journal article·2021-12-08

Micromechanical Compatibility between Cells and Scaffolds Directs the Phenotypic Transition of Stem Cells

Yang Song, Jiaoyue Long, Joy P. Dunkers, Jeremiah W. Woodcock, Hungchun Lin, Douglas M. Fox, Xiaoling Liao, Yonggang Lv, Li Yang, Martin Y. M. Chiang

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces· Volume 13· Issue 48
Publisher page

Abstract

This study experimentally substantiates that the micromechanical compatibility between cell and substrate is essential for cells to achieve energetically favorable mechanotransduction that directs phenotypic transitions. The argument for this compatibility is based on a thermodynamic model that suggests that the response of cells to their substrate mechanical environment is a consequence of the interchange between forms of energy governing the cell–substrate interaction. Experimental validation for the model has been carried out by investigating the osteogenic differentiation of dental follicle stem cells (DFSCs) seeded on electrospun fibrous scaffolds. Electrospinning of blends containing polycaprolactone (PCL) and silk fibroin (SF) with varying composition of cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) resulted in three-dimensional (3D) fibrous scaffolds with bimodal distribution of fiber diameter, which provides both macroscopically stiff and microscopically compliant scaffolds for cells without affecting the surface chemical functionality of scaffolds. Atomic force microscopy (AFM) with a colloidal probe and single-cell force spectroscopy were used to characterize cell stiffness and scaffold stiffness on the cellular level, as well as cell–scaffold adhesive interaction (chemical functionality). This study has successfully varied scaffold mechanical properties without affecting their surface chemistry. In vitro tests indicate that the micromechanical compatibility between cells and scaffolds has been significantly correlated with mechanosensitive gene expression markers and osteogenic differentiation markers of DFSCs. The agreement between experimental observations and the thermodynamic model affirms that the cellular response to the mechanical environment, though biological in nature, follows the laws of the energy interchange to achieve its self-regulating behavior. More importantly, this study provides systematic evidence, through extensive and rigorous experimental studies, for the first time that rationalizes that micromechanical compatibility is indeed important to the efficacy of regenerative medicine.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Silk-based biomaterials and applications · Cellular Mechanics and Interactions · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Materials Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, United States

111 Project Laboratory of Biomechanics and Tissue Repair, Bioengineering College, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China

Kangcell Biotechnology, Chongqing 400714, China

Department of Chemistry, American University, Washington, District of Columbia 20016, United States

Chongqing Key Laboratory of Nano/Micro Composite Materials and Devices, Chongqing University of Science and Technology, Chongqing 400050, China

Funding

Innovation and Attracting Talents Program for College and University · National Natural Science Foundation of China

References (30)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/nrendo.2014.23410.1038/nrendo.2014.234 ↗
2. 10.1089/ten.tec.2013.025010.1089/ten.tec.2013.0250 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.09.01410.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.09.014 ↗
4. 10.1002/adma.20170538810.1002/adma.201705388 ↗
5. 10.1073/pnas.111947410910.1073/pnas.1119474109 ↗
6. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aam882810.1126/scitranslmed.aam8828 ↗
7. 10.1039/b703376a10.1039/b703376a ↗
8. 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.01.01010.1016/j.actbio.2016.01.010 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.09.05710.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.09.057 ↗
10. 10.1126/science.111699510.1126/science.1116995 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.cell.2006.06.04410.1016/j.cell.2006.06.044 ↗
12. 10.1002/adma.20120252010.1002/adma.201202520 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.07.03310.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.07.033 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.01210.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.012 ↗
15. 10.1021/acsami.6b0608310.1021/acsami.6b06083 ↗
16. 10.1088/0957-4484/7/3/00910.1088/0957-4484/7/3/009 ↗
17. 10.1021/bm200401p10.1021/bm200401p ↗
18. 10.1021/bm400540v10.1021/bm400540v ↗
19. 10.1115/1.326989010.1115/1.3269890 ↗
20. 10.1038/nprot.2010.8910.1038/nprot.2010.89 ↗
21. 10.1016/B978-0-12-394624-9.00003-810.1016/B978-0-12-394624-9.00003-8 ↗
22. 10.1098/rsif.2010.041910.1098/rsif.2010.0419 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.01.03810.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.01.038 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.01210.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.012 ↗
25. 10.1021/bm500524s10.1021/bm500524s ↗
26. Ogawa R. · 2016 · 16510.1016/B978-0-12-802225-2.00009-X ↗
27. 10.1021/am400507210.1021/am4005072 ↗
28. 10.1126/scisignal.200483810.1126/scisignal.2004838 ↗
29. 10.1021/acsami.8b0866810.1021/acsami.8b08668 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.11940710.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119407 ↗