Bone defects because of age, trauma, and surgery, which are exacerbated by medication side effects and common diseases such as osteoporosis, diabetes, and rheumatoid arthritis, are a problem of epidemic scale. The present clinical standard for treating these defects includes autografts and allografts. Although both treatments can promote robust regenerative outcomes, they fail to strike a desirable balance of availability, side effect profile, consistent regenerative efficacy, and affordability. This difficulty has contributed to the rise of bone tissue engineering (BTE) as a potential avenue through which enhanced bone regeneration could be delivered. BTE is founded upon a paradigm of using biomaterials, bioactive factors, osteoblast lineage cells (ObLCs), and vascularization to cue deficient bone tissue into a state of regeneration. Despite promising preclinical results, BTE has had modest success in being translated into the clinical setting. One barrier has been the simplicity of its paradigm relative to the complexity of biological bone. Therefore, this paradigm must be critically examined and expanded to better account for this complexity. One potential avenue for this is a more detailed consideration of osteoclast lineage cells (OcLCs). Although these cells ostensibly oppose ObLCs and bone regeneration through their resorptive functions, a myriad of investigations have shed light on their potential to influence bone equilibrium in more complex ways through their interactions with both ObLCs and bone matrix. Most BTE research has not systematically evaluated their influence. Yet contrary to expectations associated with the paradigm, a selection of BTE investigations has demonstrated that this influence can enhance bone regeneration in certain contexts. In addition, much work has elucidated the role of many controllable scaffold parameters in both inhibiting and stimulating the activity of OcLCs in parallel to bone regeneration. Therefore, this review aims to detail and explore the implications of OcLCs in BTE and how they can be leveraged to improve upon the existing BTE paradigm.
Impact Statement
This review first examines the molecular groundwork of the influence of osteoclast lineage cells on bone regeneration and then transitions into empirical investigations on this influence in bone tissue engineering (BTE). The prevalence of bone loss coupled with inadequacies in the present standard of care make effective bone regeneration an enormous unmet need. BTE has had modest translational success up to the present, with a significant limitation being that it has a simple paradigm relative to the complexity of bone biology. This review intends to help BTE researchers expand this paradigm and ultimately expedite the advancement of this field into clinical applications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
YaszemskiMJ, PayneRG, HayesWC, LangerR, MikosAG. Evolution of bone transplantation: Molecular, cellular and tissue strategies to engineer human bone. Biomaterials, 1996; 17(2):175–185; doi: 10.1016/0142-9612(96)85762-0
2.
BaldwinP, LiDJ, AustonDA, MirHS, YoonRS, KovalKJ. Autograft, allograft, and bone graft substitutes: Clinical evidence and indications for use in the setting of orthopaedic trauma surgery. J Orthop Trauma, 2019; 33(4):203–213; doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001420
3.
YoungerEM, ChapmanMW. Morbidity at bone graft donor sites. J Orthop Trauma, 1989; 3(3):192–195; doi: 10.1097/00005131-198909000-00002
4.
EbraheimNA, ElgafyH, XuR. Bone-Graft harvesting from iliac and fibular donor sites: Techniques and complications. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2001; 9(3):210–218; doi: 10.5435/00124635-200105000-00007
5.
DelloyeC, CornuO, DruezV, BarbierO. Bone allografts. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2007; 89(5):574–579; doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B5.19039
AminiAR, LaurencinCT, NukavarapuSP. Bone tissue engineering: Recent advances and challenges. Crit Rev Biomed Eng, 2012; 40(5):363–408; doi: 10.1615/CritRevBiomedEng.v40.i5.10
8.
O’KeefeRJ, MaoJ. Bone tissue engineering and regeneration: From discovery to the clinic—an overview. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 2011; 17(6):389–392; doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2011.0475
9.
HollisterSJ, MurphyWL. Scaffold translation: Barriers between concept and clinic. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 2011; 17(6):459–474; doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2011.0251
10.
KimJM, LinC, StavreZ, GreenblattMB, ShimJH. Osteoblast-Osteoclast communication and bone homeostasis. Cells, 2020; 9(9):2073; doi: 10.3390/cells9092073
11.
TsukasakiM, TakayanagiH. Osteoclast biology in the single-cell era. Inflamm Regen, 2022; 42(1):27; doi: 10.1186/s41232-022-00213-x
12.
YaharaY, NguyenT, IshikawaK, KameiK, AlmanBA. The origins and roles of osteoclasts in bone development, homeostasis and repair. Development, 2022; 149(8); doi: 10.1242/dev.199908
13.
RobeyPG. Cell sources for bone regeneration: The good, the bad, and the ugly (but promising). Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 2011; 17(6):423–430; doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2011.0199
14.
DetschR, BoccacciniAR. The role of osteoclasts in bone tissue engineering. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2015; 9(10):1133–1149; doi: 10.1002/term.1851
LiJ, SarosiI, YanXQ, et al.RANK is the intrinsic hematopoietic cell surface receptor that controls osteoclastogenesis and regulation of bone mass and calcium metabolism. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2000; 97(4):1566–1571; doi: 10.1073/pnas.97.4.1566
19.
LoganCY, NusseR. The Wnt signaling pathway in development and disease. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol, 2004; 20(1):781–810; doi: 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.20.010403.113126
20.
MaedaK, KobayashiY, UdagawaN, et al.Wnt5a-Ror2 signaling between osteoblast-lineage cells and osteoclast precursors enhances osteoclastogenesis. Nat Med, 2012; 18(3):405–412; doi: 10.1038/nm.2653
21.
SimonetWS, LaceyDL, DunstanCR, et al.Osteoprotegerin: A novel secreted protein involved in the regulation of bone density. Cell, 1997; 89(2):309–319; doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80209-3
22.
BucayN, SarosiI, DunstanCR, et al.osteoprotegerin-deficient mice develop early onset osteoporosis and arterial calcification. Genes Dev, 1998; 12(9):1260–1268; doi: 10.1101/gad.12.9.1260
23.
Movérare-SkrticS, HenningP, LiuX, et al.Osteoblast-derived WNT16 represses osteoclastogenesis and prevents cortical bone fragility fractures. Nat Med, 2014; 20(11):1279–1288; doi: 10.1038/nm.3654
24.
WangL, LiuS, ZhaoY, et al.Osteoblast-induced osteoclast apoptosis by fas ligand/FAS pathway is required for maintenance of bone mass. Cell Death Differ, 2015; 22(10):1654–1664; doi: 10.1038/cdd.2015.14
RyuJ, KimHJ, ChangEJ, HuangH, BannoY, KimHH. Sphingosine 1-phosphate as a regulator of osteoclast differentiation and osteoclast–osteoblast coupling. Embo J, 2006; 25(24):5840–5851; doi: 10.1038/sj.emboj.7601430
28.
TakeshitaS, FumotoT, MatsuokaK, et al.Osteoclast-secreted CTHRC1 in the coupling of bone resorption to formation. J Clin Invest, 2013; 123(9):3914–3924; doi: 10.1172/JCI69493
29.
MatsuokaK, ParkK, ItoM, IkedaK, TakeshitaS. Osteoclast-Derived complement component 3a stimulates osteoblast differentiation. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2014; 29(7):1522–1530; doi: 10.1002/jbmr.2187
30.
BennettCN, LongoKA, WrightWS, et al.Regulation of osteoblastogenesis and bone mass by Wnt10b. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2005; 102(9):3324–3329; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0408742102
31.
PedersonL, RuanM, WestendorfJJ, KhoslaS, OurslerMJ. Regulation of bone formation by osteoclasts involves Wnt/BMP signaling and the chemokine sphingosine-1-phosphate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2008; 105(52):20764–20769; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0805133106
32.
Negishi-KogaT, ShinoharaM, KomatsuN, et al.Suppression of bone formation by osteoclastic expression of semaphorin 4D. Nat Med, 2011; 17(11):1473–1480; doi: 10.1038/nm.2489
TonnaS, TakyarFM, VrahnasC, et al.EphrinB2 signaling in osteoblasts promotes bone mineralization by preventing apoptosis. Faseb J, 2014; 28(10):4482–4496; doi: 10.1096/fj.14-254300
35.
HinzB. The extracellular matrix and transforming growth factor-β1: Tale of a strained relationship. Matrix Biol, 2015; 47:54–65; doi: 10.1016/j.matbio.2015.05.006
36.
TangY, WuX, LeiW, et al.TGF-β1–induced migration of bone mesenchymal stem cells couples bone resorption with formation. Nat Med, 2009; 15(7):757–765; doi: 10.1038/nm.1979
37.
BautistaCM, MohanS, BaylinkDJ. Insulin-like growth factors I and II are present in the skeletal tissues of ten vertebrates. Metabolism, 1990; 39(1):96–100; doi: 10.1016/0026-0495(90)90154-5
38.
XianL, WuX, PangL, et al.Matrix IGF-1 maintains bone mass by activation of mTOR in mesenchymal stem cells. Nat Med, 2012; 18(7):1095–1101; doi: 10.1038/nm.2793
39.
HaydenRS, QuinnKP, AlonzoCA, GeorgakoudiI, KaplanDL. Quantitative characterization of mineralized silk film remodeling during long-term osteoblast–osteoclast co-culture. Biomaterials, 2014; 35(12):3794–3802; doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.01.034
40.
Kay SinclairSS, BurgKJL. Effect of osteoclast co-culture on the differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells grown on bone graft granules. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed, 2011; 22(4–6):789–808; doi: 10.1163/092050610X496260
41.
RuggiuA, TortelliF, KomlevVS, PeyrinF, CanceddaR. Extracellular matrix deposition and scaffold biodegradation in an in vitro three-dimensional model of bone by X-ray computed microtomography. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2014; 8(7):557–565; doi: 10.1002/term.1559
42.
DongR, BaiY, DaiJ, et al.Engineered scaffolds based on mesenchymal stem cells/preosteoclasts extracellular matrix promote bone regeneration. J Tissue Eng, 2020; 11:2041731420926918; doi: 10.1177/2041731420926918
43.
DomaschkeH, GelinskyM, BurmeisterB, et al.In Vitro ossification and remodeling of mineralized collagen i scaffolds. Tissue Eng, 2006; 12(4):949–958; doi: 10.1089/ten.2006.12.949
44.
HsuCW, OlabisiRM, Olmsted-DavisEA, DavisAR, WestJL. Cathepsin K-sensitive poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels for degradation in response to bone resorption. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2011; 98A(1):53–62; doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.33076
45.
MidhaS, van den BerghW, KimTB, LeePD, JonesJR, MitchellCA. Bioactive glass foam scaffolds are remodelled by osteoclasts and support the formation of mineralized matrix and vascular networks in vitro. Adv Healthc Mater, 2013; 2(3):490–499; doi: 10.1002/adhm.201200140
46.
RambhiaKJ, MaPX. Controlled drug release for tissue engineering. J Control Release, 2015; 219:119–128; doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.08.049
47.
DrakeMT, ClarkeBL, LewieckiEM. The pathophysiology and treatment of osteoporosis. Clin Ther, 2015; 37(8):1837–1850; doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.06.006
48.
DrakeMT, ClarkeBL, KhoslaS. Bisphosphonates: Mechanism of action and role in clinical practice. Mayo Clin Proc, 2008; 83(9):1032–1045; doi: 10.4065/83.9.1032
49.
ZengY, ZhouM, ChenL, et al.Alendronate loaded graphene oxide functionalized collagen sponge for the dual effects of osteogenesis and anti-osteoclastogenesis in osteoporotic rats. Bioact Mater, 2020; 5(4):859–870; doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.06.010
50.
PosadowskaU, ParizekM, FilovaE, et al.Injectable nanoparticle-loaded hydrogel system for local delivery of sodium alendronate. Int J Pharm, 2015; 485(1–2):31–40; doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2015.03.003
51.
HaydenRS, VollrathM, KaplanDL. Effects of clodronate and alendronate on osteoclast and osteoblast co-cultures on silk–hydroxyapatite films. Acta Biomater, 2014; 10(1):486–493; doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2013.09.028
KimmelDB. Mechanism of action, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile, and clinical applications of nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. J Dent Res, 2007; 86(11):1022–1033; doi: 10.1177/154405910708601102
54.
ZhangW, ShiW, WuS, et al.3D printed composite scaffolds with dual small molecule delivery for mandibular bone regeneration. Biofabrication, 2020; 12(3):035020; doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab906e
55.
PetitC, BatoolF, StutzC, et al.Development of a thermosensitive statin loaded chitosan-based hydrogel promoting bone healing. Int J Pharm, 2020; 586:119534; doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2020.119534
56.
PanT, MartinezM, HubkaKM, et al.Cabozantinib reverses renal cell carcinoma–mediated osteoblast inhibition in three-dimensional coculture in vitro and reduces bone osteolysis in vivo. Mol Cancer Ther, 2020; 19(6):1266–1278; doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-19-0174
57.
GhantaP, WinschelT, HesselE, OyewumiO, CzechT, OyewumiMO. Efficacy assessment of methylcellulose-based thermoresponsive hydrogels loaded with gallium acetylacetonate in osteoclastic bone resorption. Drug Deliv Transl Res, 2023; 13(10):2533–2549; doi: 10.1007/s13346-023-01336-5
58.
BlairHC. How the osteoclast degrades bone. Bioessays, 1998; 20(10):837–846; doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-1878(199810)20:10<837::AID-BIES9>3.0.CO;2-D
59.
JamesAW, LaChaudG, ShenJ, et al.A Review of the clinical side effects of bone morphogenetic protein-2. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 2016; 22(4):284–297; doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2015.0357
60.
AraiY, AokiK, ShimizuY, et al.Peptide-induced de novo bone formation after tooth extraction prevents alveolar bone loss in a murine tooth extraction model. Eur J Pharmacol, 2016; 782:89–97; doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2016.04.049
61.
WangX, LiZ, WangZ, et al.Incorporation of bone morphogenetic protein-2 and osteoprotegerin in 3D-Printed Ti6Al4V scaffolds enhances osseointegration under osteoporotic conditions. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2021; 9:754205; doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.754205
62.
LuoP, FangJ, YangD, et al.OP3-4 peptide sustained-release hydrogel inhibits osteoclast formation and promotes vascularization to promote bone regeneration in a rat femoral defect model. Bioeng Transl Med, 2023; 8(2):e10414; doi: 10.1002/btm2.10414
63.
HuZ, ZhouY, WuH, et al.An injectable photopolymerizable chitosan hydrogel doped anti-inflammatory peptide for long-lasting periodontal pocket delivery and periodontitis therapy. Int J Biol Macromol, 2023; 252:126060; doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.126060
64.
FengX. Chemical and biochemical basis of cell-bone matrix interaction in health and disease. Curr Chem Biol, 2009; 3(2):189–196; doi: 10.2174/187231309788166398
65.
HadiAFN, AghniyaSN, HaidarGA, SihombingWSM, SutedjoA, AlhasyimiAA. Post-orthodontic relapse prevention through administration of a novel synthetic carbonated hydroxyapatite-chitosan hydrogel derived from blood cockle shell (Anadara granosa L.). Dent J (Basel), 2024; 12(1); doi: 10.3390/dj12010018
66.
ZhangY, AnC, ZhangY, et al.Microfluidic-templating alginate microgels crosslinked by different metal ions as engineered microenvironment to regulate stem cell behavior for osteogenesis. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl, 2021; 131:112497; doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2021.112497
HalaiM, KerA, MeekRD, et al.Scanning electron microscopical observation of an osteoblast/osteoclast co-culture on micropatterned orthopaedic ceramics. J Tissue Eng, 2014; 5:2041731414552114; doi: 10.1177/2041731414552114
69.
BoseS, RobertsonSF, VuAA. Garlic extract enhances bioceramic bone scaffolds through upregulating ALP & BGLAP expression in hMSC-monocyte co-culture. Biomater Adv, 2023; 154:213622; doi: 10.1016/j.bioadv.2023.213622
70.
YaoCH, TsaiHM, ChenYS, LiuBS. Fabrication and evaluation of a new composite composed of tricalcium phosphate, gelatin, and Chinese medicine as a bone substitute. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2005; 75(2):277–288; doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.30294
71.
ShanZ, BiH, SuonanA, et al.Tobacco mosaic viral nanoparticle inhibited osteoclastogenesis through inhibiting mTOR/AKT signaling. Int J Nanomedicine, 2020; 15:7143–7153; doi: 10.2147/IJN.S245870
72.
ByunH, JangGN, JeongH, et al.Development of a composite hydrogel incorporating anti-inflammatory and osteoinductive nanoparticles for effective bone regeneration. Biomater Res, 2023; 27(1):132; doi: 10.1186/s40824-023-00473-9
73.
LiX, YuanC, ChenQ, XueQ, MouJ, WangP. The efficacy of hydrogel containing zinc oxide-loaded and minocycline serum albumin nanopartical in the treatment of peri-implantitis. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, 2023; 28(5):e487–e495; doi: 10.4317/medoral.25890
74.
MuschlerGF, NakamotoC, GriffithLG. Engineering principles of clinical cell-based tissue engineering. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2004; 86(7):1541–1558; doi: 10.2106/00004623-200407000-00029
75.
TcacencuI, KarlströmE, CedervallJ, WendelM. Transplanted human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells seeded onto peptide hydrogel decrease alveolar bone loss. Biores Open Access, 2012; 1(5):215–221; doi: 10.1089/biores.2012.0239
76.
HanSS, ChoiJJ, LeeDE, et al.Histological analysis of in vitro co-culture and in vivo mice co-transplantation of stem cell-derived adipocyte and osteoblast. Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2016; 13(3):227–234; doi: 10.1007/s13770-016-9094-1
77.
ZhengL, ZhouD, JuF, et al.Oscillating fluid flow activated osteocyte lysate-based hydrogel for regulating osteoblast/osteoclast homeostasis to enhance bone repair. Adv Sci (Weinh), 2023; 10(15):e2204592; doi: 10.1002/advs.202204592
78.
LiuL, GuoS, ShiW, et al.Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell-derived small extracellular vesicles promote periodontal regeneration. Tissue Eng Part A, 2021; 27(13–14):962–976; doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2020.0141
79.
LiZ, WangH, ZhangK, et al.Bisphosphonate-based hydrogel mediates biomimetic negative feedback regulation of osteoclastic activity to promote bone regeneration. Bioact Mater, 2021; 13:9–22; doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.11.004
80.
NingH, WuX, WuQ, et al.Microfiber-reinforced composite hydrogels loaded with rat adipose-derived stem cells and bmp-2 for the treatment of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in a rat model. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2019; 5(5):2430–2443; doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.8b01468
81.
BrierlyGI, RenJ, BaldwinJ, et al.Investigation of sustained bmp delivery in the prevention of medication‐related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in a rat model. Macromol Biosci. 2019; 19(11):1900226. doi:10.1002/mabi.201900226
82.
YiJ, MeiL, LiX, ZhengW, LiY, ZhaoZ. Effects of continuous and intermittent parathyroid hormone administration on midpalatal suture expansion in rats. Arch Oral Biol, 2019; 99:161–168; doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2019.01.014
83.
LuW, LiX, YangY, et al.PTH/PTHrP in controlled release hydrogel enhances orthodontic tooth movement by regulating periodontal bone remodaling. J Periodontal Res, 2021; 56(5):885–896; doi: 10.1111/jre.12885
84.
HaydenRS, FortinJP, HarwoodB, et al.Cell-Tethered ligands modulate bone remodeling by osteoblasts and osteoclasts. Adv Funct Mater, 2014; 24(4):472–479; doi: 10.1002/adfm.201302210
85.
JeonOH, PanickerLM, LuQ, ChaeJJ, FeldmanRA, ElisseeffJH. Human iPSC-derived osteoblasts and osteoclasts together promote bone regeneration in 3D biomaterials. Sci Rep, 2016; 6(1):26761; doi: 10.1038/srep26761
86.
TrojaniC, BoukhechbaF, ScimecaJ, et al.Ectopic bone formation using an injectable biphasic calcium phosphate/Si-HPMC hydrogel composite loaded with undifferentiated bone marrow stromal cells. Biomaterials, 2006; 27(17):3256–3264; doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.057
87.
JiC, QiuM, RuanH, et al.Transcriptome analysis revealed the symbiosis niche of 3d scaffolds to accelerate bone defect healing. Adv Sci (Weinh), 2022; 9(8):e2105194; doi: 10.1002/advs.202105194
88.
BorcianiG, MontalbanoG, MeloP, BaldiniN, CiapettiG, Vitale-BrovaronC. Assessment of collagen-based nanostructured biomimetic systems with a co-culture of human bone-derived cells. Cells, 2021; 11(1); doi: 10.3390/cells11010026
89.
DouglasTEL, KrawczykG, PamulaE, et al.Generation of composites for bone tissue-engineering applications consisting of gellan gum hydrogels mineralized with calcium and magnesium phosphate phases by enzymatic means. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2016; 10(11):938–954; doi: 10.1002/term.1875
90.
KowalTJ, HahnNC, EiderS, et al.New bioactive glass scaffolds with exceptional qualities for bone tissue regeneration: Response of osteoblasts and osteoclasts. Biomed Mater, 2018; 13(2):025005; doi: 10.1088/1748-605X/aa9385
91.
LaurentiM, Al SubaieA, AbdallahMN, et al.Two-dimensional magnesium phosphate nanosheets form highly thixotropic gels that up-regulate bone formation. Nano Lett, 2016; 16(8):4779–4787; doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b00636
92.
JonesGL, MottaA, MarshallMJ, El HajAJ, CartmellSH. Osteoblast: Osteoclast co-cultures on silk fibroin, chitosan and PLLA films. Biomaterials, 2009; 30(29):5376–5384; doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.07.028
CroesM, BakhshandehS, van HengelIAJ, et al.Antibacterial and immunogenic behavior of silver coatings on additively manufactured porous titanium. Acta Biomater, 2018; 81:315–327; doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.09.051
95.
ZehnderT, BoccacciniAR, DetschR. Biofabrication of a co-culture system in an osteoid-like hydrogel matrix. Biofabrication, 2017; 9(2):025016; doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/aa64ec
96.
ChenK, ZhouQ, KangH, et al.High mineralization capacity of idg-sw3 cells in 3d collagen hydrogel for bone healing in estrogen-deficient mice. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2020; 8:864; doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00864
97.
QuentV, TaubenbergerA, ReichertJ, et al.A humanised tissue‐engineered bone model allows species‐specific breast cancer‐related bone metastasis in vivo. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2018; 12(2):494–504; doi: 10.1002/term.2517
98.
NagataM, HoshinaH, LiM, et al.A clinical study of alveolar bone tissue engineering with cultured autogenous periosteal cells: Coordinated activation of bone formation and resorption. Bone, 2012; 50(5):1123–1129; doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2012.02.631
99.
Erndt-MarinoJD, HahnMS. Probing the response of human osteoblasts following exposure to sympathetic neuron-like PC-12 cells in a 3D coculture model. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2017; 105(4):984–990; doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.35964
100.
GinaldiL, De MartinisM. Osteoimmunology and beyond. Curr Med Chem, 2016; 23(33):3754–3774; doi: 10.2174/0929867323666160907162546
