4.6 Article

Cytotoxicity and inhibitory effects of low-concentration triclosan on adipogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells

期刊

TOXICOLOGY AND APPLIED PHARMACOLOGY
卷 262, 期 2, 页码 117-123

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2012.04.024

关键词

Adipocyte differentiation; Human mesenchymal stem cell; Triclosan; Cytotoxicity

资金

  1. National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration
  2. National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
  3. [FDA IAG: 224-07-0007]
  4. [NIH Y1ES1027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Humans at all ages are continually exposed to triclosan (TCS), a widely used antimicrobial agent that can be found in many daily hygiene products, such as toothpastes and shampoos; however, the toxicological and biological effects of TCS in the human body after long-term and low-concentration exposure are far from being well understood. In the current study, we investigated the effects of TCS on the differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) by measuring the cytotoxicity, morphological changes, lipid accumulation, and the expression of adipocyte differentiation biomarkers during 21-day adipogenesis. Significant cytotoxicity was observed in un-induced hMSCs treated with high-concentration TCS (>= 5.0 mu M TCS), but not with low-concentration treatments (<= 2.5 mu M TCS). TCS inhibited adipocyte differentiation of hMSCs in a concentration-dependent manner in the 0.156 to 2.5 mu M range as indicated by morphological changes with Oil Red O staining, which is an index of lipid accumulation. The inhibitory effect was confirmed by a decrease in gene expression of specific adipocyte differentiation biomarkers including adipocyte protein 2, lipoprotein lipase, and adiponectin. Our study demonstrates that TCS inhibits adipocyte differentiation of hMSCs under concentrations that are not cytotoxic and in the range observed in human blood. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据