Evidences of the Effect of GO and rGO in PCL Membranes on the Differentiation and Maturation of Human Neural Progenitor Cells

Abstract

The effect of doping graphene oxide (GO) and reduced graphene oxide (rGO) into poly(ε‐caprolactone) (PCL) membranes prepared by solvent induced phase separation is evaluated in terms of nanomaterial distribution and compatibility with neural stem cell growth and functional differentiation. Raman spectra analyses demonstrate the homogeneous distribution of GO on the membrane surface while rGO concentration increases gradually toward the center of the membrane thickness. This behavior is associated with electrostatic repulsion that PCL exerted toward the polar GO and its affinity for the non‐polar rGO. In vitro cell studies using human induced pluripotent cell derived neural progenitor cells (NPCs) show that rGO increases marker expression of NPCs differentiation with respect to GO (significantly to tissue culture plate (TCP)). Moreover, the distinctive nanomaterials distribution defines the cell‐to‐nanomaterial interaction on the PCL membranes: GO nanomaterials on the membrane surface favor higher number of active matured neurons, while PCL/rGO membranes present cells with significantly higher magnitude of neural activity compared to TCP and PCL/GO despite there being no direct contact of rGO with the cells on the membrane surface. Overall, this work evidences the important role of rGO electrical properties on the stimulation of neural cell electro‐activity on PCL membrane scaffolds.

Hollow Fiber Membranes of PCL and PCL/Graphene as Scaffolds with Potential to Develop In Vitro Blood—Brain Barrier Models

“…The outcome obtained in the C6 cellular model of astrocytic differentiation is in agreement with previous work [24,55]. Thus, using cultures of neural progenitor cells (NPCs), Sánchez-González et al [24] demonstrated that PCL-graphene flat membranes improved neural cell modulation as compared to PCL membranes. Rastogi et al [55] evidenced that pristine graphene promotes cell adhesion and proliferation of both nonneuronal (COS-7, fibroblast) and neuronal cells.…”

“…The equipment provided with the values of impedance module ( Z ) and phase angle ( φ ). The electrical conductivity calculations for the HFs are described elsewhere [ 24 ].…”

“…Other researchers reported the processability via wet-spinning of liquid crystalline dispersions of graphene oxide to produce microfibers for neuronal interfaces [ 20 , 21 ]. We have previously demonstrated that PCL/graphene-based nanomaterial composites in flat 2D-membrane configuration could be used, even after 1 month, as an optimal and promising cell culture scaffold for neural tissue differentiation [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Furthermore, the study of the hydrolytic degradation of these PCL/graphene-based nanomaterial membranes showed null release of graphene nanoparticles from the polymer matrix during the 1-year period [ 23 ].…”

Graphene-Based Nanomaterials: From Production to Integration With Modern Tools in Neuroscience

“…Indeed, those nanomaterials significantly affect neurite branching and synapses during stem cell differentiation to neurons (Defteralí et al, 2016a,b). Similarly, changes during the differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells into multiple somatic cell lineages have been shown in graphene-treated samples (Yoo et al, 2014; Hu et al, 2015; Choi et al, 2016; Lee et al, 2016; Rodriguez-Losada et al, 2017; Wang et al, 2017; Nguyen et al, 2018; Sánchez-González et al, 2018; Saburi et al, 2019). The specific effects of Gr/GO seem to be variable even within stem cell type, but overall results collectively suggest that Gr holds promise as a scaffold material for regenerative medicine and stem cell-based technologies.…”

Antimicrobial and biodegradable materials based on ε‐caprolactone derivatives

“…During the degradation process, physicochemical factors such as temperature, enzyme species/enzyme concentration, and pH of the substrate all have an effect on the rate of biodegradation 13,15 . The in vitro degradation of polyesters can be monitored by characterizing remains via gravimetric measurements for weight loss, and via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for morphological changes, evidenced by the formation of either pores, cavities, discontinuities, and cracks 4,13,17–19 …”