4.7 Article

Immunophenotypic analysis of human articular chondrocytes: Changes in surface markers associated with cell expansion in monolayer culture

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY
卷 202, 期 3, 页码 731-742

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcp.20164

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cartilage tissue engineering relies on in vitro expansion of primary, chondrocytes. Monolayer is the chosen culture model for chondrocyte expansion because in this system the proliferative capacity of chondrocytes is substantially higher compared in non-adherent systems. However, human articular chondrocytes(HACs) cultured as monolayers undergo changes in phenotype and gene expression known as dedifferentiation. To gain a better Understanding of the cellular mechanisms involve l in the dedifferentiation process, our research focused on the characterization of the surface molecule phenotype of HACs in monolayer culture. Adult HACs were isolated by enzymatic digestion of cartilage samples obtained post-mortem. HACs cultured in monolayer for different time periods were analyzed by flow cytometry for the expression of cell surface markers with a panel of 52 antibodies. Our results show that HACs express surface molecules belonging to different categories: integrins and other adhesion molecules (CD49a, CD49b, CD49c, CD49e, CD49f, CD51/61, CD54, CD106, CD166, CD58, CD44), tetraspanin (CD9, CD63, CD81, CD82, CD151), receptors (CD105, CD119, CD130, CD140a, CD221, CD95, CD120a, CD71, CD14), ectoenzymes (CD10, CD26), and other surface molecules (CD90,CD99). Moreover, differential expression markers in monolayer culture was identified. Up-regulation of markers on HACs regarded as distinctive for mesenchymal stem cells during monolayer culture suggested that dedifferentiation leads to reversion to a primitive phenotype. This study contributes to the definition of HAC phenotype, and provides new potential markers to characterize chondrocyte differentiation stage in the context of tissue engineering applications. (C) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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