Literature DB >> 23983015

A phenotypic comparison of osteoblast cell lines versus human primary osteoblasts for biomaterials testing.

E M Czekanska1, M J Stoddart, J R Ralphs, R G Richards, J S Hayes.   

Abstract

Immortalized cell lines are used more frequently in basic and applied biology research than primary bone-derived cells because of their ease of access and repeatability of results in experiments. It is clear that these cell models do not fully resemble the behavior of primary osteoblast cells. Although the differences will affect the results of biomaterials testing, they are not clearly defined. Here, we focused on comparing proliferation and maturation potential of three osteoblast cell lines, SaOs2, MG-63, and MC3T3-E1 with primary human osteoblast (HOb) cells to assess their suitability as in vitro models for biomaterials testing. We report similarities in cell proliferation and mineralization between primary cells and MC3T3-E1. Both, SaOs2 and MG-63 cells demonstrated a higher proliferation rate than HOb cells. In addition, SaOs2, but not MG-63, cells demonstrated similar ALP activity, mineralization potential and gene regulation to HOb's. Our results demonstrate that despite SaOs-2, MG63, and MC3T3 cells being popular choices for emulating osteoblast behavior, none can be considered appropriate replacements for HOb's. Nevertheless, these cell lines all demonstrated some distinct similarities with HOb's, thus when applied in the correct context are a valuable in vitro pilot model of osteoblast functionality, but should not be used to replace primary cell studies.
© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  In vitro cell model; cell line; differentiation; osteoblast; primary cell

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23983015     DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.34937

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A        ISSN: 1549-3296            Impact factor:   4.396


  47 in total

1.  Grafting of architecture controlled poly(styrene sodium sulfonate) onto titanium surfaces using bio-adhesive molecules: Surface characterization and biological properties.

Authors:  Hamza Chouirfa; Margaret D M Evans; David G Castner; Penny Bean; Dimitri Mercier; Anouk Galtayries; Céline Falentin-Daudré; Véronique Migonney
Journal:  Biointerphases       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 2.456

2.  Enhanced Osteoblast Response to Porosity and Resolution of Additively Manufactured Ti-6Al-4V Constructs with Trabeculae-Inspired Porosity.

Authors:  Alice Cheng; Aiza Humayun; Barbara D Boyan; Zvi Schwartz
Journal:  3D Print Addit Manuf       Date:  2016-03-01       Impact factor: 5.449

3.  Do Surface Porosity and Pore Size Influence Mechanical Properties and Cellular Response to PEEK?

Authors:  F Brennan Torstrick; Nathan T Evans; Hazel Y Stevens; Ken Gall; Robert E Guldberg
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Grafting of Bioactive Polymers with Various Architectures: A Versatile Tool for Preparing Antibacterial Infection and Biocompatible Surfaces.

Authors:  Hamza Chouirfa; Margaret D M Evans; Penny Bean; Azzam Saleh-Mghir; Anne Claude Crémieux; David G Castner; Céline Falentin-Daudré; Véronique Migonney
Journal:  ACS Appl Mater Interfaces       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 9.229

5.  Tissue Engineering for Musculoskeletal Regeneration and Disease Modeling.

Authors:  Zhong Li; Shiqi Xiang; Eileen N Li; Madalyn R Fritch; Peter G Alexander; Hang Lin; Rocky S Tuan
Journal:  Handb Exp Pharmacol       Date:  2021

6.  Different diameters of titanium dioxide nanotubes modulate Saos-2 osteoblast-like cell adhesion and osteogenic differentiation and nanomechanical properties of the surface.

Authors:  Barbora Voltrova; Vojtech Hybasek; Veronika Blahnova; Josef Sepitka; Vera Lukasova; Karolina Vocetkova; Vera Sovkova; Roman Matejka; Jaroslav Fojt; Ludek Joska; Matej Daniel; Eva Filova
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2019-04-11       Impact factor: 4.036

7.  Nanofiber/Microsphere Hybrid Matrices In Vivo for Bone Regenerative Engineering: A Preliminary Report.

Authors:  Clarke Nelson; Yusuf Khan; Cato T Laurencin
Journal:  Regen Eng Transl Med       Date:  2018-06-14

8.  Kinship of conditionally immortalized cells derived from fetal bone to human bone-derived mesenchymal stroma cells.

Authors:  S Marozin; B Simon-Nobbe; S Irausek; L W K Chung; G Lepperdinger
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  In vitro characterization of xeno-free clinically relevant human collagen and its applicability in cell-laden 3D bioprinting.

Authors:  Trevor Schmitt; Nilabh Kajave; Huan Huan Cai; Linxia Gu; Mohammad Albanna; Vipuil Kishore
Journal:  J Biomater Appl       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 2.712

10.  Osteogenic cell differentiation on H-terminated and O-terminated nanocrystalline diamond films.

Authors:  Jana Liskova; Oleg Babchenko; Marian Varga; Alexander Kromka; Daniel Hadraba; Zdenek Svindrych; Zuzana Burdikova; Lucie Bacakova
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2015-01-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.