Mesenchymal stem cells play a vital role in bone formation process by differentiating into osteoblasts, in a tissue that offers not a flat but a discontinuous three-dimensional (3D) topography in vivo. In order to understand how geometry may be affecting mesenchymal stem cells, this study explored the influence of 3D geometry on mesenchymal stem cell-fate by comparing cell growth, viability and osteogenic potential using monolayer (two-dimensional, 2D) with microsphere (3D) culture systems normalised to surface area. The results suggested lower cell viability and reduced cell growth in 3D. Alkaline phosphatase activity was higher in 3D; however, both collagen and mineral deposition appeared significantly lower in 3D, even after osteogenic supplementation. Also, there were signs of patchy mineralisation in 3D with or without osteogenic supplementation as early as day 7. These results suggest that the convex surfaces on microspheres and inter-particulate porosity may have led to variable cell morphology and fate within the 3D culture. This study provides deeper insights into geometrical regulation of mesenchymal stem cell responses applicable for bone tissue engineering.
TangYWuXLeiWet al.TGF- β1-induced migration of bone mesenchymal stem cells couples bone resorption with formation. Nat Med2009; 15: 757–765.
2.
WaltersNJGentlemanE. Evolving insights in cell-matrix interactions: elucidating how non-soluble properties of the extracellular niche direct stem cell fate. Acta Biomater2015; 11: 3–16.
3.
EvansEACalderwoodDA. Forces and bond dynamics in cell adhesion. Science2007; 316: 1148–1153.
4.
HarburgerDSCalderwoodDA. Integrin signalling at a glance. J Cell Sci2009; 122: 159–163.
5.
BakerBMChenCS. Deconstructing the third dimension – how 3D culture microenvironments alter cellular cues. J Cell Sci2012; 125: 3015–3024.
6.
AbbottA. Cell culture: biology’s new dimension. Nature2003; 424: 870–872.
7.
LutolfMPGilbertPMBlauHM. Designing materials to direct stem-cell fate. Nature2009; 462: 433–441.
8.
WangFWeaverVMPetersenOWet al.Reciprocal interactions between beta1-integrin and epidermal growth factor receptor in three-dimensional basement membrane breast cultures: a different perspective in epithelial biology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A1998; 95: 14821–14826.
9.
SungKESuXBerthierEet al.Understanding the impact of 2D and 3D fibroblast cultures on in vitro breast cancer models. PLoS One2013; 8: e76373–e76373.
10.
PetrieRJYamadaKM. Fibroblasts lead the way: a unified view of 3D cell motility. Trends Cell Biol2015, pp. 25:666–674.
11.
MaenoSNikiYMatsumotoHet al.The effect of calcium ion concentration on osteoblast viability, proliferation and differentiation in monolayer and 3D culture. Biomaterials2005; 26: 4847–4855.
12.
MaldaJFrondozaCG. Microcarriers in the engineering of cartilage and bone. Trends Biotechnol2006; 24: 299–304.
13.
KimKKPackDW. Microspheres for drug delivery. BioMEMS Biomed Nanotechnol2006, pp. 19–50. Springer US.
14.
ParkJHPérezRAJinGZet al.Microcarriers designed for cell culture and tissue engineering of bone. Tissue Eng Part B Rev2013; 19: 172–190.
15.
HossainKMZPatelUAhmedI. Development of microspheres for biomedical applications: a review. Prog Biomater2015; 4: 1–9.
16.
LakhkarNJParkJHMordanNJet al.Titanium phosphate glass microspheres for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater2012; 8: 4181–4190.
17.
LiMWilkinsonDPatchigollaK. Comparison of particle size distributions measured using different techniques. Part Sci Technol2005; 23: 265–284.
18.
ManikandanSJagannathShrikhandeVKet al.Degradation behaviour of borosilicate glass: some studies. Anti-Corros Methods Mater2006; 53: 303–309.
19.
HoppeAGüldalNSBoccacciniAR. A review of the biological response to ionic dissolution products from bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. Biomaterials2011; 32: 2757–2774.
20.
OkamotoTAoyamaTNakayamaTet al.Clonal heterogeneity in differentiation potential of immortalized human mesenchymal stem cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun2002; 295: 354–361.
21.
RashidiHStrohbueckerSJacksonLet al.Differences in the pattern and regulation of mineral deposition in human cell lines of osteogenic and non-osteogenic origin. Cells Tissues Organs2012; 195: 484–494.
22.
FranceLAScotchfordCAGrantDMet al.Transient serum exposure regimes to support dual differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. J Tissue Eng Regen Med2012; 8: 652–663.
23.
HarrisonRMarkidesHMorrisRHet al.Autonomous magnetic labelling of functional mesenchymal stem cells for improved traceability and spatial control in cell therapy applications. J Tissue Eng Regen Med2017; 11: 2333–2348.
24.
KurodaYWakaoSKitadaMet al.Isolation, culture and evaluation of multilineage-differentiating stress-enduring (Muse) cells. Nat Protoc2013; 8: 1391–1415.
25.
AhmadiRMordanNForbesAet al.Enhanced attachment, growth and migration of smooth muscle cells on microcarriers produced using thermally induced phase separation. Acta Biomater2011; 7: 1542–1549.
26.
ShiXJiangJSunLet al.Hydrolysis and biomineralization of porous PLA microspheres and their influence on cell growth. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces2011; 85: 73–80.
27.
LareuRRZeugolisDIAbu-RubMet al.Essential modification of the Sircol Collagen assay for the accurate quantification of collagen content in complex protein solutions. Acta Biomater2010; 6: 3146–3151.
28.
KlimentCREnglertJMCrumLPet al.A novel method for accurate collagen and biochemical assessment of pulmonary tissue utilizing one animal. Int J Clin Exp Pathol2011; 4: 349–355.
29.
Abou NeelEAMizoguchiTItoMet al.In vitro bioactivity and gene expression by cells cultured on titanium dioxide doped phosphate-based glasses. Biomaterials2007; 28: 2967–2977.
30.
JaiswalNHaynesworthSECaplanAIet al.Osteogenic differentiation of purified, culture-expanded human mesenchymal stem cells in vitro. J Cell Biochem1997; 64: 295–312.
31.
NgKWLeongDTWHutmacherDW. The challenge to measure cell proliferation in two and three dimensions. Tissue Eng2005; 11: 182–191.
32.
PruksakornDLirdprapamongkolKChokchaichamnankitDet al.Metabolic alteration of HepG2 in scaffold-based 3-D culture: proteomic approach. Proteomics2010; 10: 3896–3904.
33.
KimHWGuHJLeeHH. Microspheres of collagen-apatite nanocomposites with osteogenic potential for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng2007; 13: 965–973.
34.
ItogaKYamatoMKobayashiJet al.Cell micropatterning using photopolymerization with a liquid crystal device commercial projector. Biomaterials2004; 25: 2047–2053.
35.
ElliottHFischerRSMyersKAet al.Myosin II controls cellular branching morphogenesis and migration in three dimensions by minimizing cell-surface curvature. Nat Cell Biol2015; 17: 137–147.
36.
ParkJYLeeDHLeeEJet al.Study of cellular behaviors on concave and convex microstructures fabricated from elastic PDMS membranes. Lab Chip2009; 9: 2043–2049.
37.
KimMHSawadaYTayaMet al.Influence of surface topography on the human epithelial cell response to micropatterned substrates with convex and concave architectures. J Biol Eng2014; 8: 13–13.
38.
de VicenteGLensenMC. Topographically and elastically micropatterned PEG-based hydrogels to control cell adhesion and migration. Eur Polym J2016; 78: 290–301.
39.
WanYWangYLiuZet al.Adhesion and proliferation of OCT-1 osteoblast-like cells on micro- and nano-scale topography structured poly(L-lactide). Biomaterials2005; 26: 4453–4459.
40.
ZhangLGZhongDHZhangYet al.A microwell pattern for c17.2 cell aggregate formation with concave cylindrical surface induced cell peeling. Biomaterials2014; 35: 9423–9437.
41.
BigerelleMGiljeanSAnselmeK. Existence of a typical threshold in the response of human mesenchymal stem cells to a peak and valley topography. Acta Biomater2011; 7: 3302–3311.
42.
BidanCMKommareddyKPRumplerMet al.How linear tension converts to curvature: geometric control of bone tissue growth. PLoS One2012; 7: e36336–e36336.
43.
RumplerMWoeszADunlopJWCet al.The effect of geometry on three-dimensional tissue growth. J R Soc Interface2008; 5: 1173–1180.
44.
BidanCM. Geometric control of tissue growth and organisation. PhD Thesis, Max-Planck-Institut of Colloids and Interfaces, Germany, 2013.
45.
DalbyMJGadegaardNTareRet al.The control of human mesenchymal cell differentiation using nanoscale symmetry and disorder. Nat Mater2007 Dec; 6: 997–1003.
46.
BallMGrantDMLoWJet al.The effect of different surface morphology and roughness on osteoblast‐like cells. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2008; 86: 637–647.
47.
LiZGongYSunSet al.Differential regulation of stiffness, topography, and dimension of substrates in rat mesenchymal stem cells. Biomaterials2013; 34: 7616–7625.
48.
ScaranoADegidiMPerrottiVet al.Experimental evaluation in rabbits of the effects of thread concavities in bone formation with different titanium implant surfaces. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res2014; 16: 572–581.
49.
BidanCMKollmannsbergerPGeringVet al.Gradual conversion of cellular stress patterns into prestressed matrix architecture during in-vitro tissue growth. J R Soc Interface2016, pp. 13–13.
50.
WernerMBlanquerSBGHaimiSPet al.Surface curvature differentially regulates stem cell migration and differentiation via altered attachment morphology and nuclear deformation. Adv Sci2017, pp. 4–4.
51.
McMahonHTGallopJL. Membrane curvature and mechanisms of dynamic cell membrane remodelling. Nature2005; 438: 590–596.
52.
McBeathRPironeDMNelsonCMet al.Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev Cell2004; 6: 483–495.
53.
VogelVSheetzM. Local force and geometry sensing regulate cell functions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol2006; 7: 265–275.
54.
GrahamTRKozlovMM. Interplay of proteins and lipids in generating membrane curvature. Curr Opin Cell Biol2010; 22: 430–436.
55.
KilianKABugarijaBLahnBTet al.Geometric cues for directing the differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2010; 107: 4872–4877.
56.
OzdemirTXuLCSiedleckiCet al.Substrate curvature sensing through Myosin IIa upregulates early osteogenesis. Integr Biol Camb2013; 5: 1407–1416.
57.
BinaméFPawlakGRouxPet al.What makes cells move: requirements and obstacles for spontaneous cell motility. Mol Biosyst2010; 6: 648–661.
58.
HongSJYuHSKimHW. Tissue engineering polymeric microcarriers with macroporous morphology and bone-bioactive surface. Macromol Biosci2009; 9: 639–645.
59.
GuedesJCParkJHLakhkarNJet al.TiO2-doped phosphate glass microcarriers: a stable bioactive substrate for expansion of adherent mammalian cells. J Biomater Appl2013; 28: 3–11.
60.
BarriasCCRibeiroCCBarbosaMA. Adhesion and proliferation of human osteoblastic cells seeded on injectable hydroxyapatite microspheres. Key Eng Mater2004; 254–256: 877–80.
61.
NelsonCMJeanRPTanJLet al.Emergent patterns of growth controlled by multicellular form and mechanics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2005; 102: 11594–11599.
62.
KollmannsbergerPBidanCMDunlopJWCet al.The physics of tissue patterning and extracellular matrix organisation: how cells join forces. Soft Matter2011; 7: 9549–9560.
63.
BidanCMWangFMDunlopJWC. A three-dimensional model for tissue deposition on complex surfaces. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2013; 16: 1056–1070.
64.
BoukhechbaFBalaguerTMichielsJ-Fet al.Human primary osteocyte differentiation in a 3D culture system. J Bone Miner Res2009; 24: 1927–1935.
65.
GohTKZhangZYChenAKLet al.Microcarrier culture for efficient expansion and osteogenic differentiation of human fetal mesenchymal stem cells. Biores Open Access2013; 2: 84–97.
66.
RipamontiU. Biomimetism, biomimetic matrices and the induction of bone formation. J Cell Mol Med2009; 13: 2953–2972.
67.
HansenJCLimJYXuLCet al.Effect of surface nanoscale topography on elastic modulus of individual osteoblastic cells as determined by atomic force microscopy. J Biomech2007; 40: 2865–2871.
68.
SeoCHFurukawaKMontagneKet al.The effect of substrate microtopography on focal adhesion maturation and actin organization via the RhoA/ROCK pathway. Biomaterials2011; 32: 9568–9575.
69.
ParkJHLeeEJKnowlesJCet al.Preparation of in situ hardening composite microcarriers: calcium phosphate cement combined with alginate for bone regeneration. J Biomater App2014; 28: 1079–1084.
70.
GrazianoAd’AquinoRCusella-De AngelisMGet al.Concave pit-containing scaffold surfaces improve stem cell-derived osteoblast performance and lead to significant bone tissue formation. PLoS One2007; 2: e496–e496.
71.
TeitelbaumSLRossFP. Genetic regulation of osteoclast development and function. Nat Rev Genet2003, pp. 4:638–649.
72.
Florencio-SilvaRSassoGRSasso-CerriEet al.Biology of bone tissue: structure, function, and factors that influence bone cells. Biomed Res Int2015, pp. 2015–2015.
73.
GrazianoAd’aquinoRCusella-De AngelisMGet al.Scaffold’s surface geometry significantly affects human stem cell bone tissue engineering. J Cell Physiol2008; 214: 166–172.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
