journal article·2023-08-14Open access

Inflammatory Licensed hMSCs Exhibit Enhanced Immunomodulatory Capacity in a Biomaterial Mediated Manner

Vasiliki Kolliopoulos, Maxwell Polanek, Hui Xu, Brendan Harley

Abstract

Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) bone injuries represent particularly challenging environments for regenerative healing due to their large sizes, irregular and unique defect shapes, angiogenic requirements, and mechanical stabilization needs. These defects also exhibit a heightened inflammatory environment that can complicate the healing process. This study investigates the influence of the initial inflammatory stance of human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) on key osteogenic, angiogenic, and immunomodulatory criteria when cultured in a class of mineralized collagen scaffolds under development for CMF bone repair. We previously showed that changes in scaffold pore anisotropy and glycosaminoglycan content can significantly alter the regenerative activity of both MSCs and macrophages. While MSCs are known to adopt an immunomodulatory phenotype in response to inflammatory stimuli, here, we define the nature and persistence of MSC osteogenic, angiogenic, and immunomodulatory phenotypes in a 3D mineralized collagen environment, and further, whether changes to scaffold architecture and organic composition can blunt or accentuate this response as a function of inflammatory licensing. Notably, we found that a one-time licensing treatment of MSCs induced higher immunomodulatory potential compared to basal MSCs as observed by sustained immunomodulatory gene expression throughout the first 7 days as well as an increase in immunomodulatory cytokine (PGE 2 and IL-6) expression throughout a 21-day culture period. Further, heparin scaffolds facilitated higher osteogenic cytokine secretion but lower immunomodulatory cytokine secretion compared to chondroitin-6-sulfate scaffolds. Anisotropic scaffolds facilitated higher secretion of both osteogenic protein OPG and immunomodulatory cytokines (PGE 2 and IL-6) compared to isotropic scaffolds. These results highlight the importance of scaffold properties on the sustained kinetics of cell response to an inflammatory stimulus. The development of a biomaterial scaffold capable of interfacing with hMSCs to facilitate both immunomodulatory and osteogenic responses is an essential next step to determining the quality and kinetics of craniofacial bone repair.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications · Mesenchymal stem cell research · Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

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

Affiliations

Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana−Champaign, 600 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States

Tumor Engineering and Phenotyping (TEP) Shared Resource, Cancer Center at Illinois University of Illinois Urbana−Champaign, 405 N. Mathews Ave., Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States

Cancer Center at Illinois, University of Illinois at Urbana−Champaign, 405 N. Mathews Ave., Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States

Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology, University of Illinois at Urbana−Champaign, 600 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States

Funding

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research · Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology · National Institute of General Medical Sciences · University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign · National Science Foundation

References (61)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.2106/00004623-200100022-0000710.2106/00004623-200100022-00007 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.04.01710.1016/j.actbio.2014.04.017 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.oooo.2014.05.02010.1016/j.oooo.2014.05.020 ↗
4. 10.1002/term.191810.1002/term.1918 ↗
5. 10.3389/fimmu.2018.0283710.3389/fimmu.2018.02837 ↗
6. 10.1007/s00018-017-2473-510.1007/s00018-017-2473-5 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.12026610.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120266 ↗
8. 10.1038/ni.300210.1038/ni.3002 ↗
9. 10.3389/fcell.2021.68117110.3389/fcell.2021.681171 ↗
10. 10.4252/wjsc.v6.i5.55210.4252/wjsc.v6.i5.552 ↗
11. 10.1186/1479-5876-10-17210.1186/1479-5876-10-172 ↗
12. 10.1378/chest.117.4.116210.1378/chest.117.4.1162 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.02.02010.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.02.020 ↗
14. 10.1039/C4BM00397G10.1039/C4BM00397G ↗
15. 10.1016/j.actbio.2008.01.00310.1016/j.actbio.2008.01.003 ↗
16. 10.1007/s10856-009-3964-110.1007/s10856-009-3964-1 ↗
17. 10.1002/jbm.b.3132010.1002/jbm.b.31320 ↗
18. Al-Munajjed A. A. · Stud Health Technol Inform. · 2008 · 133 · 11
19. 10.1002/jbm.a.3236110.1002/jbm.a.32361 ↗
20. 10.1097/SCS.000000000000191810.1097/SCS.0000000000001918 ↗
21. 10.1007/s11999-013-3438-010.1007/s11999-013-3438-0 ↗
22. 10.1155/2016/874164110.1155/2016/8741641 ↗
23. 10.1039/D0RA01336F10.1039/D0RA01336F ↗
24. 10.1002/adhm.20130064610.1002/adhm.201300646 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.04.02110.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.04.021 ↗
26. 10.1089/ten.tea.2012.049710.1089/ten.tea.2012.0497 ↗
27. 10.22203/eCM.v033a1710.22203/eCM.v033a17 ↗
28. 10.1002/adhm.20160018110.1002/adhm.201600181 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.mtla.2021.10114910.1016/j.mtla.2021.101149 ↗
30. 10.1615/CritRevImmunol.v22.i3.3010.1615/CritRevImmunol.v22.i3.30 ↗
31. 10.1126/sciadv.aaw499110.1126/sciadv.aaw4991 ↗
32. 10.1002/jbm.a.3236110.1002/jbm.a.32361 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.mtla.2021.10114910.1016/j.mtla.2021.101149 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.02.05210.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.02.052 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.04.02110.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.04.021 ↗
36. 10.5966/sctm.2016-004410.5966/sctm.2016-0044 ↗
37. 10.1002/jcp.2120010.1002/jcp.21200 ↗
38. 10.1002/stem.50310.1002/stem.503 ↗
39. 10.1038/emm.2013.13510.1038/emm.2013.135 ↗
40. 10.1038/mt.2011.18910.1038/mt.2011.189 ↗
41. 10.18632/oncotarget.862310.18632/oncotarget.8623 ↗
42. 10.1152/physiol.00036.201610.1152/physiol.00036.2016 ↗
43. 10.1111/joa.1225710.1111/joa.12257 ↗
44. 10.1002/adhm.20150042710.1002/adhm.201500427 ↗
45. 10.1515/hsz-2021-017410.1515/hsz-2021-0174 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2019.10.01810.1016/j.jconrel.2019.10.018 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.06.05610.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.06.056 ↗
48. 10.1039/D0RA03872E10.1039/D0RA03872E ↗
49. 10.1038/s41467-018-06504-710.1038/s41467-018-06504-7 ↗
50. 10.1073/pnas.130888711010.1073/pnas.1308887110 ↗
51. 10.1073/pnas.161793311410.1073/pnas.1617933114 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.01.00210.1016/j.ebiom.2018.01.002 ↗
53. 10.1146/annurev.immunol.15.1.56310.1146/annurev.immunol.15.1.563 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.jcyt.2016.05.01710.1016/j.jcyt.2016.05.017 ↗
55. 10.1186/s13287-018-0802-810.1186/s13287-018-0802-8 ↗
56. 10.1126/sciadv.aaw015810.1126/sciadv.aaw0158 ↗
57. 10.1134/S000629791911012910.1134/S0006297919110129 ↗
58. 10.1038/cdd.2012.2610.1038/cdd.2012.26 ↗
59. 10.1016/j.phrs.2021.10562610.1016/j.phrs.2021.105626 ↗
60. 10.1152/physiol.00036.201610.1152/physiol.00036.2016 ↗
61. 10.3390/ijms1603551710.3390/ijms16035517 ↗