4.8 Article

The effects of an RGD-PAMAM dendrimer conjugate in 3D spheroid culture on cell proliferation, expression and aggregation

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 34, 期 11, 页码 2665-2673

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.01.003

关键词

Dendrimer; Peptide ligand; Multicellular aggregation; Multivalent

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31170933]
  2. National High-Tech R&D Program of China [2009AA03Z314]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By presenting biomolecular ligands on the surface in high density, ligand-decorated dendrimers are capable of binding to membrane receptors and cells with specificity and avidity. Despite the various uses, fundamental investigations on ligand-dendrimer conjugates have mainly focused on their binding behavior with cells, whereas their potential bioactivity and applications in multicellular systems, especially in three-dimensional (3D) culture systems, remains untapped. In this study, a typical adhesive peptide ligand - RGD - was modified to generation 4 polyamidoamine (PAMAM), and the bioactivity of suspended RGD-PAMAM conjugates was investigated on cells cultured as multicellular spheroids. Our results demonstrate that the RGD-PAMAM conjugates, after being incorporated into the 3D spheroids, were able to promote cellular proliferation and aggregation, and affect the mRNA expression of extracellular factors by NIH 3T3 cells. These bioactive functions were multivalency-dependent, as none of similar effects was observed for monovalent RGD ligand. Our study suggests that multivalent ligand-dendrimer conjugates may act as a unique type of artificial factors to mediate the cellular microenvironment in 3D culture, a property attributable to the spatial organization of the ligands and possible cell-gluing function of multivalent conjugates. This new finding opens the door for further exploring multivalent ligand-dendrimer conjugates for applications in 3D cell culture and tissue engineering. (c) 2013 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