↓ Skip to main content

Native extracellular matrix preserves mesenchymal stem cell “stemness” and differentiation potential under serum-free culture conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Native extracellular matrix preserves mesenchymal stem cell “stemness” and differentiation potential under serum-free culture conditions
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13287-015-0235-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rubie Rakian, Travis J. Block, Shannan M. Johnson, Milos Marinkovic, Junjie Wu, Qiuxia Dai, David D. Dean, Xiao-Dong Chen

Abstract

Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) for clinical use should not be grown in media containing fetal bovine serum (FBS), because of serum-related concerns over biosafety and batch-to-batch variability. Previously, we described the preparation and use of a cell-free native extracellular matrix (ECM) made by bone marrow cells (BM-ECM) which preserves stem cell properties and enhances proliferation. Here, we compare colony-forming ability and differentiation of MSCs cultured on BM-ECM with a commercially available matrix (CELLstart™) and tissue culture plastic (TCP) under serum-free conditions. Primary MSCs from freshly isolated bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells or passaged MSCs (P1) were grown in serum-containing (SCM) or serum-free (SFM) media on BM-ECM, CELLstart™, or TCP substrates. Proliferation, cell composition (phenotype), colony-forming unit replication, and bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) responsiveness were compared among cells maintained on the three substrates. Proliferation of primary BM-MSCs was significantly higher in SCM than SFM, irrespectively of culture substrate, suggesting that the expansion of these cells requires SCM. In contrast, passaged cells cultured on BM-ECM or CELLstart™ in SFM proliferated to nearly the same extent as cells in SCM. However, morphologically, those on BM-ECM were smaller and more aligned, slender, and long. Cells grown for 7 days on BM-ECM in SFM were 20-40 % more positive for MSC surface markers than cells cultured on CELLstart™. Cells cultured on TCP contained the smallest number of cells positive for MSC markers. MSC colony-forming ability in SFM, as measured by CFU-fibroblasts, was increased 10-, 9-, and 2-fold when P1 cells were cultured on BM-ECM, CELLstart™, and TCP, respectively. Significantly, CFU-adipocyte and -osteoblast replication of cells grown on BM-ECM was dramatically increased over those on CELLstart™ (2X) and TCP (4-7X). BM-MSCs, cultured in SFM and treated with BMP-2, retained their differentiation capacity better on BM-ECM than on either of the other two substrates. Our findings indicate that BM-ECM provides a unique microenvironment that supports the colony-forming ability of MSCs in SFM and preserves their stem cell properties. The establishment of a robust culture system, combining native tissue-specific ECM and SFM, provides an avenue for preparing significant numbers of potent MSCs for cell-based therapies in patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 99 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 27%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 15%
Engineering 12 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Materials Science 9 9%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 19 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#18,432,465
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1,732
of 2,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,721
of 387,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#48
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,420 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 387,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.