Literature DB >> 21144011

Matrix elasticity in vitro controls muscle stem cell fate in vivo.

Matthew Raab1, Jae-Won Shin, Dennis E Discher.   

Abstract

Almost every laboratory that grows mammalian cells today grows their cells on tissue culture plastic, which was introduced to cell culture decades ago based on properties such as inertness, transparency, and so forth. However, plastic is rigid and unlike the many soft tissues in the body. Polymer gel systems that mimic the softness of various tissues have been developed over the past decade to test and understand the effects of rigidity on cells such as muscle cells. One recent study even shows that muscle stem cells expand much better in vitro on muscle-mimetic gels and that such cells prove optimal for engraftment in muscle.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21144011      PMCID: PMC3025440          DOI: 10.1186/scrt38

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther        ISSN: 1757-6512            Impact factor:   6.832


Solid tissue repair or regeneration with stem cells is a major challenge that is now motivating studies of many cell types with many methods. Therapies are typically expected to require expansion of autologous or allogeneic cells before transplantation into damaged or diseased tissue, but an ability to control self-renewal, differentiation, and expansion of isolated stem cells and their progenitors is probably crucial for any successful translation to humans. Soluble factors have been the usual approach in efforts to control stem cells, but Gilbert and colleagues show that even transplantation into mice will benefit from more attention to insoluble factors [1]. Tissue cells are adherent, which engages many signaling pathways. Indeed, adhesion extends into a cell beyond its membrane, with active engagement of the cytoskeleton: a cell constantly probes its microenvironment by physically pulling on extracellular matrix and adjacent cells. Such forces cause matrix deformations in proportion to matrix elasticity; that is, the tendency of your tissue to spring back after pinching or pulling it. At the cell level, the mechanics feed back and remodel a cell's cytoskeleton, impacting signaling pathways and cell fate. A number of recent papers have highlighted the importance of myosin contractility in the viability and fate of pluripotent embryonic stem cells [2-4]. The coupling of stem-cell-generated forces to matrix elasticity also affects differentiation, with initial results for mesenchymal stem cells indicating that matrix elasticity directs lineage specification [5]. Hematopoietic stem cells cultured on soft, elastic substrates expand twofold to threefold whereas crosslink rigidification of the substrate abolishes this effect [6]. Matrix stiffness indeed varies between tissues, and ranges from extremely soft bone marrow and brain tissue to rigid calcified bone. Muscle is not too soft and not too stiff, as muscle needs to be sufficiently compliant to change length in contraction. Moreover, when there are defects in compliant proteins, such as dystrophin [7], muscular dystrophies arise - which motivates therapies such as stem cell transplantation. At the microscale relevant to cells, the lateral elasticity of normal, flaccid skeletal muscle has been measured to have an elastic modulus of ~12 kPa [8], while rat cardiac tissue [9] and mouse cardiac tissue [10] are perhaps stiffer by up to twofold. Such elasticity is typical of many polyacrylamide gels widely used in protein separations. Gilbert and colleagues reproduced past measurements of the tibialis anterior skeletal muscle and then determined whether this level of stiffness affects the behavior of muscle stem cells (MuSCs) [1]. Hydrogels were engineered to have the same elasticity as muscle tissue, or else were softer or stiffer, with laminin basement membrane protein integrated into the gels. MuSCs were thus cultured on gels of elasticities 2 kPa, 12 kPa, and 42 kPa, and also on extremely thin gels on plastic so that the cells could feel the rigid plastic beneath. Tissue culture plastic is about 100,000-fold more rigid than any soft tissue. Surprisingly, MuSCs cultured on 12 kPa gels expanded over time and maintained a primitive phenotype, whereas MuSCs on rigid substrates did not expand and also tended to differentiate. Time-lapse imaging showed that while the cells divided at similar rates on both soft and rigid substrates, cells on rigid substrates died much more frequently. Two transcription factors were assayed to stage the cells: Pax7 for MuSCs, and Myogenin for differentiation. Pax7 was seen in about one-third of dividing cell doublets on the 12 kPa matrices, indicating symmetric division and self-renewal; this was about fivefold higher than doublets on rigid substrate. Myogenin immunofluorescence also suggested a threefold lower expression on the 12 kPa matrices, consistent with a less differentiated state. Past studies of mesenchymal stem cells on ~12 kPa showed that both Pax7 and Myogenin were induced but only to levels well below myoblasts [5]. Earlier work with myoblasts further demonstrated that myoblasts would fuse and generate the most robustly striated myotubes on 12 kPa matrices compared with even 50% softer or 50% stiffer substrates [8]. Multiple in vitro studies have thus demonstrated that 12 kPa matrices are best for multiple stages of myogenesis. Transplantation of matrix-controlled cells was therefore the next logical step for the field. Gilbert and colleagues expanded MuSCs on 12 kPa gels for 7 days and then injected them into damaged muscle (Figure 1). While freshly isolated MuSCs that are immediately transplanted into injured muscle tissue engraft best, even one cycle of division on rigid plastic prevents any significant MuSC engraftment. In comparison, just 10 MuSCs that had undergone one round of division on 12 kPa gels proved sufficient for 10% above threshold engraftment upon transplantation. Growth of MuSCs in vitro for even a short time on muscle-mimetic matrix can thus promote self-renewal and prolong regenerative potential. Whether this material approach to stem cell expansion will apply to other progenitor cells needs to be tested. Also in need of testing for more lineages than muscle is whether matrices can be used to first direct in vitro differentiation of more pluripotent or multipotent stem cells and then expand the early progenitors as a method to fully prime for implantation. It is nonetheless becoming clear that stem cells feel matrix elasticity as a potent insoluble factor in proliferation and differentiation.
Figure 1

Priming cells on rigid plastic versus biomimetic gels.

Priming cells on rigid plastic versus biomimetic gels.

Abbreviations

MuSC: muscle stem cell.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
  10 in total

1.  Substrate elasticity regulates skeletal muscle stem cell self-renewal in culture.

Authors:  P M Gilbert; K L Havenstrite; K E G Magnusson; A Sacco; N A Leonardi; P Kraft; N K Nguyen; S Thrun; M P Lutolf; H M Blau
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification.

Authors:  Adam J Engler; Shamik Sen; H Lee Sweeney; Dennis E Discher
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2006-08-25       Impact factor: 41.582

3.  Substrate elasticity provides mechanical signals for the expansion of hemopoietic stem and progenitor cells.

Authors:  Jeff Holst; Sarah Watson; Megan S Lord; Steven S Eamegdool; Daniel V Bax; Lisa B Nivison-Smith; Alexey Kondyurin; Liang Ma; Andres F Oberhauser; Anthony S Weiss; John E J Rasko
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2010-10-03       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  Molecular pathway and cell state responsible for dissociation-induced apoptosis in human pluripotent stem cells.

Authors:  Masatoshi Ohgushi; Michiru Matsumura; Mototsugu Eiraku; Kazuhiro Murakami; Toshihiro Aramaki; Ayaka Nishiyama; Keiko Muguruma; Tokushige Nakano; Hidetaka Suga; Morio Ueno; Toshimasa Ishizaki; Hirofumi Suemori; Shuh Narumiya; Hitoshi Niwa; Yoshiki Sasai
Journal:  Cell Stem Cell       Date:  2010-08-06       Impact factor: 24.633

5.  Actin-myosin contractility is responsible for the reduced viability of dissociated human embryonic stem cells.

Authors:  Guokai Chen; Zhonggang Hou; Daniel R Gulbranson; James A Thomson
Journal:  Cell Stem Cell       Date:  2010-08-06       Impact factor: 24.633

6.  Exon-skipped dystrophins for treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy: mass spectrometry mapping of most exons and cooperative domain designs based on single molecule mechanics.

Authors:  Christine Carag Krieger; Nishant Bhasin; Manorama Tewari; Andre E X Brown; Daniel Safer; H Lee Sweeney; Dennis E Discher
Journal:  Cytoskeleton (Hoboken)       Date:  2010-11-10

7.  Non-muscle myosin II regulates survival threshold of pluripotent stem cells.

Authors:  Andrea Walker; Hua Su; Mary Anne Conti; Nicole Harb; Robert S Adelstein; Noboru Sato
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 8.  Mechanobiology of cardiomyocyte development.

Authors:  Jeffrey G Jacot; Jody C Martin; Darlene L Hunt
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Myotubes differentiate optimally on substrates with tissue-like stiffness: pathological implications for soft or stiff microenvironments.

Authors:  Adam J Engler; Maureen A Griffin; Shamik Sen; Carsten G Bönnemann; H Lee Sweeney; Dennis E Discher
Journal:  J Cell Biol       Date:  2004-09-13       Impact factor: 10.539

10.  Mesenchymal stem cell injection after myocardial infarction improves myocardial compliance.

Authors:  Mark F Berry; Adam J Engler; Y Joseph Woo; Timothy J Pirolli; Lawrence T Bish; Vasant Jayasankar; Kevin J Morine; Timothy J Gardner; Dennis E Discher; H Lee Sweeney
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2006-02-10       Impact factor: 4.733

  10 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Coaxing stem cells for skeletal muscle repair.

Authors:  Karl J A McCullagh; Rita C R Perlingeiro
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 15.470

Review 2.  Advanced biomatrix designs for regenerative therapy of periodontal tissues.

Authors:  J H Kim; C H Park; R A Perez; H Y Lee; J H Jang; H H Lee; I B Wall; S Shi; H W Kim
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 6.116

3.  Substrate elasticity controls cell proliferation, surface marker expression and motile phenotype in amniotic fluid-derived stem cells.

Authors:  Aleksander Skardal; David Mack; Anthony Atala; Shay Soker
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2012-10-11

4.  Customized hydrogel substrates for serum-free expansion of functional hMSCs.

Authors:  Ngoc Nhi T Le; Tianran Leona Liu; James Johnston; John D Krutty; Kayla Marie Templeton; Victoria Harms; Andrew Dias; Hau Le; Padma Gopalan; William L Murphy
Journal:  Biomater Sci       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 6.843

5.  Nuclear transport of the serum response factor coactivator MRTF-A is downregulated at tensional homeostasis.

Authors:  Karen M McGee; Maria K Vartiainen; Peng T Khaw; Richard Treisman; Maryse Bailly
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 8.807

Review 6.  Physicochemical Niche Conditions and Mechanosensing by Osteocytes and Myocytes.

Authors:  Jianfeng Jin; Astrid D Bakker; Gang Wu; Jenneke Klein-Nulend; Richard T Jaspers
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 5.096

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.