Evaluation and comparison of the in vitro characteristics and chondrogenic capacity of four adult stem/progenitor cells for cartilage cell‐based repair

Abstract

Cell-based therapy is being considered as a promising approach to regenerate damaged cartilage. Though, autologous chondrocyte implantation is the most effective strategy currently in use, but is hampered by some drawbacks seeking comprehensive research to surmount existing limitations or introducing alternative cell sources. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the in vitro characteristics and chondrogenic capacity of some easily available adult cell sources for use in cartilage repair which includes: bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSC), adipose tissue-derived MSC, articular chondrocyte progenitors, and nasal septum-derived progenitors. Human stem/progenitor cells were isolated and expanded. Cell's immunophenotype, biosafety, and cell cycle status were evaluated. Also, cells were seeded onto aligned electrospun poly (l-lactic acid)/poly (ε-caprolactone) nanofibrous scaffolds and their proliferation rate as well as chondrogenic potential were assessed. Cells were almost phenotypically alike as they showed similar cell surface marker expression pattern. The aligned nanofibrous hybrid scaffolds could support the proliferation and chondrogenic differentiation of all cell types. However, nasal cartilage progenitors showed a higher proliferation potential and a higher chondrogenic capacity. Though, mostly similar in the majority of the studied features, nasal septum progenitors demonstrated a higher chondrogenic potential that in combination with their higher proliferation rate and easier access to the source tissue, introduces it as a promising cell source for cartilage tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 104A: 600-610, 2016.

Molecular Validation of Chondrogenic Differentiation and Hypoxia Responsiveness of Platelet-Lysate Expanded Adipose Tissue–Derived Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells

“…18,36 Furthermore, extracellular matrix proteins (e.g., ACAN, DCN, COMP, and HAPLN1) are highly expressed in human cartilage and human articular chondrocytes. 24,26,37 In our studies, both cell types respond to hypoxia by enhancing the expression of several chondrogenic markers including SOX9, HAPLN1, and COMP, but also HIST2H4 and HIF1A. These findings indicate that a low oxygen microenvironment may act to modulate cell proliferation and chondrogenic differentiation of both AMSCs and chondrocytes.…”

Toward tissue-engineering of nasal cartilages

“…These cells are migratory and express surface markers, such as CD29, CD105, CD106, CD90, and CCD44, suggesting a state of differentiation between mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and chondrocytes [109]. NSPs have been shown to differentiate to chondrogenic and osteogenic, but not adipogenic lineages [88] and show a greater proliferation potential than bone marrow-and adipose-derived MSCs [110]. The surface markers and differentiation potential of NSPs have been reported to remain unchanged after 10 passages [108].…”

Concise Review: Avian Multipotent Stem Cells as a Novel Tool for Investigating Cell-Based Therapies

“…CSPCs are multipotent stem cells and identify by expression of specific surface markers, ability to self-renew, and differentiate into three cell types such as adipocytes, osteoblasts, and chondrocytes [37,38]. These cells are great tools for cell-based cartilage repair [37,[39][40][41].…”