ArticleSmall science2024
A Proteomic Approach to Determine Stem Cell Skeletal Differentiation Signature on Additive Manufactured Scaffolds.
Article in Small science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how porous biomaterials interact with cells at their surface and how they either promote or inhibit cellular processes has presented several challenges. Additive manufacturing enables the fabrication of scaffolds with distinct compositions and designs for different tissue engineering applications. To evaluate the in vitro performance of multiple printed materials, biochemical assays can be limiting in providing valuable insight and key information to select the best tissue destination. Omics technologies like proteomics are crucial for studying important cellular events and gathering valuable information about cellular processes and mechanisms. However, only few studies focus on proteomics to decipher cell-material interactions and cell differentiation on additive manufactured scaffolds. Here, scaffolds were fabricated using three polymers (polycaprolactone (PCL), poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(butylene terephthalate) (PEOT/PBT), and polylactic acid (PLA)) through additive manufacturing. Their chondrogenic and osteogenic potential were characterized and compared using human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hBMSCs) through proteomics analysis. The 3D scaffolds were all hydrophilic and displayed Young's moduli close to those of bone or cartilage for PLA and PCL and PEOT/PBT, respectively. Biochemical assays indicated that PEOT/PBT and PLA scaffolds have a greater chondrogenic potential by higher glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and collagen deposition compared to PCL. PLA and PEOT/PBT showed to be more effective in promoting bone formation, as evidenced by higher calcium deposits detected by alizarin red staining, and higher alkaline phosphatase (ALP), especially for PLA in osteogenic medium. Proteomics data revealed the most distinct separation between conditions in chondrogenic medium, which had the highest protein identification rates. Pathway analysis showed that PCL did not induce any differentiation-related pathways when compared to PEOT/PBT and PLA in any of the tested media conditions. Analysis of PEOT/PBT proteins showed pathways involved in chondrogenesis in all three media and pathways related to hypertrophic phenotype progression in chondrogenic medium. These data suggests that PEOT/PBT is a valuable candidate for cartilage and osteochondral applications, able to drive hBMSCs differentiation without the need of growth factors. PLA was also a valuable candidate for cartilage and bone applications by upregulating both chondrogenic and osteogenic-related proteins in maintenance and chondrogenic media. In osteogenic and maintenance media, the upregulation of angiogenic proteins makes PLA a better candidate for bone application where vascularization is key.
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.