4.5 Article

Comparative efficacy of dermal fibroblast-mediated and direct adenoviral bone morphogenetic protein-2 gene therapy for bone regeneration in an equine rib model

Journal

GENE THERAPY
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages 733-744

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/gt.2010.13

Keywords

bone morphogenetic protein; dermal fibroblasts; bone healing; cell-based gene therapy; adenoviral vectors

Funding

  1. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases [K08 AR049201]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cell-mediated and direct adenoviral (Ad) vector gene therapies can induce bone regeneration, including dermal fibroblasts (DFbs). We compared two effective therapies, DFb-mediated and direct Ad vector delivery of bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP2), for relative efficacy in bone regeneration. Equine rib drill defects were treated by percutaneous injection of either DFb-BMP2 or an Ad-BMP2 vector. At week 6, both DFb-BMP2- and Ad-BMP2-treated rib defects had greater bone filling volume and mineral density, with DFb-BMP2 inducing greater bone volume and maturity in the cortical bone aspect of the defect than Ad-BMP2. The transplantation of DFb alone induced modest bone formation. Increased mineral density and bone turnover were evident in the cortical and cancellous bone directly adjacent to the healing drill defects treated with either DFb-BMP2 or Ad-BMP2. Using our cell/vector dosage and model, BMP2, whether delivered by the DFb vector or direct Ad vector, induced greater and robust bone regeneration. DFb-mediated BMP2 therapy promoted greater cortical bone regeneration than did direct gene delivery, possibly because of an increased cellularity of the bone healing site. BMP2 delivery, regardless of gene delivery method, increased the mineral density of the neighboring bone, which may be beneficial clinically in repairing or weak bone. Gene Therapy (2010) 17, 733-744; doi: 10.1038/gt.2010.13; published online 11 March 2010

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available