2002
DOI: 10.1006/excr.2002.5498
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Increasing Fibroblast Response to Materials Using Nanotopography: Morphological and Genetic Measurements of Cell Response to 13-nm-High Polymer Demixed Islands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

9
223
3
5

Year Published

2005
2005
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 329 publications
(244 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
9
223
3
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Taken together, these data provided evidence that alteration of ECM signaling or cytoskeleton arrangement could lead to a change in gene regulation directing cell differentiation. Changes in gene regulation by nanotopography in fibroblasts have also been observed on random pattern of nano-scaled islands produced with polymer-demixing techniques [26]. The difference in cytoskeleton arrangement, cell adhesion and protein expression, such as Rac and other signaling proteins, on fibroblasts cultured on nano-islands versus flat surface are observed in cDNA microarray gene expression analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Taken together, these data provided evidence that alteration of ECM signaling or cytoskeleton arrangement could lead to a change in gene regulation directing cell differentiation. Changes in gene regulation by nanotopography in fibroblasts have also been observed on random pattern of nano-scaled islands produced with polymer-demixing techniques [26]. The difference in cytoskeleton arrangement, cell adhesion and protein expression, such as Rac and other signaling proteins, on fibroblasts cultured on nano-islands versus flat surface are observed in cDNA microarray gene expression analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…6 Accordingly, nanogrooves, nanopits, and nanoislands have been shown to affect contact guidance in vitro and directly influence cell adhesion to a degree related to feature dimension, cell type, and cell density. [7][8][9][10] Present studies indicate that fibroblasts react significantly to nanotopographical cues in vitro, perceiving the topography of an implanted surface via dynamic filopodial formation and extension to find sites topographicaly suitable for adhesion, growth, and maturation. 11,12 The processes that mediate cellular reaction to nanoscale surface structures are not well understood, and may be direct (a result of the influence of the surface topography) or indirect (where the surface structure has affected the composition, orientation, or conformation of the adsorbed ECM components).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Response of cells to topographical cues and the concept of contact guidance have been known for decades [8,9]. Various topographical features such as grooves, ridges, stops, pores, wells and nodes in micro-or nanoscale [10][11][12] have been presented to a wide variety of cells: fibroblasts [13][14][15][16][17], BHK cells [18], neuronal cells [19], macrophages [20,21], epithelial cells [22], endothelial cells, and smooth muscle cells (SMC) [23][24][25][26]. Topography can influence cellular responses from initial attachment and migration to differentiation and production of new tissue [10,12,27].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%