Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29107054›Full record

ArticleActa biomaterialia2018

Selecting the correct cellular model for assessing of the biological response of collagen-based biomaterials.

Natalia Davidenko, Samir Hamaia, Daniel V Bax, Jean-Daniel Malcor, Carlos F Schuster, Donald Gullberg, Richard W Farndale, Serena M Best, Ruth E Cameron

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Natalia DavidenkoDepartment of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS, United Kingdom. Electronic address: nd313@cam.ac.uk.
Samir HamaiaDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Downing Site, Cambridge CB2 1QW, United Kingdom.
Daniel V BaxDepartment of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS, United Kingdom.
Jean-Daniel MalcorDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Downing Site, Cambridge CB2 1QW, United Kingdom.
Carlos F SchusterDepartment of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS, United Kingdom.
Donald GullbergDepartment of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Jonas Lies vei 91, N-5009 Bergen, Norway.
Richard W FarndaleDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Downing Site, Cambridge CB2 1QW, United Kingdom.
Serena M BestDepartment of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS, United Kingdom.
Ruth E CameronDepartment of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS, United Kingdom.
University of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Bergen · NO

Funding

British Heart Foundation NH/11/1/28922British Heart Foundation RG/15/4/31268British Heart Foundation SP/15/7/31561Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate evaluation of the biological performance of biomaterials requires the correct assessment of their native-like cell ligation properties. However, cell attachment studies often overlook the details of the substrate-cell binding mechanisms, be they integrin-mediated or non-specific, and ignore the class- and species-specificities of the cell adhesion receptor involved. In this work we have used different collagen (Col) substrates (fibrillar collagens I, II and III and network-forming Col IV), containing different affinity cell-recognition motifs, to establish the influence of the receptor identity and species-specificity on collagen-cell interactive properties. Receptor expression was varied by using cells of different origin, or transfecting collagen-binding integrins into integrin-null cells. These include mouse C2C12 myoblasts transfected with human α1, α2, α10 or α11; human fibrosarcoma HT1080 cells which constitutively express only human α2β1, and rat glioma Rugli cells, with only rat α1β1. Using these lines, the nature of integrin binding sites was studied in order to delineate the bioactivity of different collagen substrates. Integrin ligation was studied on collagen coatings alongside synthetic (GFOGER/GLOGEN) and Toolkit (Col II-28/Col III-7) triple-helical peptides to evaluate (1) their affinity towards different integrins and (2) to confirm the activity of the inserted integrin in the transfected cells. Thin films of dermal and tendon Col I were used to evaluate the influence of the carbodiimide (EDC)-based treatment on the cellular response on Col of different origin. The results showed that the binding properties of transfected C2C12 cells to collagens depend on the identity of inserted integrin. Similar ligation characteristics were observed using α1+ and α10+ cells, but these were distinct from the similar binding features of α2+ and α11+ cells. Recombinant human and rat-α1 I domain binding to collagens and peptides correlated with the cell adhesion results, showing receptor class- and species-specificities. The understanding of the physiologically relevant cell anchorage characteristics of bio-constructs may assist in the selection of (1) the optimum collagen source for cellular supports and (2) the correct cellular model for their biological assessment. This, in turn, may allow reliable prediction of the biological performance of bio-scaffolds in vivo for specific TE applications. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Integrins play a vital role in cellular responses to environmental cues during early-stage cell-substrate interaction. We describe physiologically relevant cell anchorage to collagen substrates that present different affinity cell-recognition motifs, to provide experimental tools to assist in understanding integrin binding. Using different cell types and recombinant integrin α1-I-domains, we found that cellular response was highly dependent on collagen type, origin and EDC-crosslinking status, as well as on the integrin class and species of origin. This comprehensive study establishes selectivity amongst the four collagen-binding integrins and species-specific properties that together may influence choice of cell type and receptor in different experimental settings. This work offers key guidance in selecting of the correct cellular model for the biological testing of collagen-based biomaterials.

Indexed as

Biocompatible MaterialsMaterials TestingModels, BiologicalAnimalsCell AdhesionCell LineCell Line, TumorExtracellular MatrixFibrillar CollagensHumansIntegrinsMicePeptidesProtein BindingRatsReceptors, Cell SurfaceBiocompatible MaterialsFibrillar CollagensIntegrinsPeptidesReceptors, Cell SurfaceRecombinant ProteinsCell adhesionCollagenCrosslinkingIntegrinsTissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID29107054
PMCPMC5729022
OpenAlexW2766036856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.