Evaluation of the effects of cell-dispensing using an inkjet-based bioprinter on cell integrity by RNA-seq analysis.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 04 2020
28 04 2020
Historique:
received:
27
11
2019
accepted:
10
04
2020
entrez:
30
4
2020
pubmed:
30
4
2020
medline:
7
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Bioprinting technology is expected to be applied in the fields of regenerative medicine and drug discovery. There are several types of bioprinters, especially inkjet-based bioprinter, which can be used not only as a printer for arranging cells but also as a precision cell-dispensing device with controlled cell numbers similar to a fluorescence activated cell sorter (FACS). Precise cell dispensers are expected to be useful in the fields of drug discovery and single-cell analysis. However, there are enduring concerns about the impacts of cell dispensers on cell integrity, particularly on sensitive cells, such as stem cells. In response to the concerns stated above, we developed a stress-free and media-direct-dispensing inkjet bioprinter. In the present study, in addition to conventional viability assessments, we evaluated the gene expression using RNA-seq to investigate whether the developed bioprinter influenced cell integrity in mouse embryonic stem cells. We evaluated the developed bioprinter based on three dispensing methods: manual operation using a micropipette, FACS and the developed inkjet bioprinter. According to the results, the developed inkjet bioprinter exhibited cell-friendly dispensing performance, which was similar to the manual dispensing operation, based not only on cell viability but also on gene expression levels.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32346113
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64193-z
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-64193-z
pmc: PMC7189371
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7158Références
Murphy, S. V. & Atala, A. 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 773–785 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/nbt.2958
Peng, W. et al. 3D bioprinting for drug discovery and development in pharmaceutics. Acta Biomaterialia. 57, 26–46 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.05.025
Gross, A. et al. Single-cell printer: Automated, on demand, and label free. J. Lab. Autom., https://doi.org/10.1177/2211068213497204 (2013).
Xu, C., Chai, W., Huang, Y. & Markwald, R. R. Scaffold-free inkjet printing of three-dimensional zigzag cellular tubes. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 109, 3152–3160 (2012).
doi: 10.1002/bit.24591
Ozbolat, I. T. & Yin Yu. Bioprinting toward organ fabrication: Challenges and future trends. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 60, 691–699 (2013).
doi: 10.1109/TBME.2013.2243912
Chun, Y. S., Chaudhari, P. & Jang, Y. Y. Applications of patient-specific induced pluripotent stem cells; focused on disease modeling, drug screening and therapeutic potentials for liver disease. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 6, 796–805 (2010).
doi: 10.7150/ijbs.6.796
Xu, F. et al. Microengineering methods for cell-based microarrays and high-throughput drug-screening applications. Biofabrication. 3, 034101 (2011).
doi: 10.1088/1758-5082/3/3/034101
Schaack, B. et al. A ‘DropChip’ cell array for DNA and siRNA transfection combined with drug screening. Nanobiotechnology. 1, 183–189 (2005).
doi: 10.1385/NBT:1:2:183
Wang, Y. & Navin, N. E. Advances and applications of single-cell sequencing technologies. Mol. Cell. 58, 598–609 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.05.005
Navin, N. E. Cancer genomics: one cell at a time. Genome Biol. 15, 452 (2014).
doi: 10.1186/s13059-014-0452-9
Rinke, C. et al. Insights into the phylogeny and coding potential of microbial dark matter. Nature. 499, 431–437 (2013).
doi: 10.1038/nature12352
Hue, P. Le. Progress and trends in ink-jet printing technology. J. Imaging Sci. Technol. 42, 49–62 (1998).
Schoendube, J., Yusof, A., Kalkandjiev, K., Zengerle, R. & Koltay, P. Wafer level fabrication of single cell dispenser chips with integrated electrodes for particle detection. J. Micromechanics Microengineering. 25 (2015).
Mollet, M., Godoy-Silva, R., Berdugo, C. & Chalmers, J. J. Computer simulations of the energy dissipation rate in a fluorescence-activated cell sorter: Implications to cells. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 100, 260–272 (2008).
doi: 10.1002/bit.21762
Vercoulen, Y. et al. Human regulatory T cell suppressive function is independent of apoptosis induction in activated effector T cells. PLoS One. 4, e7183 (2009).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007183
He, P., Liu, Y. & Qiao, R. Fluid dynamics of the droplet impact processes in cell printing. Microfluid. Nanofluidics. 18, 569–585 (2015).
doi: 10.1007/s10404-014-1470-3
Shi, J. et al. Shear stress analysis and its effects on cell viability and cell proliferation in drop-on-demand bioprinting. Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express. 4, 045028 (2018).
doi: 10.1088/2057-1976/aac946
Cui, X., Dean, D., Ruggeri, Z. M. & Boland, T. Cell damage evaluation of thermal inkjet printed chinese hamster ovary cells. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 106, 963–969 (2010).
doi: 10.1002/bit.22762
Solis, L. H. et al. Thermal inkjet bioprinting triggers the activation of the VEGF pathway in human microvascular endothelial cells in vitro. Biofabrication. 11, 045005 (2019).
doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab25f9
Campbell, A., Mohl, J. E., Gutierrez, D. A., Varela-Ramirez, A. & Boland, T. Thermal bioprinting causes ample alterations of expression of LUCAT1, IL6, CCL26, and NRN1L genes and massive phosphorylation of critical oncogenic drug resistance pathways in breast cancer cells. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8, 1–15 (2020).
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00082
Takagi, D. et al. High-precision 3D inkjet technology for live cell bioprinting. Int. J. Bioprinting. 5, 27–38 (2019).
doi: 10.18063/ijb.v5i2.208
Hendriks, J. et al. Optimizing cell viability in droplet-based cell deposition. Sci. Rep. 5, 11304 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/srep11304
Ibrahim, S. F. & V D Engh, G. High-speed cell sorting: Fundamentals and recent advances. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 14, 5–12 (2003).
doi: 10.1016/S0958-1669(02)00009-5
Saunders, R. E., Gough, J. E. & Derby, B. Delivery of human fibroblast cells by piezoelectric drop-on-demand inkjet printing. Biomaterials. 29, 193–203 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.09.032
Vining, K. H. & Mooney, D. J. Mechanical forces direct stem cell behaviour in development and regeneration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 18, 728–742 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/nrm.2017.108
Yamamoto, K. et al. Fluid shear stress induces differentiation of Flk-1-positive embryonic stem cells into vascular endothelial cells in vitro. Am. J. Physiol. Circ. Physiol. 288, H1915–H1924 (2005).
doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00956.2004
Chowdhury, F. et al. Material properties of the cell dictate stress-induced spreading and differentiation in embryonic stemcells. Nat. Mater. 9, 82–88 (2010).
doi: 10.1038/nmat2563
Higgins, J. W. et al. Bioprinted pluripotent stem cell-derived kidney organoids provide opportunities for high content screening. bioRxiv 505396, https://doi.org/10.1101/505396 (2018).
Koo, Y. & Kim, G. New strategy for enhancing in situ cell viability of cell-printing process via piezoelectric transducer-assisted three-dimensional printing. Biofabrication. 8, 025010 (2016).
doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/8/2/025010
Chapman, G. et al. The mouse homeobox gene, Gbx2: Genomic organization and expression in pluripotent cells in vitro and in vivo. Genomics. 46, 223–233 (1997).
doi: 10.1006/geno.1997.4969
Morita, M. et al. mTOR controls mitochondrial dynamics and cell survival via MTFP1. Mol. Cell. 67, 922–935 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.08.013
Saxton, R. A. & Sabatini, D. M. mTOR signaling in growth, metabolism, and disease. Cell. 168, 960–976 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.02.004
Picelli, S. et al. Full-length RNA-seq from single cells using Smart-seq. 2. Nat. Protoc. 9, 171–181 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/nprot.2014.006
Roehr, J. T., Dieterich, C. & Reinert, K. Flexbar 3.0 – SIMD and multicore parallelization. Bioinformatics. 33, 2941–2942 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx330
Kim, D., Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat. Methods. 12, 357–360 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3317
Pertea, M. et al. StringTie enables improved reconstruction of a transcriptome from RNA-seq reads. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 290–295 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/nbt.3122
Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. 126, 663–676 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024
Robinson, M. D., McCarthy, D. J. & Smyth, G. K. edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics. 26, 139–140 (2010).
doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp616
Yu, G., Wang, L.-G., Han, Y. & He, Q.-Y. clusterProfiler: an R Package for Comparing Biological Themes Among Gene Clusters. Omi. A J. Integr. Biol. 16, 284–287 (2012).
doi: 10.1089/omi.2011.0118