4.5 Article

Induction of hair follicle neogenesis with cultured mouse dermal papilla cells in de novo regenerated skin tissues

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/term.2918

关键词

devitalized; de novo; dermal matrix; dermal papilla; hair follicle; keratinocyte; skin regeneration

资金

  1. Peking University Third Hospital Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Scholars [7743401]
  2. Beijing Higher Education Young Elite Teacher Project [YETP0072]
  3. NIH/NIAMS [P30-AR066527, R01-AR057746]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

De novo skin regeneration with human keratinocytes amplified in culture is a life-saving procedure for patients with extensive skin loss and chronic wounds. It also provides a valuable platform for gene function and therapeutic assessments. Nevertheless, tissues generated in this manner lack hair follicles that are important for skin homeostasis, barrier function, and repair. In this study, we generated skin tissues with human keratinocytes combined with dermal papilla (DP) cells isolated from mouse whisker hair. For this, cultured keratinocytes and mouse DP (mDP) cells were mixed at 10:1 ratio and seeded onto devitalized human dermal matrix derived from surgically discarded human abdominoplasty skin. After 1 week in submerged culture, the cell/matrix composites were grafted onto the skin wound beds of immunocompromised NSG.SCID mice. Histological analysis of 6-week-old skin grafts showed that tissues generated with the addition of mDP cells contained Sox2-positive dermal condensates and well-differentiated folliculoid structures that express human keratinocyte markers. These results indicate that cultured mDP cells can induce hair follicle neogenesis in the de novo regenerated skin tissues. Our method offers a new experimental system for mechanistic studies of hair follicle morphogenesis and tissue regeneration and provides insights to solving an important clinical challenge in generation of fully functional skin with a limited source of donor cells.

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

4.5
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