4.7 Article

Loss and rescue of osteocalcin and osteopontin modulate osteogenic and angiogenic features of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY
卷 235, 期 10, 页码 7496-7515

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcp.29653

关键词

angiogenesis; mesenchymal stem; stromal cells; osteocalcin; osteogenesis; osteopontin

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/105771/2014, SFRH/BD/52478/2014, UID/BIO/04565/2019]
  2. NIH [AR49635]
  3. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [UID/BIO/04565/2019] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Noncollagenous proteins in the bone extracellular matrix, such as osteocalcin (OC) and osteopontin (OPN), inherent to evolution of bone as a skeletal tissue, are known to regulate bone formation and mineralization. However, the fundamental basis of this regulatory role remains unknown. Here, for the first time, we use mouse mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSC) lacking both OC and OPN to investigate the mechanistic roles of OC and OPN on the proliferation capacity and differentiation ability of MSC. We found that the loss of OC and OPN reduces stem cells self-renewal potential and multipotency, affects their differentiation into an osteogenic lineage, and impairs their angiogenic potential while maintaining chondrogenic and adipogenic lineages. Moreover, loss of OC and OPN compromises the extracellular matrix integrity and maturation, observed by an unexpected enhancement of glycosaminoglycans content that are associated with a more primitive skeletal connective tissue, and by a delay on the maturation of mineral species produced. Interestingly, exogenously supplemented OC and OPN were able to rescue MSC proliferative and osteogenic potential along with matrix integrity and mineral quality. Taken together, these results highlight the key contributions of OC and OPN in enhancing osteogenesis and angiogenesis over primitive connective tissue, and support a potential therapeutic approach based on their exogenous supplementation.

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