4.8 Review

Biomaterials control of pluripotent stem cell fate for regenerative therapy

期刊

PROGRESS IN MATERIALS SCIENCE
卷 82, 期 -, 页码 234-293

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2016.05.003

关键词

Pluripotent stem cells; Self-renewal; Lineage differentiation; Biomaterials; Microenvironment

资金

  1. Global Research Laboratory Program [2015032163]
  2. Priority Research Centers Program through National Research Foundation, South Korea [2009-0093829]
  3. NIH, USA [5R25EB013127]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) derived from either the embryo or reprogramming processes have the capacity to self-renew and differentiate into various cells in the body, thereby offering a valuable cell source for regenerative therapy of intractable disease and serious tissue damage. Traditionally, methods to expand and differentiate PSCs have been confined to 2D culture through the use of biochemical signals; the use of biomaterials beyond the commercially available culture dish has not been widespread. Nevertheless, biomaterials with tailored physical, chemical, and geometrical cues can mimic the native stem cell niche to tune the microenvironmental conditions for PSCs to preserve their self-renewal capacity or to switch their phenotype, a status ultimately needed to gain regenerative functions ex vivo and in vivo. Recently efforts to explore biomaterials to regulate PSC behavior have accelerated. The biomaterials properties investigated include surface chemistry, immobilized ligand, nano-/micro-topography, matrix stiffness, geometrical complexity, 3D configuration, and combinations thereof. This review aims to cover the current advances of biomaterials-based control over PSCs, particularly for the preservation of self-renewal capacity as well as for their differentiation into target cells. Furthermore, it aims to suggest future research directions that would facilitate the eventual translation of these advances. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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