4.5 Article

A controlled release system for simultaneous delivery of three human perivascular stem cell-derived factors for tissue repair and regeneration

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/term.2451

关键词

biomaterials; stem cells; tissue repair and regenerative medicine

资金

  1. Nazarbayev University
  2. American Heart Association Established Investigator Award [12EIA9020016]
  3. National Institute of Health [1R21EB016774]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transplanted stem/progenitor cells improve tissue healing and regeneration anatomically and functionally, mostly due to their secreted trophic factors. However, harsh conditions at the site of injury, including hypoxia, oxidative and inflammatory stress, increased fibrosis and insufficient angiogenesis, and in some cases immunological response or incompatibility, are detrimental to stem cell survival. To overcome the complexity and deficiencies of stem cell therapy, the coacervate delivery platform is deemed promising because it offers controlled and sustained release using heparin to recapitulate the binding and stabilization of extracellular proteins by heparan sulphates in native tissues. Here we show that recombinant alternatives of three key factors [vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and interleukin-6 (IL-6)], commonly produced by perivascular stem cells under various stress conditions, can be successfully incorporated into a heparin-based coacervate. We characterized the release profile of the triply incorporated factors from the complex coacervate. The coacervate-released factors were able to exert their desired biological activities in vitro: VEGF stimulated human umbilical vein endothelial cell proliferation, MCP-1 elevated macrophage migration and IL-6 increased IgM production by IL-6-dependent cell line. Thus, a controlled release system can be used for simultaneous delivery of three stem cell-derived factors and could be useful for tissue repair and regenerative medicine.

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

4.5
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