Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31096043›Full record

ArticleActa biomaterialia2019

Bioprinting of stem cell expansion lattices.

Christopher D Lindsay, Julien G Roth, Bauer L LeSavage, Sarah C Heilshorn

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Diffusion-Based 3D Bioprinting Strategies.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  4. Aqueous Two-Phase Enabled Low Viscosity 3D (LoV3D) Bioprinting of Living Matter.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Prospects and Challenges of Translational Corneal Bioprinting.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher D LindsayDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, 496 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: clinds@stanford.edu.
Julien G RothInstitute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford Medical School, Stanford University, 265 Campus Drive, 3rd Floor, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: jgroth@stanford.edu.
Bauer L LeSavageDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, 443 Via Ortega, Shriram Center, Room 119, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: lesavage@stanford.edu.
Sarah C HeilshornDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, 496 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: heilshorn@stanford.edu.
Stanford University · USFranciscan University of Steubenville · US

Funding

Stanford/UNC Biomimetic U19 Research CenterU19AI116484 · NIAID · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI AMIEVA, MANUEL R · 2015 to 2025
$13.5M
Engineered matrix microarrays to enhance the regenerative potential of iPSC-derived endothelial cellsR01HL142718 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HEILSHORN, SARAH C, HUANG, NGAN F. · 2018 to 2021
$1.6M
Engineered Protein Hydrogels to Modulate Adipose-derived Stromal Cell Secretome and Exosomes for Injectable Myocardial Infarction TherapyR21HL138042 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HEILSHORN, SARAH C · 2017 to 2018
$435k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL142718NHLBI NIH HHS R21 HL138042NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI116484
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stem cells have great potential in regenerative medicine, with neural progenitor cells (NPCs) being developed as a therapy for many central nervous system diseases and injuries. However, one limitation to the clinical translation of stem cells is the resource-intensive, two-dimensional culture protocols required for biomanufacturing a clinically-relevant number of cells. This challenge can be overcome in an easy-to-produce and cost-effective 3D platform by bioprinting NPCs in a layered lattice structure. Here we demonstrate that alginate biopolymers are an ideal bioink for expansion lattices and do not require chemical modifications for effective NPC expansion. Alginate bioinks that are lightly crosslinked prior to printing can shield printed NPCs from potential mechanical damage caused by printing. NPCs within alginate expansion lattices remain in a stem-like state while undergoing a 2.5-fold expansion. Importantly, we demonstrate the ability to efficiently remove NPCs from printed lattices for future down-stream use as a cell-based therapy. These results demonstrate that 3D bioprinting of alginate expansion lattices is a viable and economical platform for NPC expansion that could be translated to clinical applications.

Indexed as

AlginatesAnimalsBioprintingCell DifferentiationCell LineageCell ProliferationCross-Linking ReagentsHumansHydrogelsInkLigandsMiceNeural Stem CellsNeurogliaNeuronsPhenotypeAlginatesCross-Linking ReagentsHydrogelsLigands3D bioprintingBiofabricationCell manufacturing

Identifiers

PMID31096043
PMCPMC7050497
OpenAlexW2945462211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.