Optimizing large-scale autologous human keratinocyte sheets for major burns-Toward an animal-free production and a more accessible clinical application.

autograft epidermal skin engineering keratinocytes process development xenofree

Journal

Health science reports
ISSN: 2398-8835
Titre abrégé: Health Sci Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101728855

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Historique:
received: 11 02 2021
revised: 18 10 2021
accepted: 25 10 2021
entrez: 14 1 2022
pubmed: 15 1 2022
medline: 15 1 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Autologous keratinocyte sheets constitute an important component of the burn wound treatment toolbox available to a surgeon and can be considered a life-saving procedure for patients with severe burns over 50% of their total body surface area. Large-scale keratinocyte sheet cultivation still fundamentally relies on the use of animal components such as inactivated murine 3T3 fibroblasts as feeders, animal-derived enzymes such as trypsin, as well as media components such as fetal bovine serum (FBS). This study was therefore aimed to optimize autologous keratinocyte sheets by comparing various alternatives to critical components in their production. Human skin samples were retrieved from remnant operative tissues. Cell isolation efficiency and viability were investigated by comparing the efficacy of porcine-derived trypsin and animal-free enzymes (Accutase and TrypLESelect). The subsequent expansion of the cells and the keratinocyte sheet formation was analyzed, comparing various cell culture substrates (inactivated murine 3T3 fibroblasts, inactivated human fibroblasts, Collagen I or plain tissue culture plastic), as well as media containing serum or chemically defined animal-free media. The cell isolation step showed clear cell yield advantages when using porcine-derived trypsin, compared to animal-free alternatives. The keratinocyte sheets produced using animal-free serum were similar to those produced using 3T3 feeder layer and FBS-containing medium, particularly in mechanical integrity as all grafts were liftable. In addition, sheets grown on collagen in an animal-free medium showed indications of advantages in homogeneity, speed, reduced variability, and differentiation status compared to the other growth conditions investigated. Most importantly, the procedure was compatible with the up-scaling requirements of major burn wound treatments. This study demonstrated that animal-free components could be used successfully to reduce the risk profile of large-scale autologous keratinocyte sheet production, and thereby increase clinical accessibility.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OBJECTIVE
Autologous keratinocyte sheets constitute an important component of the burn wound treatment toolbox available to a surgeon and can be considered a life-saving procedure for patients with severe burns over 50% of their total body surface area. Large-scale keratinocyte sheet cultivation still fundamentally relies on the use of animal components such as inactivated murine 3T3 fibroblasts as feeders, animal-derived enzymes such as trypsin, as well as media components such as fetal bovine serum (FBS). This study was therefore aimed to optimize autologous keratinocyte sheets by comparing various alternatives to critical components in their production.
METHODS METHODS
Human skin samples were retrieved from remnant operative tissues. Cell isolation efficiency and viability were investigated by comparing the efficacy of porcine-derived trypsin and animal-free enzymes (Accutase and TrypLESelect). The subsequent expansion of the cells and the keratinocyte sheet formation was analyzed, comparing various cell culture substrates (inactivated murine 3T3 fibroblasts, inactivated human fibroblasts, Collagen I or plain tissue culture plastic), as well as media containing serum or chemically defined animal-free media.
RESULTS RESULTS
The cell isolation step showed clear cell yield advantages when using porcine-derived trypsin, compared to animal-free alternatives. The keratinocyte sheets produced using animal-free serum were similar to those produced using 3T3 feeder layer and FBS-containing medium, particularly in mechanical integrity as all grafts were liftable. In addition, sheets grown on collagen in an animal-free medium showed indications of advantages in homogeneity, speed, reduced variability, and differentiation status compared to the other growth conditions investigated. Most importantly, the procedure was compatible with the up-scaling requirements of major burn wound treatments.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrated that animal-free components could be used successfully to reduce the risk profile of large-scale autologous keratinocyte sheet production, and thereby increase clinical accessibility.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35028432
doi: 10.1002/hsr2.449
pii: HSR2449
pmc: PMC8738975
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e449

Informations de copyright

© 2022 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that there is no conflict of interest. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Dr. med. Maurizio Calcagni had full access to all of the data in this study and has taken complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Références

Curr Transplant Rep. 2018;5(3):244-250
pubmed: 30221121
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Sep 9;105(36):13409-14
pubmed: 18725626
Nat Commun. 2018 Oct 30;9(1):4432
pubmed: 30377295
J Burn Care Res. 2010 Jul-Aug;31(4):559-68
pubmed: 20616650
Wound Repair Regen. 2004 Nov-Dec;12(6):626-34
pubmed: 15555054
J Biosci Bioeng. 2013 Dec;116(6):734-9
pubmed: 23849744
Metabolism. 2006 Apr;55(4):515-24
pubmed: 16546483
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 Nov;49(11):4837-43
pubmed: 18658091
Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2015 Aug;21(4):345-53
pubmed: 25659081
Burns. 2000 Jun;26(4):379-87
pubmed: 10751706
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020 Aug 19;8:968
pubmed: 32974308
N Engl J Med. 1984 Aug 16;311(7):448-51
pubmed: 6379456
Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2011 Dec;17(12):1201-10
pubmed: 21895491
J Burn Care Res. 2019 Feb 20;40(2):157-165
pubmed: 30500931
Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2015 Jan;21(1):52-64
pubmed: 24787358
Stem Cells Transl Med. 2012 Oct;1(10):750-8
pubmed: 23197667
Burns. 2007 Jun;33(4):405-13
pubmed: 17400392
J Virol. 2010 Jun;84(12):6033-40
pubmed: 20375174
Cell Tissue Res. 2019 Jun;376(3):389-400
pubmed: 30666537
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e52494
pubmed: 23326335
Stem Cells Int. 2016;2016:5246584
pubmed: 27006663
Cell Tissue Bank. 2014 Mar;15(1):41-9
pubmed: 23456438
J Biol Chem. 2010 Jun 18;285(25):19068-75
pubmed: 20418373
Biologicals. 2011 Nov;39(6):359-69
pubmed: 22000165
J Hematother Stem Cell Res. 2001 Dec;10(6):873-80
pubmed: 11798513
Burns Trauma. 2017 Aug 8;5:23
pubmed: 28795054
Nat Protoc. 2010 Feb;5(2):371-82
pubmed: 20134422
Burns. 2016 Jun;42(4):769-76
pubmed: 26948957
Arch Toxicol. 2015 Jan;89(1):33-45
pubmed: 24838295
Stem Cells Int. 2011;2011:504723
pubmed: 21603148
Cell. 1975 Nov;6(3):331-43
pubmed: 1052771
Stem Cells. 2007 Jan;25(1):197-202
pubmed: 17008421
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 05;8(8):e70263
pubmed: 23940553
Biotechnol Prog. 2006 Sep-Oct;22(5):1294-300
pubmed: 17022666
Exp Dermatol. 2018 May;27(5):443-448
pubmed: 28266764
Health Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 07;5(1):e449
pubmed: 35028432
Transplantation. 2004 Feb 15;77(3):350-5
pubmed: 14966407
Stem Cell Res Ther. 2010 Apr 02;1(1):8
pubmed: 20504289
Haematologica. 2007 Sep;92(9):1208-15
pubmed: 17666368
Cell Tissue Bank. 2012 Mar;13(1):175-89
pubmed: 21394485
Burns Trauma. 2018 May 28;6:13
pubmed: 29854856
Biomed Eng Online. 2013 Feb 20;12:15
pubmed: 23425366
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1955 Jul 15;41(7):432-7
pubmed: 16589695
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1979 Nov;76(11):5665-8
pubmed: 293669
Burns. 1997 May;23(3):204-11
pubmed: 9232279
Nat Med. 2005 Feb;11(2):228-32
pubmed: 15685172

Auteurs

Laura Frese (L)

Institute for Regenerative Medicine (IREM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.
Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine (CABMM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.
La Colline Sion Switzerland.

Salim Elias Darwiche (SE)

Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine (CABMM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.
Musculoskeletal Research Unit (MSRU), Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.

Myrna Elisabeth Gunning (ME)

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery University Hospital Zurich Zurich Switzerland.

Simon Philipp Hoerstrup (SP)

Institute for Regenerative Medicine (IREM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.
Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine (CABMM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.

Brigitte von Rechenberg (B)

Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine (CABMM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.
Musculoskeletal Research Unit (MSRU), Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.

Pietro Giovanoli (P)

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery University Hospital Zurich Zurich Switzerland.

Maurizio Calcagni (M)

Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine (CABMM) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland.
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery University Hospital Zurich Zurich Switzerland.

Classifications MeSH