In this work, we report a novel surface plasmon resonance (SPR) based live-cell biosensing platform to measure and compare the binding affinity of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and VEGF to bevacizumab. Results have shown that bevacizumab binds VEGF with a higher association rate and affinity compared to VEGFR. Further, this platform has been employed to mimic the in vivo condition of the VEGF-VEGFR angiogenic switch. Competitive binding to VEGF between VEGFR and bevacizumab was monitored in real-time using this platform. Results demonstrated a significant blockage of VEGF-VEGFR binding by bevacizumab. From the results, it is evident that the proposed strategy is simple and highly sensitive for the direct and real-time measurements of bevacizumab drug efficacy to the VEGF-VEGFR angiogenic switch in living SKOV-3 cells.
In this work, we report a novel surface plasmon resonance (SPR) based live-cell biosensing platform to measure and compare the binding affinity of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and VEGF to bevacizumab. Results have shown that bevacizumab binds VEGF with a higher association rate and affinity compared to VEGFR. Further, this platform has been employed to mimic the in vivo condition of the VEGF-VEGFR angiogenic switch. Competitive binding to VEGF between VEGFR and bevacizumab was monitored in real-time using this platform. Results demonstrated a significant blockage of VEGF-VEGFR binding by bevacizumab. From the results, it is evident that the proposed strategy is simple and highly sensitive for the direct and real-time measurements of bevacizumab drug efficacy to the VEGF-VEGFR angiogenic switch in living SKOV-3 cells.
In the past
decade, cancer has
been reported as the second major cause of death in the United States.[1] Although there are several types of cancer, a
common cause for any type of cancer is the abnormal growth of cells.[2−4] Further, very often, cancer cells form a tumor. A tumor larger than
a millimeter will starve itself for oxygen and energy, unless new
blood vessels are built to provide supplies. During such circumstances,
a process known as angiogenesis is found to be involved in building
new blood vessels for many types of cancer.[5] Angiogenesis is a complex process and is defined as the growth of
new blood vessels from existing vessels.[6,7] Mediators of
angiogenesis such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) stimulate
endothelial cells to secrete proteases and plasminogen activators.
Cells will then migrate, proliferate, and eventually differentiate
to form a new lumen vessel.[8] Several pathological
conditions involve or mimic the angiogenic process. Cancer switches
on angiogenesis by breaking the balance between productions of angiogenic
stimulus and inhibiting factors.[9,10] Vascular endothelial
growth factor receptor (VEGFR) refers to a family of endothelial cell
membrane receptors that bind with the VEGFs secreted by tumors. VEGF–VEGFR
binding process is the key point of neovascularization.[11,12] Targeting the endothelial cells receptor binding and activation
process is a promising strategy for cancer repression. However, there
are several questions about the VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch
including the binding kinetics remain unclear.Despite the fact
that there are several unanswered fundamental
questions, biochemical therapies targeting angiogenic switches are
rapidly emerging in the anticancer pharmaceutical industry. Further,
the side effects associated with biochemical therapies are negligible
upon comparison with chemotherapy and radiotherapy.[13] At present, FDA approved about 100 antibodies based cancer
therapy for regulating the VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch.[14−16] One such approved antibody is bevacizumab, a humanized anti-VEGF
monoclonal antibody generated by engineering the VEGF binding residues
of a murine neutralizing antibody into the framework of the consensus
human immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1).[17] Bevacizumab
recognizes, binds and blocks all biologically active forms of VEGF
that interact with VEGFRs.[18] The binding
epitope of VEGF for bevacizumab has been determined structurally in
a previous study: Fab domain of bevacizumab binding centers on Gly-88
residue of the humanVEGF.[19] The efficacy
of bevacizumab against various cancer types has been demonstrated
in several clinical studies.[20−24] (Supporting Information, Table S1)Although there are several clinical studies and trials on the drug
efficacy of bevacizumab on cancers, only a few fundamental studies
have been reported on the interaction between bevacizumab and VEGF.[25,26] A kinetics study on VEGF-bevacizumab binding is essential to elucidate
the fundamental mechanism of bevacizumab inhibition to the VEGF–VEGFR
angiogenic switch. Traditional biological techniques employed to measure
the binding kinetics of VEGF and bevacizumab include Western Blot
and ELISA.[27,28] These techniques measure biomolecular
binding only at a single time point and therefore are not useful for
real-time monitoring. Electrochemical biosensors provide continuous
monitoring of biomolecular bindings. However, a labeling procedure
is required in order to detect non redox-active analytes.[29,30] The recent rapid development of surface plasmon resonance (SPR)
biosensors has offered an engineering solution to overcome these limitations.
SPR offers highly sensitive label-free detection, and it is also a
powerful tool for binding kinetic studies.[31−33] SPR transforms
the refractive index change induced by biomolecular binding events
on the sensing surface into the shift of the plasmon extinction wavelength.
Real-time biomolecular binding kinetics and affinity information can
be obtained by tracking this shift versus time. Earlier, work by Yu
et al. has shown an in vitro real-time monitoring
of VEGF-bevacizumab binding using SPR.[34] However, the experimental conditions were not comparable to the in vivo VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch as it was performed
with a commercial VEGF solution. Therefore, an alternative real-time
binding kinetic study method is urgently needed to mimic the in vivo VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch for fundamental
studies and drug development. In our previous study, we have successfully
demonstrated real-time monitoring of VEGF expression from living humanovarian carcinoma cells using SPR.[35] By
integrating a mini cell culture system into the SPR flow system, we
were able to maintain live-cell culture on the ceiling of the SPR
flow chamber to realize VEGF measurements from live-cells. In this
study, we have measured and compared the binding affinity of VEGF
to VEGFR and VEGF to bevacizumab. Finally, we employed this live-cell
sensing platform to mimic the in vivo condition of
the VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch. The results demonstrated
a significant blockage of VEGF–VEGFR binding by bevacizumab.
With this successful prove of concept, we believe that this simple
and highly sensitive biomimic platform possesses great potential in
the future biomolecular binding studies and drug evaluation.
Experimental
Section
Reagents
11-Mercaptoundecanoic acid (MUA) was purchased
from Asemblon (Redmond, WA). Calcium ionophore (A23187) and Kreb’s
buffer were from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). 1-Ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopro-pyl)
carbodiimidehydrochloride (EDC) and N-hydroxysuccinamide
(NHS) were obtained from Alfa Aesar (Ward Hill, MA). Bevacizumab was
kindly donated by Genentech (San Francisco, CA). Recombinant humanVEGF and VEGFR were purchased from R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN).
Cell Culture and Viability Test
In order to maintain
cell viability during the measurements, a customized polydimethylsiloxane
(PDMS) SPR flow chamber gasket was treated by applying several drops
of 0.1% w/v gelatin solution made with boiling distilled water to
cover the entire surface and dried for 12 h. A cell culture Petri
dish and an uncoated PDMS gasket were also prepared and employed as
positive and negative control substrates, respectively. SKOV-3 cells
were cultured in McCoy’s 5A medium added with 1% penicillin
and 10% fetal bovine serum and kept in a 37 °C cell incubator
maintained with a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 and 95%
air. A total of 200 000 cells were seeded on each substrate
and kept with cell culture media for 48 h before experiments. Cell
viability on each substrate was evaluated using a previously reported
fluorescent imaging method[35] (described
in the Supporting Information).
Functionalization
of the SPR Sensing Surface
Carboxylic
groups were immobilized on the gold SPR chip (Biosensing Instrument,
AZ) by incubation in 1 mM MUA/ethanol solution for 12 h at 4 °C.
The SPR chip was then washed with copious ethanol and mounted on the
SPR instrument (described in the Supporting Information). After starting the flowing buffer, a solution of 75 mM EDC and
15 mM NHS in water was injected into the flowing buffer to activate
the carboxylic groups. Following this, 50 μg/mL of protein G
solution was injected to cover the activated SPR chip to ensure proper
antibody orientation. All injections in this study were performed
with a 20 μL/min rate unless otherwise specified.
Living Cell
Integration to the SPR System
The flowing
PBS buffer was stopped immediately after the SPR chip functionalization
and the immobilization of ligands. The PDMS gasket in the SPR flow
chamber used for surface immobilization (no cells) was changed to
the PDMS gasket with cells, and SPR flowing buffer was changed from
PBS (pH = 7.4) to Kreb’s buffer (pH = 7.4) in order to maintain
the cell viability during experiments. The PDMS flow chamber gasket
with SKOV-3 cell culture was removed from cell culture media and thoroughly
rinsed with Kreb’s buffer to remove cell culture media and
unattached cells before mounting on the SPR flow chamber for measurements.
As shown in Scheme 1, living cells are attached
on the ceiling of a customized SPR flow cell chamber; VEGFR is immobilized
on the SPR chip. A chemical stimulation is used to induce the rapid
secretion of VEGF from cells. Bevacizumab is added to the system to
actively block the VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch. Competitive
binding to VEGF between VEGFR and bevacizumab was monitored in real-time.
Scheme 1
Schematic Illustration of the Biomimic System for Bevacizumab Drug
Regulation Study
Results and Discussion
Cell Viability in the SPR Flow Chamber
As shown in
Figure 1, the cell count within the same area
on the tissue culture plate, the gelatin coated gasket, and the uncoated
gasket are found to be 166 ± 8 (n = 3), 227
± 10 (n = 3), and 79 ± 7 (n = 3), respectively. With a significant enhancement of cell attachment
compared to uncoated gaskets, gelatin coated gaskets were demonstrated
to be a suitable substrate to maintain the cell viability for live-cell
experiments in the SPR flow chamber.[36]
Figure 1
Merged
fluorescent images (Hoechst channel & MitoTracker Red
channel) of SKOV-3 cells on different type of substrates: Petri dishes
(exposure time 400 ms), gelatin coated gaskets (exposure time 200
ms), and uncoated gaskets (exposure time 200 ms).
Merged
fluorescent images (Hoechst channel & MitoTracker Red
channel) of SKOV-3 cells on different type of substrates: Petri dishes
(exposure time 400 ms), gelatin coated gaskets (exposure time 200
ms), and uncoated gaskets (exposure time 200 ms).
Optimization of Bevacizumab Dosing
In order to determine
the optimal dose of bevacizumab for this study, we have investigated
the SPR response corresponding to various amounts of bevacizumab immobilized
on the gold sensing surface. Initially, a known concentration of bevacizumab
(5 μg/mL, 10 μg/mL, 30 μg/mL, 50 μg/mL, 70
μg/mL) was injected to the functionalized SPR chip. A solution
of 3 μg/mL VEGF (recombinant, Sigma-Aldrich) was then injected
to pass through the sensing surface. The SPR measurement was repeated
three times for every single bevacizumab concentration. Figure 2 shows the results corresponding to one set of measurements.
The resulting SPR response for each bevacizumab concentration was
plotted against time (70 μg/mL data not shown). It is evident
that the amount of VEGF bound to the 50 μg/mL bevacizumab sensing
surface did not show a significant difference than the amount of VEGF
bound to the 30 μg/mL bevacizumab sensing surface (Figure 2). This observation can be attributed to the following
two possible reasons: (i) 30 μg/mL is the saturation concentration
of bevacizumab on the surface or (ii) 3 μg/mL VEGF injection
can be completely captured by 30 μg/mL surface bound bevacizumab.
Our previous study indicated that even if SKOV-3 cells reached 100%
confluency in the SPR flow chamber, the VEGF release did not reach
3 μg/mL.[35] Therefore, the dynamic
range of the sensor employed in this work is suitable for the live-cell
measurements. We employed 30 μg/mL of bevacizumab as the optimum
concentration for further binding studies.
Figure 2
(A) SPR response corresponding
to 3 μg/mL VEGF for each surface
bound bevacizumab concentration: 5 μg/mL (red), 10 μg/mL
(blue), 30 μg/mL (purple), 50 μg/mL (green); (B) SPR baseline
shift induced by each different surface concentration of bevacizumab
(n = 3): 8.5 ± 1.3 (5 μg/mL), 26.1 ±
3.6 (10 μg/mL), 96.1 ± 9.8 (30 μg/mL), 107.2 ±
9.3 (50 μg/mL), 111.6 ± 11.2 (70 μg/mL).
(A) SPR response corresponding
to 3 μg/mL VEGF for each surface
bound bevacizumab concentration: 5 μg/mL (red), 10 μg/mL
(blue), 30 μg/mL (purple), 50 μg/mL (green); (B) SPR baseline
shift induced by each different surface concentration of bevacizumab
(n = 3): 8.5 ± 1.3 (5 μg/mL), 26.1 ±
3.6 (10 μg/mL), 96.1 ± 9.8 (30 μg/mL), 107.2 ±
9.3 (50 μg/mL), 111.6 ± 11.2 (70 μg/mL).
Specificity Study of VEGF-Bevacizumab Binding
Bevacizumab
is a humanized anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody generated by engineering
the VEGF binding residues of a murine neutralizing antibody into the
framework of the human IgG.[37] Any nonspecific
binding to other biomolecules is expected to affect the efficacy of
this drug. Earlier, we have demonstrated the affinity and reproducibility
of VEGF-bevacizumab binding. In this experiment, we further investigated
the specificity of the VEGF-bevacizumab interaction. VEGF–VEGFR
binding and activation is the most important step of the angiogenesis
process, which is also the target of most angiogenesis regulation
therapy strategies, including bevacizumab.[38,39] Thus, it is crucial to investigate the interaction between bevacizumab
and VEGFR. Similarly, a bevacizumab layer was formed on the activated
SPR gold surface by injecting 10 μg/mL of bevacizumab. Following
this, 3 μg/mL VEGF and VEGFR were injected and passed the two
bevacizumab covered gold chips, respectively. As shown in Figure 3A, a 25.1 mDeg baseline shift was observed in the
SPR sensogram upon comparing the stable baseline positions before
and after the injection. Such a baseline shift can be attributed to
the VEGF-bevacizumab binding. However, no significant baseline shift
was detected for the VEGFR–bevacizumab interaction (Figure 3B). From the results, it is evident that bevacizumab
competitively binds with VEGF and thereby minimizes the amount of
VEGF available to the VEGF–VEGFR interaction.
Figure 3
(A) SPR sensorgram of
surface bound bevacizumab interacting with
VEGF. Inset: enlarged sensorgram of the response upon VEGF binding.
(B) SPR sensorgram of surface bound bevacizumab interacting with VEGFR.
Inset: enlarged sensorgram of the response upon VEGFR binding.
(A) SPR sensorgram of
surface bound bevacizumab interacting with
VEGF. Inset: enlarged sensorgram of the response upon VEGF binding.
(B) SPR sensorgram of surface bound bevacizumab interacting with VEGFR.
Inset: enlarged sensorgram of the response upon VEGFR binding.
Binding Kinetics Study
of VEGF–VEGFR and VEGF–Bevacizumab
Interactions
To demonstrate the drug efficacy of bevacizumab,
binding kinetics of VEGF–VEGFR and VEGF–bevacizumab
interactions was measured and compared. After the surface activation
and modification of the SPR gold chip, 30 μg/mL of bevacizumab
was immobilized on top of the protein G layer. Another SPR chip was
immobilized by direct injection of 30 μg/mL of VEGFR onto the
activated surface without the protein G layer. A solution of 2 μg/mL
VEGF was injected to the flow chamber after surface functionalization.
The SPR sensorgram corresponding to the responses on VEGF binding
to bevacizumab (blue) and VEGFR (red) is shown in Figure 4A. A modified pseudo-first-order kinetics equation[40] was used to determine the association rate constants
(described in Supporting Information):where R is the SPR signal
at time t, ka is the association rate constant which
indicates the binding affinity between two molecules, [VEGF] is the
concentration of VEGF, and Rmax is the maximum response of the immobilized
ligand (bevacizumab or VEGFR). The value of (dR/dt) for each sample was determined by calculating the maximum
slope of the association curve using Matlab 7.1 (SP3). The weight
concentration of VEGF was converted to molar concentration (47.6 nM).
The maximum SPR response of the surface bound bevacizumab is 1321
mDeg and the ka for bevacizumab is 1.45 ± 0.05 × 105 M–1 s–1 (n = 3) (repeated trails, 1.63 ± 0.06 × 105 M–1 s–1; 1.41 ± 0.05 × 105 M–1 s–1). Similarly,
the maximum SPR response of the surface bound VEGFR is 1078 mDeg,
the ka for VEGFR is 0.83 ± 0.03 × 105 M–1 s–1 (n = 3) (repeated trails,
0.91 ± 0.04 × 105 M–1 s–1; 0.82 ± 0.03 × 105 M–1 s–1). We also obtained the binding affinity information
for both interactions from Figure 4A by measuring
the SPR baseline shift upon VEGF binding. VEGF–bevacizumab
binding induced a 92.7 ± 4 mDeg baseline shift (repeated trails,
106.5 ± 6 mDeg; 89.8 ± 3 mDeg), whereas VEGF–VEGFR
binding induced a 60.2 ± 3 mDeg baseline shift (repeated trails,
69.3 ± 3 mDeg; 57.4 ± 2 mDeg). Results of ka and SPR baseline
shift from three similar experiments with different batch of SKOV-3
cells are shown in parts B and C of Figure 4, respectively. Each experiment was repeated three times with intertrail
coefficient of variation (CV) ranging from 0.034 to 0.056. These results
indicate that bevacizumab binds VEGF with a higher rate and affinity
compared to VEGFR.
Figure 4
(A) SPR sensorgram of VEGF binding response to bevacizumab
(blue
line) and VEGFR (red line). (B) Association rate constants (ka) of
VEGF–bevacizumab binding (blue) and VEGF–VEGFR binding
(red) calculated for each trial of experiment. (n = 3). (C) Binding affinity indicated by SPR baseline shift of VEGF–bevacizumab
binding (blue) and VEGF–VEGFR binding (red) for each trial
(n = 3).
(A) SPR sensorgram of VEGF binding response to bevacizumab
(blue
line) and VEGFR (red line). (B) Association rate constants (ka) of
VEGF–bevacizumab binding (blue) and VEGF–VEGFR binding
(red) calculated for each trial of experiment. (n = 3). (C) Binding affinity indicated by SPR baseline shift of VEGF–bevacizumab
binding (blue) and VEGF–VEGFR binding (red) for each trial
(n = 3).
Biomimic Drug Regulation Study on VEGF–VEGFR Interaction
The biomimic system was employed to evaluate the bevacizumab drug
regulation on the VEGF angiogenic switch. VEGFR was immobilized on
the SPR gold sensing surface by the aforementioned method. The PDMS
gasket with living cells was then integrated to the SPR system. After
restarting the experiment, 500 μm Ca2+ ionophore
(A23187) was injected to induce rapid exocytosis of VEGF from the
SKOV-3 cells.[29] In Figure 5A, the red line represents the SPR response of VEGF exocytosis
binding to VEGFR on the sensing surface (control experiment). The
peak between ∼50 s and ∼250 s is attributed to the refractive
index change induced by the Ca2+ ionophore (A23187) passing
through the sensing surface. Following the plateau, the baseline is
stabilized at 103.7 ± 8 mDeg (repeated trails, 105.6 ± 9
mDeg, 113.2 ± 10 mDeg). This SPR baseline shift indicates that
VEGF released from SKOV-3 cells has bound to the VEGFR. The blue line
depicts the SPR response of VEGF exocytosis binding to surface VEGFR
under the regulation of bevacizumab (drug regulation experiment).
A solution of 30 μg/mL bevacizumab was added to the flowing
buffer to bind the VEGF secretion in this group. This data, upon comparison
with the control experiment, has shown that the SPR baseline dropped
by 82.5 ± 9.6 mDeg after the Ca2+ ionophore (A23187)
stimulation. Similar results were observed in experiments with different
batch of SKOV-3 cells. We anticipate this sudden drop of baseline
as a result of the surface refractive index decrease caused by the
rapid binding event occurred between VEGF and bevacizumab in the flowing
buffer. However, further experiments are essential to validate this
assumption. Following the plateau, the baseline slowly increased toward
the original position to −25.8 ± 2 mDeg (repeated trails,
−18.4 ± 2 mDeg; −10.5 ± 2 mDeg) as a consequence
of the VEGF exocytosis being carried away from the sensing surface.
No significant baseline increase was observed after the induced exocytosis,
thereby confirming that the VEGF–VEGFR pathway was successfully
blocked by bevacizumab in the flow chamber. Figure 5B shows the SPR baseline shift with and without bevacizumab
regulation obtained from three similar experiments with different
batch of SKOV-3 cells. Each experiment was repeated three times with
intertrail CV ranging from 0.081 to 0.18. These results indicate that
the amount of VEGF bound to VEGFR was significantly decreased under
the regulation of bevacizumab.[41]
Figure 5
(A) SPR response
of VEGF (SKOV-3 cells released)–VEGFR interaction
(red line) and VEGF (SKOV-3 cells released)–VEGFR interaction
under bevacizumab regulation (blue line) in the biomimic system. (B)
SPR baseline shift of VEGF–VEGFR interaction (red) and VEGF–VEGFR
interaction under bevacizumab regulation (blue) for each trial. (n = 3).
(A) SPR response
of VEGF (SKOV-3 cells released)–VEGFR interaction
(red line) and VEGF (SKOV-3 cells released)–VEGFR interaction
under bevacizumab regulation (blue line) in the biomimic system. (B)
SPR baseline shift of VEGF–VEGFR interaction (red) and VEGF–VEGFR
interaction under bevacizumab regulation (blue) for each trial. (n = 3).
Conclusion
In
summary, we have constructed a biomimic system for the VEGF–VEGFR
angiogenic switch in SPR and investigated its potential application
on antineoplastic drugs development. To the best of our knowledge,
this is the first report showing direct and real-time measurements
of drug effect to the VEGF–VEGFR angiogenic switch on live-carcinoma
cells. SKOV-3 cells and the bevacizumab antibody were used as the
cell model and the drug model to evaluate the strategy. SPR exhibited
excellent sensitivity and linear dynamic range toward VEGF and bevacizumab
interactions. VEGF–bevacizumab binding indicated a higher association
rate constant and binding affinity than VEGF–VEGFR binding.
The bevacizumab drug regulation study reveals successful blockage
of VEGF–VEGFR binding and activation process. We have outlined
a highly sensitive and simple strategy for the direct and real-time
measurements of bevacizumab drug efficacy to the VEGF–VEGFR
angiogenic switch on living SKOV-3 cells. A similar strategy can be
adopted to develop and evaluate other types of medicine in the future.
Authors: Henry H Q Heng; Joshua B Stevens; Steven W Bremer; Karen J Ye; Guo Liu; Christine J Ye Journal: J Cell Biochem Date: 2010-04-15 Impact factor: 4.429
Authors: Kathy D Miller; Linnea I Chap; Frankie A Holmes; Melody A Cobleigh; P Kelly Marcom; Louis Fehrenbacher; Maura Dickler; Beth A Overmoyer; James D Reimann; Amy P Sing; Virginia Langmuir; Hope S Rugo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Leonard B Saltz; Stephen Clarke; Eduardo Díaz-Rubio; Werner Scheithauer; Arie Figer; Ralph Wong; Sheryl Koski; Mikhail Lichinitser; Tsai-Shen Yang; Fernando Rivera; Felix Couture; Florin Sirzén; Jim Cassidy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Felix Bock; Jasmine Onderka; Tina Dietrich; Björn Bachmann; Friedrich E Kruse; Matthias Paschke; Grit Zahn; Claus Cursiefen Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Wouter B Nagengast; Elisabeth G de Vries; Geke A Hospers; Nanno H Mulder; Johan R de Jong; Harry Hollema; Adrienne H Brouwers; Guus A van Dongen; Lars R Perk; Marjolijn N Lub-de Hooge Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-07-13 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Haitham A Badr; Dina M M AlSadek; Mohit P Mathew; Chen-Zhong Li; Leyla B Djansugurova; Kevin J Yarema; Hafiz Ahmed Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2015-08-10 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Haitham A Badr; Dina M M AlSadek; Motawa E El-Houseini; Christopher T Saeui; Mohit P Mathew; Kevin J Yarema; Hafiz Ahmed Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 12.479