Redirecting differentiation of mammary progenitor cells by 3D bioprinted sweat gland microenvironment.
3D bioprinting
Artificial microenvironment
Differentiation
ECM
Extracellular matrix
MPC
Mammary progenitor cells
Sweat gland
Journal
Burns & trauma
ISSN: 2321-3868
Titre abrégé: Burns Trauma
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101651457
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
28
05
2019
accepted:
30
07
2019
entrez:
28
9
2019
pubmed:
29
9
2019
medline:
29
9
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Mammary progenitor cells (MPCs) maintain their reproductive potency through life, and their specific microenvironments exert a deterministic control over these cells. MPCs provides one kind of ideal tools for studying engineered microenvironmental influence because of its accessibility and continually undergoes postnatal developmental changes. The aim of our study is to explore the critical role of the engineered sweat gland (SG) microenvironment in reprogramming MPCs into functional SG cells. We have utilized a three-dimensional (3D) SG microenvironment composed of gelatin-alginate hydrogels and components from mouse SG extracellular matrix (SG-ECM) proteins to reroute the differentiation of MPCs to study the functions of this microenvironment. MPCs were encapsulated into the artificial SG microenvironment and were printed into a 3D cell-laden construct. The expression of specific markers at the protein and gene levels was detected after cultured 14 days. Compared with the control group, immunofluorescence and gene expression assay demonstrated that MPCs encapsulated in the bioprinted 3D-SG microenvironment could significantly express the functional marker of mouse SG, sodium/potassium channel protein ATP1a1, and tend to express the specific marker of luminal epithelial cells, keratin-8. When the Shh pathway is inhibited, the expression of SG-associated proteins in MPCs under the same induction environment is significantly reduced. Our evidence proved the ability of differentiated mouse MPCs to regenerate SG cells by engineered SG microenvironment
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Mammary progenitor cells (MPCs) maintain their reproductive potency through life, and their specific microenvironments exert a deterministic control over these cells. MPCs provides one kind of ideal tools for studying engineered microenvironmental influence because of its accessibility and continually undergoes postnatal developmental changes. The aim of our study is to explore the critical role of the engineered sweat gland (SG) microenvironment in reprogramming MPCs into functional SG cells.
METHODS
METHODS
We have utilized a three-dimensional (3D) SG microenvironment composed of gelatin-alginate hydrogels and components from mouse SG extracellular matrix (SG-ECM) proteins to reroute the differentiation of MPCs to study the functions of this microenvironment. MPCs were encapsulated into the artificial SG microenvironment and were printed into a 3D cell-laden construct. The expression of specific markers at the protein and gene levels was detected after cultured 14 days.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Compared with the control group, immunofluorescence and gene expression assay demonstrated that MPCs encapsulated in the bioprinted 3D-SG microenvironment could significantly express the functional marker of mouse SG, sodium/potassium channel protein ATP1a1, and tend to express the specific marker of luminal epithelial cells, keratin-8. When the Shh pathway is inhibited, the expression of SG-associated proteins in MPCs under the same induction environment is significantly reduced.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our evidence proved the ability of differentiated mouse MPCs to regenerate SG cells by engineered SG microenvironment
Identifiants
pubmed: 31559316
doi: 10.1186/s41038-019-0167-y
pii: 167
pmc: PMC6755689
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
29Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Références
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002 Jun;961:83-95
pubmed: 12081872
Dev Biol. 2002 Sep 1;249(1):131-9
pubmed: 12217324
Stem Cells. 2008 May;26(5):1253-64
pubmed: 18292212
Tissue Eng Part A. 2008 Jan;14(1):127-33
pubmed: 18333811
J Biomech Eng. 2009 Mar;131(3):035001
pubmed: 19154078
Integr Biol (Camb). 2009 Jan;1(1):70-9
pubmed: 20023793
Int J Cell Biol. 2011;2011:451676
pubmed: 21647291
Dev Cell. 2011 Jul 19;21(1):35-47
pubmed: 21763607
Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2012 Jan;18(1):33-44
pubmed: 21854293
Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2012 Nov;11(8):1241-9
pubmed: 22161021
Cell. 2012 Jul 6;150(1):136-50
pubmed: 22770217
Science. 2012 Nov 16;338(6109):921-6
pubmed: 23161993
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2013 May;97(10):4243-58
pubmed: 23525900
Cell Tissue Res. 2013 Dec;354(3):897-902
pubmed: 23996202
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2014 Feb 01;4(2):null
pubmed: 24492848
Nat Commun. 2014 Jun 02;5:3935
pubmed: 24887553
Cell Rep. 2014 Jun 26;7(6):1926-39
pubmed: 24910432
Development. 2015 Mar 15;142(6):1028-42
pubmed: 25758218
Exp Dermatol. 2015 Sep;24(9):644-50
pubmed: 26014472
Biofabrication. 2015 Nov 04;7(4):044101
pubmed: 26531008
Acta Biomater. 2016 Mar 1;32:170-177
pubmed: 26747979
Biomater Res. 2016 Apr 25;20:12
pubmed: 27114828
Biofabrication. 2016 Dec 05;9(1):015006
pubmed: 27917823
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017 Mar 1;72:359-370
pubmed: 28024598
Cell Rep. 2017 Aug 15;20(7):1525-1532
pubmed: 28813665
Chem Rev. 2017 Oct 25;117(20):12764-12850
pubmed: 28991456
Burns Trauma. 2018 Jan 23;6:5
pubmed: 29404374
Sci Rep. 2018 May 22;8(1):8020
pubmed: 29789674
Stem Cell Res Ther. 2018 Jul 4;9(1):179
pubmed: 29973266
Nature. 2018 Aug;560(7720):655-660
pubmed: 30135582
Int Wound J. 2019 Feb;16(1):134-138
pubmed: 30240111
Burns Trauma. 2019 Feb 12;7:4
pubmed: 30805375
Nature. 2019 Feb;566(7745):563-565
pubmed: 30809069
Acta Anat (Basel). 1995;152(3):195-204
pubmed: 7572029
Science. 1976 Dec 24;194(4272):1439-41
pubmed: 827022