4.6 Article

Sustained Delivery of Bioactive GDNF from Collagen and Alginate-Based Cell-Encapsulating Gel Promoted Photoreceptor Survival in an Inherited Retinal Degeneration Model

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159342

关键词

-

资金

  1. Hong Kong Research Grant Council, GRF [HKU773613M]
  2. University of Hong Kong Seed Funding Programme for Basic Research [201011159005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Encapsulated-cell therapy (ECT) is an attractive approach for continuously delivering freshly synthesized therapeutics to treat sight-threatening posterior eye diseases, circumventing repeated invasive intravitreal injections and improving local drug availability clinically. Composite collagen-alginate (CAC) scaffold contains an interpenetrating network that integrates the physical and biological merits of its constituents, including biocompatibility, mild gelling properties and availability. However, CAC ECT properties and performance in the eye are not well-understood. Previously, we reported a cultured 3D CAC system that supported the growth of GDNF-secreting HEK293 cells with sustainable GDNF delivery. Here, the system was further developed into an intravitreally injectable gel with 1x10(4) or 2x10(5) cells encapsulated in 2mg/ml type I collagen and 1% alginate. Gels with lower alginate concentration yielded higher initial cell viability but faster spheroid formation while increasing initial cell density encouraged cell growth. Continuous GDNF delivery was detected in culture and in healthy rat eyes for at least 14 days. The gels were well-tolerated with no host tissue attachment and contained living cell colonies. Most importantly, gel-implanted in dystrophic Royal College of Surgeons rat eyes for 28 days retained photoreceptors while those containing higher initial cell number yielded better photoreceptor survival. CAC ECT gels offers flexible system design and is a potential treatment option for posterior eye diseases.

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