelial cell mass formation in zebrafish epidermis. Additionally, changes in the intrinsic density of cells or their surrounding matrix could also affect the ability of cells to sense crowding. Tumors are denser than the surrounding normal tissue [60, 61], a property that is evident in the ability to palpate tumors. Increased tumor density is due to a stiffer matrix underlying the tumor cells and denser cells that comprise the primary tumor, as measured by atomic force microscopy (AFM) of tumor tissue sections [62]. Stiffer tumor tissue would likely be less responsive to crowding pressures that normal cells promote extrusion in healthy tissue, thereby preventing their death by extrusion. Alternatively, AFM measurements have also determined that metastatic tumor cells isolated from pleural effusions are softer than neighboring benign or primary tumor cells [63]. A comparatively softer cell might have a higher probability of getting extruded from the tumor or epithelium from which it originates and allow it to invade and migrate through the body better. In support of this, increased physical pressure on tumors can promote the shedding of cells [64], and mechanical stimulation enhances cancer cell invasion [65, 66]. Moreover, tumor cells can be more contractile than their normal cells [67] and may be primed to extrude at a lower threshold than normal. Changes in density of tumor cells could even work together to promote invasion. Primary tumors could induce enough pressure to promote extrusion and metastasis of softer tumor cells.

A similar concept to how differences in cells could selectively kick out some cell types at the expense of others is exemplified genetically in the phenomenon of cell competition, seen in Drosophila and cell culture epithelia [68, 69]. In Drosophila, mosaic patches of cells with compromised growth [70] or altered polarity [71] will be eliminated by surrounding wild-type tissue through cell competition. Conversely, patches of mutant cells that have enhanced growth rates compared to surrounding wild type cells can act as super competitors to eliminate their neighbors [72, 73]. During cell competition, winning cells could promote extrusion of less fit cells by causing increased pressure through faster growth and proliferation. Mathematical models also support this idea, as patches of mutant clones with enhanced growth cause “pressure-induced apoptosis” on surrounding neighbors [13], a process that may likely be due to crowding-induced live cell extrusion. In addition to altering the ability of a cell to sense crowding, mutations in the extrusion pathway could alter the ability of a cell to extrude in response to increased pressures. For instance, several regulators of the extrusion pathway, such as sphingosine kinase-1, a precursor to S1P, S1P receptor 2, and RhoA and C, are misregulated in numerous tumors [7479]. Future work will determine how alterations in the extrusion pathway could cause cells to accumulate or promote invasion.

Although extrusion of live cells normally promotes their death by anoikis, it is important to note that most aggressive, metastatic tumors upregulate survival signaling to override anoikis [33, 80, 81], a property which allows them to colonize elsewhere in the body. When cells can no longer die by anoikis, the direction a cell extrudes could have a dramatic impact on its later fate. Typically, cells extrude apically into the lumen [30, 35, 40, 41], which is a dead space, so even if cells continue to survive after extrusion, they would still be essentially eliminated by extrusion. In this way, extrusion could act to suppress tumor formation. In fact, cells expressing oncogenic K-Ras or Src, or mutant DPP/BMP preferentially get eliminated from epithelia in cell culture and from the epidermis of developing Drosophila and zebrafish [4246]. On the other hand, if cancer cells with upregulated survival signaling extrude basally underneath the epithelium [40, 41], they could potentially invade the stroma and gain access to other sites in the body (Figure 4B). Interestingly, loss or mutation of the tumor suppressor adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) shifts cells to extrude predominantly basally [41], suggesting an additional way wild-type APC may act to suppress tumor formation. Therefore, aberrations in any step of sensing crowding, activating extrusion, or ensuring that extrusion occurs in the correct apical direction could contribute to the formation or progression of tumors.

Barrier Function Diseases

Epithelia provide a barrier to the outside world, and disruption of this barrier results in a variety of diseases. While hyper-immune response is often thought to be the basis of diseases such as asthma, coeliac disease, and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), an alternate hypothesis is that the primary cause of these diseases is poor epithelial barrier function. In support of this idea, many of these diseases are associated with mutations in cell-cell adhesion genes [8286]. Epithelia in these situations are thought to have poor barrier function simply due to poor adherens and tight junctions. However, alterations in cell adhesion could also affect the ability of a cell to extrude effectively. Additionally, mutations in the extrusion pathway could disrupt the ability of an epithelium to extrude in response to pathogens or insults that trigger cell death. For instance, perturbation of Rho activity downstream of the apoptotic pathway can block cell extrusion but still allow death to occur [35, 39, 40], which could produce gaps in the epithelial layer (Figure 4C). Loss of epithelial barrier function in colitis or asthma would then lead to inflammation and further exacerbation of the disease.

Another possibility is that epithelial barrier lesions could arise from excessive extrusion. For example, bronchoconstriction of airway smooth muscle during asthma may lead to excessive over-crowding of the attached bronchial epithelia. Excess epithelial crowding could cause hyper-extrusion could lead to the epithelial denuding seen in asthma [8790]. The resulting poor barrier could then lead to increased inflammation and infection commonly seen in asthmatics following an attack of bronchoconstriction [9193]. Further, excess extrusion caused by pathogens such as Vibrio parahaemolyticus may contribute to the disintegration and inflammation seen in intestinal villi [94]. Future studies will define what roles, if any, extrusion plays in the pathobiology of epithelial barrier diseases.

Concluding remarks

Despite its importance to human physiology and disease, how epithelial tissues maintain overall cell numbers has been a mystery. Previous studies implicated a role for cell contacts controlling proliferation of cells. Recent findings now add a role for epithelial cell densities in controlling cell division and death, suggesting that crowding forces and relative levels of cell contacts may be critical for regulating overall numbers. This emerging view of an old problem is also revealing new molecules that might translate changes in density, force, and contacts into whether a cell will live or die. These findings should, hopefully, also bring new models for how epithelial diseases initiate and new targets to treat or prevent these diseases.


Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.


1. Blanpain C, et al. Epithelial stem cells: turning over new leaves. Cell. 2007;128:445–458. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
2. Hooper CE. Cell turnover in epithelial populations. The Journal Of Histochemistry And Cytochemistry: Official Journal Of The Histochemistry Society. 1956;4:531–540. [PubMed]
3. Pellettieri J, Sanchez Alvarado A. Cell turnover and adult tissue homeostasis: from humans to planarians. Annual Review of Genetics. 2007;41:83–105. [PubMed]
4. Carter SB. Tissue homeostasis and the biological basis of cancer. Nature. 1968;220:970–974. [PubMed]
5. Stoker MG, Rubin H. Density dependent inhibition of cell growth in culture. Nature. 1967;215:171–172. [PubMed]
6. Abercrombie M, Heaysman JE. Observations on the social behaviour of cells in tissue culture. II. Monolayering of fibroblasts. Experimental Cell Research. 1954;6:293–306. [PubMed]
7. Abercrombie M. Contact inhibition and malignancy. Nature. 1979;281:259–262. [PubMed]
8. Abercrombie M, Heaysman JE. Invasive behavior between sarcoma and fibroblast populations in cell culture. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1976;56:561–570. [PubMed]
9. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell. 2000;100:57–70. [PubMed]
10. Puliafito A, et al. Collective and single cell behavior in epithelial contact inhibition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012;109:739–744. [PubMed]
11. Frisch SM, Francis H. Disruption of epithelial cell-matrix interactions induces apoptosis. The Journal Of Cell Biology. 1994;124:619–626. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
12. Farhadifar R, et al. The influence of cell mechanics, cell-cell interactions, and proliferation on epithelial packing. Current Biology: CB. 2007;17:2095–2104. [PubMed]
13. Shraiman BI. Mechanical feedback as a possible regulator of tissue growth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005;102:3318–3323. [PubMed]
14. Hufnagel L, et al. On the mechanism of wing size determination in fly development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007;104:3835–3840. [PubMed]
15. Benhamouche S, et al. Nf2/Merlin controls progenitor homeostasis and tumorigenesis in the liver. Genes & development. 2010;24:1718–1730. [PubMed]
16. Hamaratoglu F, et al. The tumour-suppressor genes NF2/Merlin and Expanded act through Hippo signalling to regulate cell proliferation and apoptosis. Nature cell biology. 2006;8:27–36. [PubMed]
17. Harvey KF, et al. The Drosophila Mst ortholog, hippo, restricts growth and cell proliferation and promotes apoptosis. Cell. 2003;114:457–467. [PubMed]
18. Pantalacci S, et al. The Salvador partner Hippo promotes apoptosis and cell-cycle exit in Drosophila. Nature Cell Biology. 2003;5:921–927. [PubMed]
19. Udan RS, et al. Hippo promotes proliferation arrest and apoptosis in the Salvador/Warts pathway. Nature Cell Biology. 2003;5:914–920. [PubMed]
20. Willecke M, et al. The fat cadherin acts through the hippo tumor-suppressor pathway to regulate tissue size. Current Biology: CB. 2006;16:2090–2100. [PubMed]
21. Wu S, et al. hippo encodes a Ste-20 family protein kinase that restricts cell proliferation and promotes apoptosis in conjunction with salvador and warts. Cell. 2003;114:445–456. [PubMed]
22. Zhang N, et al. The Merlin/NF2 tumor suppressor functions through the YAP oncoprotein to regulate tissue homeostasis in mammals. Developmental Cell. 2010;19:27–38. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
23. Kim NG, et al. E-cadherin mediates contact inhibition of proliferation through Hippo signaling-pathway components. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2011;108:11930–11935. [PubMed]
24. Silvis MR, et al. alpha-catenin is a tumor suppressor that controls cell accumulation by regulating the localization and activity of the transcriptional coactivator Yap1. Science Signaling. 2011;4:ra33. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
25. Varelas X, et al. The Crumbs complex couples cell density sensing to Hippo-dependent control of the TGF-beta-SMAD pathway. Developmental Cell. 2010;19:831–844. [PubMed]
26. Zhao B, et al. Inactivation of YAP oncoprotein by the Hippo pathway is involved in cell contact inhibition and tissue growth control. Genes & Development. 2007;21:2747–2761. [PubMed]
27. Zhao B, et al. Cell detachment activates the Hippo pathway via cytoskeleton reorganization to induce anoikis. Genes & Development. 2012;26:54–68. [PubMed]
28. Dupont S, et al. Role of YAP/TAZ in mechanotransduction. Nature. 2011;474:179–183. [PubMed]
29. McClatchey AI, Yap AS. Contact inhibition (of proliferation) redux. Current Opinion In Cell Biology 2012 [PubMed]
30. Eisenhoffer GT, et al. Crowding induces live cell extrusion to maintain homeostatic cell numbers in epithelia. Nature. 2012;484:546–549. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
31. Marinari E, et al. Live-cell delamination counterbalances epithelial growth to limit tissue overcrowding. Nature. 2012;484:542–545. [PubMed]
32. Reddig PJ, Juliano RL. Clinging to life: cell to matrix adhesion and cell survival. Cancer Metastasis Reviews. 2005;24:425–439. [PubMed]
33. Taddei ML, et al. Anoikis: an emerging hallmark in health and diseases. The Journal of Pathology. 2012;226:380–393. [PubMed]
34. Meghana C, et al. Integrin adhesion drives the emergent polarization of active cytoskeletal stresses to pattern cell delamination. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2011;108:9107–9112. [PubMed]
35. Rosenblatt J, et al. An epithelial cell destined for apoptosis signals its neighbors to extrude it by an actin- and myosin-dependent mechanism. Current biology: CB. 2001;11:1847–1857. [PubMed]
36. Denning DP, et al. Programmed elimination of cells by caspase-independent cell extrusion in C. elegans. Nature. 2012;488:226–230. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
37. Muliyil S, et al. Spatial, temporal and molecular hierarchies in the link between death, delamination and dorsal closure. Development. 2011;138:3043–3054. [PubMed]
38. Andrade D, Rosenblatt J. Apoptotic regulation of epithelial cellular extrusion. Apoptosis. 2011;16:491–501. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
39. Gu Y, et al. Epithelial cell extrusion requires the sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor 2 pathway. The Journal Of Cell Biology. 2011;193:667–676. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
40. Slattum G, et al. P115 RhoGEF and microtubules decide the direction apoptotic cells extrude from an epithelium. The Journal Of Cell Biology. 2009;186:693–702. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
41. Marshall TW, et al. The tumor suppressor adenomatous polyposis coli controls the direction in which a cell extrudes from an epithelium. Molecular Biology Of The Cell. 2011;22:3962–3970. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
42. Gibson MC, Perrimon N. Extrusion and death of DPP/BMP-compromised epithelial cells in the developing Drosophila wing. Science. 2005;307:1785–1789. [PubMed]
43. Hogan C, et al. Characterization of the interface between normal and transformed epithelial cells. Nature Cell Biology. 2009;11:460–467. [PubMed]
44. Kajita M, et al. Interaction with surrounding normal epithelial cells influences signalling pathways and behaviour of Src-transformed cells. Journal of Cell Science. 2010;123:171–180. [PubMed]
45. Norman M, et al. Loss of Scribble causes cell competition in mammalian cells. Journal of Cell Science. 2012;125:59–66. [PubMed]
46. Shen J, Dahmann C. Extrusion of cells with inappropriate Dpp signaling from Drosophila wing disc epithelia. Science. 2005;307:1789–1790. [PubMed]
47. Coste B, et al. Piezo1 and Piezo2 are essential components of distinct mechanically activated cation channels. Science. 2010;330:55–60. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
48. Coste B, et al. Piezo proteins are pore-forming subunits of mechanically activated channels. Nature. 2012;483:176–181. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
49. Pedersen SF, et al. Osmosensory mechanisms in cellular and systemic volume regulation. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: JASN. 2011;22:1587–1597. [PubMed]
50. Pedersen SF, Nilius B. Transient receptor potential channels in mechanosensing and cell volume regulation. Methods in Enzymology. 2007;428:183–207. [PubMed]
51. Chalfie M. Neurosensory mechanotransduction. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2009;10:44–52. [PubMed]
52. Ingber DE. Cellular mechanotransduction: putting all the pieces together again. FASEB Journal. 2006;20:811–827. [PubMed]
53. Sachs F. Stretch-activated ion channels: what are they? Physiology (Bethesda) 2010;25:50–56. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
54. Zhang H, Labouesse M. Signalling through mechanical inputs - a coordinated process. Journal of Cell Science. 2012;125:3039–3049. [PubMed]
55. Ehrlicher AJ, et al. Mechanical strain in actin networks regulates FilGAP and integrin binding to filamin A. Nature. 2011;478:260–263. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
56. Galkin VE, et al. Actin filaments as tension sensors. Current Biology: CB. 2012;22:R96–101. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
57. Schwarz US, Gardel ML. United we stand - integrating the actin cytoskeleton and cell-matrix adhesions in cellular mechanotransduction. Journal of Cell Science. 2012;125:3051–3060. [PubMed]
58. Aegerter-Wilmsen T, et al. Integrating force-sensing and signaling pathways in a model for the regulation of wing imaginal disc size. Development. 2012;139:3221–3231. [PubMed]
59. Yu FX, et al. Regulation of the Hippo-YAP Pathway by G-Protein-Coupled Receptor Signaling. Cell. 2012;150:780–791. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
60. Butcher DT, et al. A tense situation: forcing tumour progression. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2009;9:108–122. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
61. Kumar S, Weaver VM. Mechanics, malignancy, and metastasis: the force journey of a tumor cell. Cancer Metastasis Reviews. 2009;28:113–127. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
62. Lopez JI, et al. In situ force mapping of mammary gland transformation. Integrative Biology: Quantitative Biosciences From Nano To Macro. 2011;3:910–921. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
63. Cross SE, et al. Nanomechanical analysis of cells from cancer patients. Nature nanotechnology. 2007;2:780–783. [PubMed]
64. Hayashi K, et al. Real-time imaging of tumor-cell shedding and trafficking in lymphatic channels. Cancer Research. 2007;67:8223–8228. [PubMed]
65. Menon S, Beningo KA. Cancer cell invasion is enhanced by applied mechanical stimulation. PloS one. 2011;6:e17277. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
66. Tse JM, et al. Mechanical compression drives cancer cells toward invasive phenotype. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012;109:911–916. [PubMed]
67. Samuel MS, et al. Actomyosin-mediated cellular tension drives increased tissue stiffness and beta-catenin activation to induce epidermal hyperplasia and tumor growth. Cancer Cell. 2011;19:776–791. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
68. Baker NE. Cell competition. Current Biology: CB. 2011;21:R11–15. [PubMed]
69. Johnston LA. Competitive interactions between cells: death, growth, and geography. Science. 2009;324:1679–1682. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
70. Morata G, Ripoll P. Minutes: mutants of drosophila autonomously affecting cell division rate. Developmental Biology. 1975;42:211–221. [PubMed]
71. Chen CL, et al. Tumor suppression by cell competition through regulation of the Hippo pathway. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012;109:484–489. [PubMed]
72. de la Cova C, et al. Drosophila myc regulates organ size by inducing cell competition. Cell. 2004;117:107–116. [PubMed]
73. Moreno E, Basler K. dMyc transforms cells into super-competitors. Cell. 2004;117:117–129. [PubMed]
74. Arpaia E, et al. The interaction between caveolin-1 and Rho-GTPases promotes metastasis by controlling the expression of alpha5-integrin and the activation of Src, Ras and Erk. Oncogene. 2012;31:884–896. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
75. Gulhati P, et al. mTORC1 and mTORC2 regulate EMT, motility, and metastasis of colorectal cancer via RhoA and Rac1 signaling pathways. Cancer Research. 2011;71:3246–3256. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
76. Herrera Abreu MT, et al. Gab2 regulates cytoskeletal organization and migration of mammary epithelial cells by modulating RhoA activation. Molecular Biology Of The Cell. 2011;22:105–116. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
77. Pyne NJ, Pyne S. Sphingosine 1-phosphate and cancer. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2010;10:489–503. [PubMed]
78. Pyne S, et al. Sphingosine kinase inhibitors and cancer: seeking the golden sword of Hercules. Cancer Research. 2011;71:6576–6582. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
79. Yester JW, et al. Extracellular and intracellular sphingosine-1-phosphate in cancer. Cancer Metastasis Reviews. 2011;30:577–597. [PubMed]
80. Guadamillas MC, et al. Overcoming anoikis--pathways to anchorage-independent growth in cancer. Journal Of Cell Science. 2011;124:3189–3197. [PubMed]
81. Kim YN, et al. Anoikis resistance: an essential prerequisite for tumor metastasis. International Journal Of Cell Biology. 2012;2012:306879. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
82. Hering NA, et al. Determinants of colonic barrier function in inflammatory bowel disease and potential therapeutics. The Journal Of Physiology. 2012;590:1035–1044. [PubMed]
83. Petit CS, et al. Requirement of cellular prion protein for intestinal barrier function and mislocalization in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:122–132. e115. [PubMed]
84. Schumann M, et al. Cell polarity-determining proteins Par-3 and PP-1 are involved in epithelial tight junction defects in coeliac disease. Gut. 2012;61:220–228. [PubMed]
85. Xiao C, et al. Defective epithelial barrier function in asthma. The Journal Of Allergy And Clinical Immunology. 2011;128:549–556. e541–512. [PubMed]
86. Zeissig S, et al. Changes in expression and distribution of claudin 2, 5 and 8 lead to discontinuous tight junctions and barrier dysfunction in active Crohn’s disease. Gut. 2007;56:61–72. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
87. Trautmann A, et al. Apoptosis and loss of adhesion of bronchial epithelial cells in asthma. International Archives Of Allergy And Immunology. 2005;138:142–150. [PubMed]
88. Kim MN, et al. Involvement of the MAPK and PI3K pathways in chitinase 3-like 1-regulated hyperoxia-induced airway epithelial cell death. Biochemical And Biophysical Research Communications. 2012;421:790–796. [PubMed]
89. Zhou C, et al. Epithelial apoptosis and loss in airways of children with asthma. The Journal Of Asthma: Official Journal Of The Association For The Care Of Asthma. 2011;48:358–365. [PubMed]
90. Lee HH, et al. Apoptotic cells activate NKT cells through T cell Ig-like mucin-like-1 resulting in airway hyperreactivity. J Immunol. 2010;185:5225–5235. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
91. Holgate ST. The airway epithelium is central to the pathogenesis of asthma. Allergology International: Official Journal Of The Japanese Society Of Allergology. 2008;57:1–10. [PubMed]
92. Knight DA, Holgate ST. The airway epithelium: structural and functional properties in health and disease. Respirology. 2003;8:432–446. [PubMed]
93. Swindle EJ, et al. Breakdown in epithelial barrier function in patients with asthma: identification of novel therapeutic approaches. The Journal Of Allergy And Clinical Immunology. 2009;124:23–34. quiz 35-26. [PubMed]
94. Ritchie JM, et al. Inflammation and disintegration of intestinal villi in an experimental model for Vibrio parahaemolyticus-induced diarrhea. PLoS Pathogens. 2012;8:e1002593. [PMC free article] [PubMed]