Coculture Strategies in Bone Tissue Engineering: The Impact of Culture Conditions on Pluripotent Stem Cell Populations

Janardhanan, Sathyanarayana; Wang, Martha O.; Fisher, John P.

doi:10.1089/ten.teb.2011.0681

Cited by 21 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We used this strategy to monitor individual phenotype changes and gene expression characteristics, both in osteoblast and osteoclast, which is difficult in the condition of direct co-culturing. Moreover, the indirect co-culture model is more accurate for cells with different characteristics of growth [35,36].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of miR-21 in Osteoblasts–Osteoclasts Coupling In Vitro

Śmieszek

Marcinkowska

Pielok

et al. 2020

Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MiR-21 is being gradually more and more recognized as a molecule regulating bone tissue homeostasis. However, its function is not fully understood due to the dual role of miR-21 on bone-forming and bone-resorbing cells. In this study, we investigated the impact of miR-21 inhibition on pre-osteoblastic cells differentiation and paracrine signaling towards pre-osteoclasts using indirect co-culture model of mouse pre-osteoblast (MC3T3) and pre-osteoclast (4B12) cell lines. The inhibition of miR-21 in MC3T3 cells (MC3T3inh21) modulated expression of genes encoding osteogenic markers including collagen type I (Coll-1), osteocalcin (Ocl), osteopontin (Opn), and runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx-2). Inhibition of miR-21 in osteogenic cultures of MC3T3 also inflected the synthesis of OPN protein which is essential for proper mineralization of extracellular matrix (ECM) and anchoring osteoclasts to the bones. Furthermore, it was shown that in osteoblasts miR-21 regulates expression of factors that are vital for survival of pre-osteoclast, such as receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand (RANKL). The pre-osteoclast cultured with MC3T3inh21 cells was characterized by lowered expression of several markers associated with osteoclasts’ differentiation, foremost tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (Trap) but also receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (Rank), cathepsin K (Ctsk), carbonic anhydrase II (CaII), and matrix metalloproteinase (Mmp-9). Collectively, our data indicate that the inhibition of miR-21 in MC3T3 cells impairs the differentiation and ECM mineralization as well as influences paracrine signaling leading to decreased viability of pre-osteoclasts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of miR-21 in Osteoblasts–Osteoclasts Coupling In Vitro

Śmieszek

Marcinkowska

Pielok

et al. 2020

Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During osteogenesis, it has been reported that HADSCs committed to the osteoblastic lineage were abundant between day 7 and day 14, the same time the initiation of osteogenesis occurred . Differentiation of HADSCs to pre‐osteoblasts takes place at day 7, differentiation of pre‐osteoblasts to osteoblasts at day 14, and osteoblasts become mature cells (osteocytes) after 21 days . In the present study, HOBs and HADSCs are combined in co‐culture.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Differential osteogenic potential of human adipose‐derived stem cells co‐cultured with human osteoblasts on polymeric microfiber scaffolds

Rozila

Azari

Sha'ban

et al. 2015

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The osteogenic potential of human adipose-derived stem cells (HADSCs) co-cultured with human osteoblasts (HOBs) using selected HADSCs/HOBs ratios of 1:1, 2:1, and 1:2, respectively, is evaluated. The HADSCs/HOBs were seeded on electrospun three-dimensional poly[(R)-3-hydroxybutyric acid] (PHB) blended with bovine-derived hydroxyapatite (BHA). Monocultures of HADSCs and HOBs were used as control groups. The effects of PHB-BHA scaffold on cell proliferation and cell morphology were assessed by AlamarBlue assay and field emission scanning electron microscopy. Cell differentiation, cell mineralization, and osteogenic-related gene expression of co-culture HADSCs/HOBs were examined by alkaline phosphatase (ALP) assay, alizarin Red S assay, and quantitative real time PCR, respectively. The results showed that co-culture of HADSCs/HOBs, 1:1 grown into PHB-BHA promoted better cell adhesion, displayed a significant higher cell proliferation, higher production of ALP, extracellular mineralization and osteogenic-related gene expression of run-related transcription factor, bone sialoprotein, osteopontin, and osteocalcin compared to other co-culture groups. This result also suggests that the use of electrospun PHB-BHA in a co-culture HADSCs/HOBs system may serve as promising approach to facilitate osteogenic differentiation activity of HADSCs through direct cell-to-cell contact with HOBs.

show abstract

“…For the development of interfacial TEC based on cells' coculturing, one must consider the complexity of the native composite tissues when choosing tissue engineering parameters . A variety of scaffolds, cell sources and environmental signals can be used to customize the culture protocol and take advantages of their synergistic effect for specific applications.…”

Section: Key Considerations In Coculture Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim is to improve construct integration and to aid natural healing in complex body parts . To reflect this complexity, different cell lineages should be cultured simultaneously in vitro on a scaffold made of a biomaterial, in order to mimic structures analogous to in vivo composite tissues ( Figure ). Using multiple cell types to develop a single interfacial TEC requires specific investigations, and optimization of setups and protocols, still largely unresolved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilineage Constructs for Scaffold‐Based Tissue Engineering: A Review of Tissue‐Specific Challenges

Baudequin

Tabrizian

2017

Adv Healthcare Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing interest in the regeneration of tissue in interfacial regions, where biological, physical, and chemical attributes vary across tissue type. The simultaneous use of distinct cell lineages can help in developing in vitro structures, analogous to native composite tissues. This literature review gathers the recent reports that have investigated multiple cell types of various sources and lineages in a coculture system for tissue-engineered constructs. Such studies aim at mimicking the native organization of tissues and their interfaces, and/or to improve the development of complex tissue substitutes. This paper thus distinguishes itself from those focusing on technical aspects of coculturing for a single specific tissue. The first part of this review is dedicated to variables of cocultured tissue engineering such as scaffold, cells, and in vitro culture environment. Next, tissue-specific coculture methods and approaches are covered for the most studied tissues. Finally, cross-analysis is performed to highlight emerging trends in coculture principles and to discuss how tissue-specific challenges can inspire new approaches for regeneration of different interfaces to improve the outcomes of various tissue engineering strategies.

show abstract

Coculture Strategies in Bone Tissue Engineering: The Impact of Culture Conditions on Pluripotent Stem Cell Populations

Cited by 21 publications

References 74 publications

The Role of miR-21 in Osteoblasts–Osteoclasts Coupling In Vitro

The Role of miR-21 in Osteoblasts–Osteoclasts Coupling In Vitro

Differential osteogenic potential of human adipose‐derived stem cells co‐cultured with human osteoblasts on polymeric microfiber scaffolds

Multilineage Constructs for Scaffold‐Based Tissue Engineering: A Review of Tissue‐Specific Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About