4.0 Article

Prolonged exposure to bacterial toxins downregulated expression of toll-like receptors in mesenchymal stromal cell-derived osteoprogenitors

期刊

BMC CELL BIOLOGY
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2121-9-52

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Human mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs, also known as mesenchymal stem cells) are multipotent cells with potential therapeutic value. Owing to their osteogenic capability, MSCs may be clinically applied for facilitating osseointegration in dental implants or orthopedic repair of bony defect. However, whether wound infection or oral microflora may interfere with the growth and osteogenic differentiation of human MSCs remains unknown. This study investigated whether proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of MSCs would be affected by potent gram-positive and gram-negative derived bacterial toxins commonly found in human settings. Results: We selected lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from Escherichia coli and lipoteichoic acid (LTA) from Streptococcus pyogenes as our toxins of choice. Our findings showed both LPS and LTA did not affect MSC proliferation, but prolonged LPS challenge upregulated the osteogenic differentiation of MSCs, as assessed by alkaline phosphatase activity and calcium deposition. Because toll-like receptors (TLRs), in particularly TLR4 and TLR2, are important for the cellular responsiveness to LPS and LTA respectively, we evaluated their expression profiles serially from MSCs to osteoblasts by quantitative PCR. We found that during osteogenic differentiation, MSC-derived osteoprogenitors gradually expressed TLR2 and TLR4 by Day 12. But under prolonged incubation with LPS, MSC-derived osteoprogenitors had reduced TLR2 and TLR4 gene expression. This peculiar response to LPS suggests a possible adaptive mechanism when MSCs are subjected to continuous exposure with bacteria. Conclusion: In conclusion, our findings support the potential of using human MSCs as a biological graft, even under a bacterial toxin-rich environment.

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

4.0
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