4.2 Article

Inducing substances for chondrogenic differentiation of dental pulp stem cells in the conditioned medium of a novel chordoma cell line

期刊

HUMAN CELL
卷 35, 期 2, 页码 745-755

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s13577-021-00662-5

关键词

Chordoma cell line; Skull base; Brachyury; Fibrocartilage; Conditioned medium

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan [18K08987, 21K16625]
  2. Japan Brain Foundation
  3. Japanese Foundation for Multidisciplinary Treatment of Cancer
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21K16625, 18K08987] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a skull base chordoma cell line (TSK-CHO1) was successfully established, which could be used to investigate the pathogenesis of skull base chordoma and the production mechanism of fibrocartilage.
We successfully established a chordoma cell line, designated TSK-CHO1, derived from the clival chordoma. Currently, there is only one skull base chordoma cell line, UM-chor1, freely available to researchers. The established TSK-CHO1 cells were neoplastic, exhibited pleomorphic features, and secreted brachyury, as revealed by immunocytochemical staining or ELISA of conditioned medium (CM). Cells also secreted SOX9, which enhanced brachyury production. The CM of TSK-CHO1 cells promoted the production of hyaluronic acid and type II collagen during differentiation of human dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) into fibrocartilage cells. Culture of DPSC pellets in a growth medium supplemented with 10% CM of TSK-CHO1 cells for 2 weeks resulted in the induction of fibrocartilage tissue under normoxic conditions. Brachyury produced by TSK-CHO1 cells promoted the production of collagen type II, peculiar to cartilage, in a dose-dependent manner. The newly established skull base chordoma cell line, TSK-CHO1, is expected to be used for elucidating the pathogenesis of skull base chordoma and for investigating the mechanism underlying the production of fibrocartilage.

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

4.2
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