4.3 Article

TGF-β1 gene-engineered mesenchymal stem cells induce rat cartilage regeneration using nonviral gene vector

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND APPLIED BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 59, 期 3, 页码 163-169

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bab.1001

关键词

cartilage defect; nonviral gene vector; reverse transfection; three dimensional; mesenchymal stem cells

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of People's Republic of China [30873173, 81001410]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for Central University [81001410]
  3. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of People's Republic of China [R2090176]
  4. People's Republic of China-Japan Scientific Cooperation Program [81011140077]
  5. NSFC (People's Republic of China)
  6. JSPS (Japan)
  7. Zijin Program of Zhejiang University [188020-544802]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the potential of utilizing transfected pTGF beta-1 gene-engineered rat mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) using nonviral vector to promote cartilage regeneration. Pullulanspermine was used as the nonviral gene vector and gelatin sponge was used as the scaffold. MSCs were engineered with TGF-beta 1 gene with either the three-dimensional (3D) reverse transfection system or the two-dimensional (2D) conventional transfection system. For the 3D reverse transfection system, pullulanspermine/pTGF-beta 1 gene complexes were immobilized to the gelatin sponge, followed by the seeding of MSCs. Pullulanspermine/pTGF-beta 1 gene complexes were delivered to MSCs cultured in the plate to perform the 2D conventional transfection system, and then MSCs were seeded to the gelatin sponge. Then, TGF-beta 1 gene-transfected MSC seeded gelatin sponge was implanted to the full-thickness cartilage defect. Compared with the control group, both groups of TGF-beta 1 gene-engineered MSCs improved cartilage regeneration through optical observation and histology staining. So, with pullulanspermine as the nonviral vector, TGF-beta 1-gene engineered MSCs can induce cartilage regeneration in vivo.

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

4.3
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