Tannic acid-crosslinked chitosan matrices enhance osteogenic differentiation and modulate epigenetic status of cultured cells over glutaraldehyde crosslinking
Source abstract
Abstract
Tannic acid (TA) is a polyphenol with potential to crosslink biomacromolecules. Though, feasibility of TA crosslinking is known, the more toxic glutaraladehyde (GA) continue to be used extensively for developing novel chitosan-based scaffolds, hindering in vivo translation. Thus, a direct comparison between TA- and GA-crosslinked chitosan membranes with respect to physico-chemical, biocomptability and biofunctional properties is required. Role of TA to modulate epigenetic changes in cultured cells is also investigated. TA-crosslinked scaffolds differed from GA in contact angle and swelling by 20–25% while mechanical properties and degradation differed by 50%. Cell viability on TA-crosslinked scaffolds was ~1.4 times higher compared to GA-crosslinked samples, osteocalcin expression was two-fold higher and ROS and cox-2 expression was reduced by ~1.4 times (p < .01). TA crosslinking modulated epigenetic changes in cultured cells by evidencing global DNA hypomethylation. It is concluded that TA can provide a flexible scaffold with ability to modulate epigenetics and osteogeneticity.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine · biodegradable polymer synthesis and properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Centre for Healthcare Science and Technology, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Shibpur, India
Department of Aerospace Engineering and Applied Mechanics, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Shibpur, India
Department of Pharmaceutics, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Kolkata, India
References (52)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.04.05510.1016/j.carbpol.2019.04.055 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.msec.2019.11055710.1016/j.msec.2019.110557 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.11673410.1016/j.carbpol.2020.116734 ↗
4. 10.1016/S0141-8130(99)00068-910.1016/S0141-8130(99)00068-9 ↗
5. Islam N. · Heliyon · 2019 · 5 · 5
6. 10.1163/092050610X55033110.1163/092050610X550331 ↗
7. 10.1002/jbm.1014510.1002/jbm.10145 ↗
8. 10.1007/s12055-007-0050-510.1007/s12055-007-0050-5 ↗
9. Sionkowska A. · Progress Chem Appl Chitin Derivatives · 2014
10. 10.1002/jbm.b.3285610.1002/jbm.b.32856 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2015.03.02810.1016/j.jphotobiol.2015.03.028 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.08.08110.1016/j.carbpol.2014.08.081 ↗
13. Felice F. · Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. · 2013 · 50 · 39310.1016/j.ejps.2013.08.008 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.01.05610.1016/j.carbpol.2018.01.056 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.chemphys.2018.12.00910.1016/j.chemphys.2018.12.009 ↗
16. Martínez-Mejía G. · Colloids Surf. A. · 2019 · 579 · 12365810.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.123658 ↗
17. Li H. · ACS App. Bio Mat · 2020 · 3 · 67310.1021/acsabm.9b01017 ↗
18. 10.1093/rb/rbu00910.1093/rb/rbu009 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.tiv.2019.10468810.1016/j.tiv.2019.104688 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.11.02610.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.11.026 ↗
21. Kaczmarek B. · Polym. Degrad. Stab. · 2018 · 158 · 2610.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2018.10.018 ↗
22. Tan S. J. · Sci. Rep. · 2015 · 5 · 1633310.1038/srep16333 ↗
23. 10.1039/C9BM01526D10.1039/C9BM01526D ↗
24. Riggs A. D. · Cytogen. Genome Res · 1975 · 14 · 910.1159/000130315 ↗
25. 10.1007/s10856-018-6038-410.1007/s10856-018-6038-4 ↗
26. Yeo J. · Biomater. Sci. · 2020 · 8 · 114810.1039/C9BM01384A ↗
27. 10.1080/01635581.2018.144609110.1080/01635581.2018.1446091 ↗
28. Sarkar R. · Future Oncol. · 2019 · 31
29. 10.1021/acs.biomac.8b0142010.1021/acs.biomac.8b01420 ↗
30. 10.3390/polym1112209410.3390/polym11122094 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.carres.2007.06.00910.1016/j.carres.2007.06.009 ↗
32. Ostrowska-Czubenko J. · J. Polym. Res. · 2015 · 22 · 15310.1007/s10965-015-0786-3 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2012.12.00910.1016/j.eurpolymj.2012.12.009 ↗
34. Rivero S. · J. Mat. Phys. Chem. · 2013 · 1
35. 10.1179/1743280414Y.000000003810.1179/1743280414Y.0000000038 ↗
36. Larsson L. · J. Biomed. Mat. Res. Part B: App. Biomat. · 2018 · 106 · 206510.1002/jbm.b.33953 ↗
37. Arianita A. · J. Phys. Conf. Series · 2019 · 1317 · 1204510.1088/1742-6596/1317/1/012045 ↗
38. Kaczmarek B. · Polym. Test. · 2019 · 78 · 10600710.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.106007 ↗
39. Kaczmarek B. · J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. · 2020 · 110 · 10391610.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103916 ↗
40. 10.1080/21691401.2018.153384610.1080/21691401.2018.1533846 ↗
41. Hapidin H. · Microsc. Res. Tech. · 2019 · 82 · 1928
42. 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b0049710.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00497 ↗
43. Geißler S. · Langmuir : ACS J. Surfaces Colloids · 2016 · 32 · 805010.1021/acs.langmuir.6b01959 ↗
44. 10.3390/ijms1911360210.3390/ijms19113602 ↗
45. Steffi S. · Polymers · 2019 · 11 · 125610.3390/polym11081256 ↗
46. Coşan D. T. · Cytotechnology · 2015 · 67
47. Łabieniec M. · Mutation Res · 2006 · 603 · 4810.1016/j.mrgentox.2005.10.013 ↗
48. Isenburg J. C. · Biomaterials · 2006 · 27 · 3645
49. 10.1016/j.cyto.2015.05.01610.1016/j.cyto.2015.05.016 ↗
50. Abhishek S. · Cell J. · 2016 · 18 · 1
51. Liu Y. · Nat. Commun. · 2016 · 1
52. Li J. · Respir. Res · 2017 · 18 · 9110.1186/s12931-017-0576-z ↗