ArticleScientific reports2022
iPSC-neural crest derived cells embedded in 3D printable bio-ink promote cranial bone defect repair.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A smart nanocomposite bioactive ink for controlled siRNA delivery in calvarial mesenchymal stromal cells as a minimally invasive treatment for craniosynostosis.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
- Cell and tissue reprogramming: Unlocking a new era in medical drug discovery.Pharmacological reviews · 2025Review
- Optimization of 3D Extrusion-Printed Particle-Containing Hydrogels for Osteogenic Differentiation.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Recent Advances in Bone Tissue Engineering: Enhancing the Potential of Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Regenerative Therapies.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Commercially available bioinks and state-of-the-art lab-made formulations for bone tissue engineering: A comprehensive review.Materials today. Bio · 2024Review
- Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs): molecular mechanisms of induction and applications.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Review
- In Vitro Modelling of Osteogenesis Imperfecta with Patient-Derived Induced Mesenchymal Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Advancements and Innovative Strategies in Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy: A Comprehensive Review.Stem cells international · 2024Review
- iPSC-derived tenocytes seeded on microgrooved 3D printed scaffolds for Achilles tendon regeneration.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2023Article
- Potential and Limitations of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Musculoskeletal Disorders Treatment.Biomolecules · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Cranial bone loss presents a major clinical challenge and new regenerative approaches to address craniofacial reconstruction are in great demand. Induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) differentiation is a powerful tool to generate mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs). Prior research demonstrated the potential of bone marrow-derived MSCs (BM-MSCs) and iPSC-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells via the neural crest (NCC-MPCs) or mesodermal lineages (iMSCs) to be promising cell source for bone regeneration. Overexpression of human recombinant bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)6 efficiently stimulates bone formation. The study aimed to evaluate the potential of iPSC-derived cells via neural crest or mesoderm overexpressing BMP6 and embedded in 3D printable bio-ink to generate viable bone graft alternatives for cranial reconstruction. Cell viability, osteogenic potential of cells, and bio-ink (Ink-Bone or GelXa) combinations were investigated in vitro using bioluminescent imaging. The osteogenic potential of bio-ink-cell constructs were evaluated in osteogenic media or nucleofected with BMP6 using qRT-PCR and in vitro μCT. For in vivo testing, two 2 mm circular defects were created in the frontal and parietal bones of NOD/SCID mice and treated with Ink-Bone, Ink-Bone + BM-MSC-BMP6, Ink-Bone + iMSC-BMP6, Ink-Bone + iNCC-MPC-BMP6, or left untreated. For follow-up, µCT was performed at weeks 0, 4, and 8 weeks. At the time of sacrifice (week 8), histological and immunofluorescent analyses were performed. Both bio-inks supported cell survival and promoted osteogenic differentiation of iNCC-MPCs and BM-MSCs in vitro. At 4 weeks, cell viability of both BM-MSCs and iNCC-MPCs were increased in Ink-Bone compared to GelXA. The combination of Ink-Bone with iNCC-MPC-BMP6 resulted in an increased bone volume in the frontal bone compared to the other groups at 4 weeks post-surgery. At 8 weeks, both iNCC-MPC-BMP6 and iMSC-MSC-BMP6 resulted in an increased bone volume and partial bone bridging between the implant and host bone compared to the other groups. The results of this study show the potential of NCC-MPC-incorporated bio-ink to regenerate frontal cranial defects. Therefore, this bio-ink-cell combination should be further investigated for its therapeutic potential in large animal models with larger cranial defects, allowing for 3D printing of the cell-incorporated material.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.