4.8 Article

Reversible hydrogel formation driven by protein-peptide-specific interaction and chondrocyte entrapment

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 31, 期 1, 页码 58-66

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.09.026

关键词

Chondrocyte; CutA; Hydrogel; Interaction; TIP1; PDZ domain

资金

  1. Japan Science and Technology Corporation
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of the Japanese Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We developed a hydrogel self-assembling method driven by the interaction between recombinant tax-interactive protein-1 (TIP1) with the PDZ domain in a molecule, which is fused to each end of the triangular trimeric CutA protein (CutA-TIP1), and a PDZ domain-recognizable peptide which is covalently bound to each terminus of four-armed poly(ethylene glycol) (PDZ-peptide-PEG). Genetic manipulation based on molecular-dynamic simulation generated a cell-adhesive RGD tripeptidyl sequence in the CutA loop region [CutA(RGD)-TIP1]. Spontaneous viscoelastic hydrogel formation occurred when either CutA-TIP1- or CutA(RGD)-TIP1-containing buffer solution and PDZ-peptide-PEG-containing buffer solutions were stoichiometrically mixed. Dynamic viscoelasticity measurement revealed shear stress-dependent reversible-phase transformation: a spontaneous viscoelastic hydrogel was formed at low shear stress, but it was transformed into a sol at high shear stress. Upon the cessation of shear, hydrogel was restored. When chondrocytes were pre-mixed with one of these two components containing buffer solutions, the stoichiometric mixed solution was also spontaneously gelled. Individual rounded cells and multicellular aggregates were entrapped within both hydrogels without substantial cellular impairment regardless of the presence or absence of RGD motif in the CutA-TIP1 molecule. The potential use of such a shear-sensitive hydrogel for injectable cell delivery into diseased or lost cartilage tissue is discussed. (C) 2009 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