4.7 Article

Defective Proliferation and Osteogenic Potential with Altered Immunoregulatory phenotype of Native Bone marrow-Multipotential Stromal Cells in Atrophic Fracture Non-Union

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-53927-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. AO foundation Start-Up grant [S-16-132E]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bone marrow-Multipotential stromal cells (BM-MSCs) are increasingly used to treat complicated fracture healing e.g., non-union. Though, the quality of these autologous cells is not well characterized. We aimed to evaluate bone healing-related capacities of non-union BM-MSCs. Iliac crest-BM was aspirated from long-bone fracture patients with normal healing (U) or non-united (NU). Uncultured (native) CD271highCD45low cells or passage-zero cultured BM-MSCs were analyzed for gene expression levels, and functional assays were conducted using culture-expanded BM-MSCs. Blood samples were analyzed for serum cytokine levels. Uncultured NU-CD271highCD45low cells significantly expressed fewer transcripts of growth factor receptors, EGFR, FGFR1, and FGRF2 than U cells. Significant fewer transcripts of alkaline phosphatase (ALPL), osteocalcin (BGLAP), osteonectin (SPARC) and osteopontin (SPP1) were detected in NU-CD271(high)CD45(low) cells. Additionally, immunoregulation-related markers were differentially expressed between NU- and U-CD271(high)CD45(low) cells. Interestingly, passage-zero NU BM-MSCs showed low expression of immunosuppressive mediators. However, culture-expanded NU and U BM-MSCs exhibited comparable proliferation, osteogenesis, and immunosuppression. Serum cytokine levels were found similar for NU and U groups. Collectively, native NU-BM-MSCs seemed to have low proliferative and osteogenic capacities; therefore, enhancing their quality should be considered for regenerative therapies. Further research on distorted immunoregulatory molecules expression in BM-MSCs could potentially benefit the prediction of complicated fracture healing.

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

4.7
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