3.9 Article

Differential osteogenicity of multiple donor-derived human mesenchymal stem cells and osteoblasts in monolayer, scaffold-based 3D culture and in vivo

Journal

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING-BIOMEDIZINISCHE TECHNIK
Volume 61, Issue 3, Pages 253-266

Publisher

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/bmt-2014-0159

Keywords

3D culture; bone; gene expression; NOD/SCID mice; polycaprolactone; tissue engineering

Funding

  1. Queensland University of Technology
  2. Australian Research Council (ARC)
  3. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We set out to compare the osteogenicity of human mesenchymal stem (hMSCs) and osteoblasts (hOBs). Upon osteogenic induction in monolayer, hMSCs showed superior matrix mineralization expressing characteristic bone-related genes. For scaffold cultures, both cell types presented spindle-shaped, osteoblast-like morphologies forming a dense, interconnected network of high viability. On the scaffolds, hOBs proliferated faster. A general upregulation of parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP), osteoprotegrin (OPG), receptor activator of NF-kappa B ligand (RANKL), sclerostin (SOST), and dentin matrix protein 1 (DMP1) was observed for both cell types. Simultaneously, PTHrP, RANKL and DMP-1 expression decreased under osteogenic stimulation, while OPG and SOST increased significantly. Following transplantation into NOD/SCID mice, mu CT and histology showed increased bone deposition with hOBs. The bone was vascularized, and amounts further increased for both cell types after recombinant human bone morphogenic protein 7 - (rhBMP-7) addition also stimulating osteoclastogenesis. Complete bone organogenesis was evidenced by the presence of osteocytes and hematopoietic precursors. Our study results support the asking to develop 3D cellular models closely mimicking the functions of living tissues suitable for in vivo translation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available