Ever since the introduction of the concept of tissue engineering (TE), the field has developed and matured from a hype to a proper scientific discipline. Recently, the field is witnessing a reversal of the innovation drivers as it has started to move from a technology-driven science-focused field toward a patient-driven, manufacturing-focused one. This evolution is made possible through innovations at the interface between biology and technology, including robust biological building blocks, precise biomanufacturing technologies, in-depth characterization methods, and in silico models. Combining this with novel insights on TE-related regulatory sciences and business strategies, the field is ready to meet the grand challenge of designing, developing, and delivering living implants with the accuracy and robustness expected from inanimate implants, leading to sustainable, predictable, and vastly superior biological and clinical results.
Impact Statement
From this perspective, we discuss the different stages of development the tissue engineering (TE) field has gone through in its relatively young history. We discuss how TE is evolving from a technology-driven, science-focused field toward a patient-driven, manufacturing-focused one where patients' needs are translated into production process requirements, and subsequently into technological and biological innovations needed to meet the regulatory and clinical demands.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DetelaG., and LodgeA.EU regulatory pathways for ATMPs: standard, accelerated and adaptive pathways to marketing authorisation. Mol Ther Meth Clin Dev, 13, 205, 2019.
2.
RonfardV., VertèsA.A., MayM.H., DuprazA., van DykeM.E., and BayonY.Evaluating the past, present, and future of regenerative medicine: a global view. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 23, 199, 2017.
3.
LenasP., MoosM., and LuytenF.P.Developmental engineering: a new paradigm for the design and manufacturing of cell-based products. Part II: from genes to networks: tissue engineering from the viewpoint of systems biology and network science. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 15, 395, 2009.
4.
LenasP., MoosM., and LuytenF.P.Developmental engineering: a new paradigm for the design and manufacturing of cell-based products. Part I: from three-dimensional cell growth to biomimetics of in vivo development. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 15, 381, 2009.
5.
ZhangF., CitraF., and WangD.Prospects of induced pluripotent stem cell technology in regenerative medicine. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 17, 115, 2011.
6.
GrobarczykB., FrancoB., HanonK., and MalgrangeB.Generation of isogenic human iPS cell line precisely corrected by genome editing using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Stem Cell Rev, 11, 774, 2015.
7.
MironovV., ReisN., and DerbyB.Review: bioprinting: a beginning. Tissue Eng, 12, 631–634, 2006.
8.
SearsN., SeshadriD.R., DhavalikarP.S., and Cosgriff-HernandezE.A review of three-dimensional printing in tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 22, 298, 2016.
9.
MartinI.Engineered tissues as customized organ germs. Tissue Eng Part A, 20, 1132, 2014.
10.
MarcucioR.S., QinL., AlsbergE., and BoerckelJ.D.Reverse engineering development: crosstalk opportunities between developmental biology and tissue engineering. J Orthop Res, 35, 2356, 2017.
11.
FarrellE., BothS.K., OdörferK.I., et al.In-vivo generation of bone via endochondral ossification by in-vitro chondrogenic priming of adult human and rat mesenchymal stem cells. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 12, 31, 2011.
12.
ScottiC., PiccininiE., TakizawaH., et al.Engineering of a functional bone organ through endochondral ossification. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 110, 3997, 2013.
13.
JukesJ.M., BothS.K., LeusinkA., SterkL.M., van BlitterswijkC.A., and de BoerJ.Endochondral bone tissue engineering using embryonic stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 105, 6840, 2008.
14.
FernandoW.A., PapantoniouI., MendesL.F., et al.Limb derived cells as a paradigm for engineering self-assembling skeletal tissues. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 12, 794, 2018.
15.
MatsikoA., ThompsonE.M., Lloyd-GriffithC., et al.An endochondral ossification approach to early stage bone repair: use of tissue-engineered hypertrophic cartilage constructs as primordial templates for weight-bearing bone repair. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 12, e2147, 2018.
16.
VisserJ., GawlittaD., BendersK.E., et al.Endochondral bone formation in gelatin methacrylamide hydrogel with embedded cartilage-derived matrix particles. Biomaterials, 37, 174, 2015.
17.
KallepitisC., BergholtM.S., MazoM.M., et al.Quantitative volumetric Raman imaging of three dimensional cell cultures. Nat Comm, 8, 14843, 2017.
18.
AlbroM.B., BergholtM.S., St-PierreJ.P., et al.Raman spectroscopic imaging for quantification of depth-dependent and local heterogeneities in native and engineered cartilage. NPJ Regen Med, 3, 3, 2018.
19.
KerckhofsG., StegenS., Van GastelN., et al.Simultaneous three-dimensional visualization of mineralized and soft skeletal tissues by a novel microCT contrast agent with polyoxometalate structure. Biomaterials, 159, 1, 2018.
20.
BusseM., MüllerM., KimmM.A., et al.Three-dimensional virtual histology enabled through cytoplasm-specific X-ray stain for microscopic and nanoscopic computed tomography. PNAS, 115, 2293, 2018.
MoroniL., BurdickJ.A., HighleyC., et al.Biofabrication strategies for 3D in vitro models and regenerative medicine. Nat Rev Mater, 3, 21, 2018.
23.
DaltonP.D.Melt electrowriting with additive manufacturing principles. Curr Op Biomed Eng, 2, 49, 2017.
24.
MelchelsF.P.W., FeijenJ., and GrijpmaD.W.A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering. Biomaterials, 31, 6121, 2010.
25.
KeriquelV., OliveiraH., RémyM., et al.In situ printing of mesenchymal stromal cells, by laser-assisted bioprinting, for in vivo bone regeneration applications. Sci Rep, 7, 1778, 2017.
26.
MoldovanN.I., HibinoN., and NakayamaK.Principles of the Kenzan Method for robotic cell spheroid-based three-dimensional bioprinting. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 23, 237, 2017.
27.
MekhileriN.V., LimK.S., BrownG.C.J., et al. Automated 3D bioassembly of micro-tissues for biofabrication of hybrid tissue engineered constructs. Biofabrication, 10, 024103, 2018.
28.
DalyA.C., PitaccoP., NultyJ.; CunniffeG.M., and KellyD.J.3D printed microchannel networks to direct vascularisation during endochondral bone repair. Biomaterials, 162, 34, 2018.
29.
KoleskyD.B., HomanK.A., Skylar-ScottM.A., and LewisJ.A.Three-dimensional bioprinting of thick vascularized tissues. PNAS, 113, 3179, 2016.
30.
LipsitzY.Y., TimminsN.E., and ZandstraP.W.Quality cell therapy manufacturing by design. Nat Biotechnol, 34, 393, 2016.
31.
GerisL., LambrechtsT., CarlierA., and PapantoniouI.The future is digital: in silico tissue engineering. Curr Op Biomed Eng, 6, 92, 2018.
32.
KerkhofsK., LeijtenJ., BolanderJ., LuytenF.P., PostJ., and GerisL.A qualitative model of the differentiation network in chondrocyte maturation: a holistic view of chondrocyte hypertrophy. PLoS One, 11, e0162052, 2016.
33.
Emmert-StreibF., DehmerM., and Haibe-KainsB.Gene regulatory networks and their applications: understanding biological and medical problems in terms of networks. Front Cell Dev Biol, 2, 38, 2014.
34.
GohlJ., MarkstedtK., MarkA., et al., Simulations of 3D bioprinting: predicting bioprintability of nanofibrillar inks. Biofabrication, 10, 034105, 2018.
35.
GuyotY, PapantoniouI., LuytenF.P., and GerisL.Coupling curvature-dependent and shear stress-stimulated neotissue growth in dynamic bioreactor cultures: a 3D computational model of a complete scaffold. Biomech Model Mechanobiol, 15, 169, 2016.
36.
MehrianM., GuyotY., PapantoniouI., et al.Maximizing neotissue growth kinetics in a perfusion bioreactor: an in silico strategy using model reduction and Bayesian optimization. Biotechnol Bioeng, 115, 617, 2018.
37.
ASMEV&V40. Assessing Credibility of Computational Modeling through Verification and Validation: Application to Medical Devices. 60p, 2018. ISBN: 9780791872048.
38.
HoffmanT., KhademhosseiniA., and LangerR.S.Chasing the paradigm: clinical translation of 25 years of tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A 2019, (In press). DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2019.0032.
39.
GarraldaE., DienstmannR., PirisA., BrañaI., RodonJ., and TaberneroJ.New clinical trial designs in the era of Precision Medicine. Mol Oncol, 2019, (In press).
40.
PallmannP., BeddingA.W., Choodari-OskooeiB., et al.Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them. BMC Med, 16, 29, 2018.
41.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Navigating the Manufacturing Process and Ensuring the Quality of Regenerative Medicine Therapies: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2017.
42.
MichaelsJ.V., and WoodW.P.Design to cost. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, 1989. p. 413.
