Comparative proteomic analysis of osteogenic differentiated human adipose tissue and bone marrow‐derived stromal cells

Dadras, Mehran; May, Caroline; Wagner, Johannes Maximilian; Wallner, Christoph; Becerikli, Mustafa; Dittfeld, Stephanie; Serschnitzki, Bettina; Schilde, Lukas; Guntermann, Annika; Sengstock, Christina; Köller, Manfred; Seybold, D.; Geßmann, Jan; Schildhauer, Thomas A.; Lehnhardt, Marcus; Marcus, Katrin

doi:10.1111/jcmm.15797

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar results were obtained by Dadras et al (2020), who performed a donor-matched analysis of BM-MSCs and ADSCs from 29 patients after 21 days of osteogenic differentiation by shotgun proteomics. A total of 2624 proteins with at least two unique peptides were quantified, and 427 and 102 were specific for BM-MSCs and ADSCs, respectively.…”

Section: Cell Biologysupporting

confidence: 79%

“…theless, induction of osteogenic differentiation might be controlled by differential signal cascades in different mesenchymal cells. Moreover, while most of the studies focus only on measurements of ALP activity and matrix mineralization (Alizarin red stain), there is evidence of the differences between osteoblast-like cells, differentiated from different MSC types (e.g., Jääger et al, 2012;Dadras et al, 2020;Nantavisai et al, 2020).…”

Section: Cell Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Osteogenic differentiation: a universal cell program of heterogeneous mesenchymal cells or a similar extracellular matrix mineralizing phenotype?

Lobov

Malashicheva

2022

BioComm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the popularity of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), many fundamental aspects of their physiology still have not been understood. The information accumulated to date argues that MSCs from different sources vary in their differentiation potential and, probably, in molecular mechanisms of trilineage differentiation. Therefore, this review consists of two parts. Firstly, we focus on the data on inter- and intra-source variation of MSCs. We discuss in detail MSC variation at the single-cell level and direct omics comparison of MSCs from four main tissue sources: bone marrow, adipose tissue, umbilical cord and tooth. MSCs from all tissues represent heterogeneous populations in vivo with sub-populational structures reflecting their functional role in the tissue. After in vitro cultivation MSCs lose their natural heterogeneity, but obtain a new one, which might be regarded as a cultivation artifact. Nevertheless, MSCs from various sources still keep their functional differences after in vitro cultivation. In the second part of the review, we discuss how these differences influence molecular mechanisms of osteogenic differentiation. We highlight at least one subtype of mesenchymal cells differentiation with matrix mineralization — odontoblastic differentiation. We also discuss differences in molecular mechanisms of pathological heterotopic osteogenic differentiation of valve interstitial and tumor cells, but these assumptions need additional empirical confirmation. Finally, we observe differences in osteogenic differentiation molecular mechanisms of several MSC types and argue that this differentiation might be influenced by the cell context. Nevertheless, bone marrow and adipose MSCs seem to undergo osteogenic differentiation similarly, by the same mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Cell Biologysupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Cell Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Osteogenic differentiation: a universal cell program of heterogeneous mesenchymal cells or a similar extracellular matrix mineralizing phenotype?

Lobov

Malashicheva

2022

BioComm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on the generous recommendation for screening process of proteomics, researchers usually tend to choose the pathways/proteins with higher fold change for the subsequent analysis. [31][32][33] In our study, although HEXA/ HEXB was universally overexpressed in the CI ≥1 group, their expressions in the CI=0 group were also high and their fold change (CI ≥1/CI=0) was 1.78 and 1.60, respectively, which was lower than that of NEU1 (7.90). Moreover, the potent pathogenic roles of the candidate proteins should also be taken into consideration.…”

Section: Lupus Nephritiscontrasting

confidence: 53%

Discovery of NEU1 as a candidate renal biomarker for proliferative lupus nephritis chronicity

Mao

Tan

et al. 2021

Lupus Sci Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveProteomic approach was applied to identify candidate biomarkers of chronicity in patients with proliferative lupus nephritis (LN), and their clinicopathological significance and prognostic values were investigated.MethodsThis study recruited 10 patients with proliferative LN and 6 normal controls (NCs) with proteomic data to compare protein expression profiles, 58 patients with proliferative LN and 10 NCs to verify proteomic data by immunohistochemistry, and 14 patients with proliferative LN with urine samples to evaluate the urinary expression of the biomarker by western blot assay. The composite endpoints included end-stage renal disease and ≥50% reduction from baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).ResultsProteomics detected 48 proteins upregulated in the group with chronicity index (CI) ≥1 compared with the CI=0 and NC groups. Further pathway analysis was enriched in ‘other glycan degradation’. Neuraminidase 1 (NEU1), the most predominant protein in the pathway of other glycan degradation, was highly expressed in the kidney of patients with proliferative LN and could co-localise with podocyte, mesangial cells, endothelial cells and tubule cells. NEU1 expression in the tubulointerstitium area was significantly higher in the CI ≥1 group compared with the CI=0 and NC groups. Moreover, NEU1 expression was significantly correlated with serum creatinine value, eGFR and CI scores, respectively. Urinary NEU1 excretion in the CI ≥1 group was higher than in the CI=0 group and was also positively correlated with CI scores. Furthermore, the high expression of renal NEU1 was identified as an independent risk factor for renal prognosis by multivariate Cox regression analysis (HR, 6.462 (95% CI 1.025 to 40.732), p=0.047).ConclusionsRenal NEU1 expression was associated with pathological CI scores and renal outcomes in patients with proliferative LN.

show abstract

“…MSCs are derived from perivascular niche and can be found in almost all tissues with vascularization [ 12 , 77 ]. Therefore MSCs can be harvested from skeletal muscle [ 78 ], umbilical cord [ 79 ], skin [ 80 ], dental pulp [ 81 ], bone marrow [ 82 ], and adipose tissue [ 83 , 84 ].…”

Section: Cell Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Adipose Stem Cells in Bone Regeneration and Bone Tissue Engineering

Mende

Götzl

Kubo

et al. 2021

Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone regeneration is a complex process that is influenced by tissue interactions, inflammatory responses, and progenitor cells. Diseases, lifestyle, or multiple trauma can disturb fracture healing, which might result in prolonged healing duration or even failure. The current gold standard therapy in these cases are bone grafts. However, they are associated with several disadvantages, e.g., donor site morbidity and availability of appropriate material. Bone tissue engineering has been proposed as a promising alternative. The success of bone-tissue engineering depends on the administered cells, osteogenic differentiation, and secretome. Different stem cell types offer advantages and drawbacks in this field, while adipose-derived stem or stromal cells (ASCs) are in particular promising. They show high osteogenic potential, osteoinductive ability, and immunomodulation properties. Furthermore, they can be harvested through a noninvasive process in high numbers. ASCs can be induced into osteogenic lineage through bioactive molecules, i.e., growth factors and cytokines. Moreover, their secretome, in particular extracellular vesicles, has been linked to fracture healing. The aim of this review is a comprehensive overview of ASCs for bone regeneration and bone tissue engineering.

show abstract

Comparative proteomic analysis of osteogenic differentiated human adipose tissue and bone marrow‐derived stromal cells

Abstract: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Cited by 8 publications

References 68 publications

Osteogenic differentiation: a universal cell program of heterogeneous mesenchymal cells or a similar extracellular matrix mineralizing phenotype?

Osteogenic differentiation: a universal cell program of heterogeneous mesenchymal cells or a similar extracellular matrix mineralizing phenotype?

Discovery of NEU1 as a candidate renal biomarker for proliferative lupus nephritis chronicity

The Role of Adipose Stem Cells in Bone Regeneration and Bone Tissue Engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About