Adipose stem cell‐derived extracellular matrix represents a promising biomaterial by inducing spontaneous formation of prevascular‐like structures by mvECs

Abstract

Tissue constructs of physiologically relevant scale require a vascular system to maintain cell viability. However, in vitro vascularization of engineered tissues is still a major challenge. Successful approaches are based on a feeder layer (FL) to support vascularization. Here, we investigated whether the supporting effect on the self‐assembled formation of prevascular‐like structures by microvascular endothelial cells (mvECs) originates from the FL itself or from its extracellular matrix (ECM). Therefore, we compared the influence of ECM, either derived from adipose‐derived stem cells (ASCs) or adipogenically differentiated ASCs, with the classical cell‐based FL. All cell‐derived ECM (cdECM) substrates enabled mvEC growth with high viability. Prevascular‐like structures were visualized by immunofluorescence staining of endothelial surface protein CD31 and could be observed on all cdECM and FL substrates but not on control substrate collagen I. On adipogenically differentiated ECM, longer and higher branched structures could be found compared with stem cell cdECM. An increased concentration of proangiogenic factors was found in cdECM substrates and FL approaches compared with controls. Finally, the expression of proteins associated with tube formation (E‐selectin and thrombomodulin) was confirmed. These results highlight cdECM as promising biomaterial for adipose tissue engineering by inducing the spontaneous formation of prevascular‐like structures by mvECs.

Cell‐derived and enzyme‐based decellularized extracellular matrix exhibit compositional and structural differences that are relevant for its use as a biomaterial

“…It was found that acdECM from both time points [acdECM d7: 2357.6 (±201.1)% (this value was already published by us in Nellinger et al 2020) and acdECM d14: 2329.4 (±118.7)%] exhibited a higher degree of swelling compared with dECM [1288.1 (±383.3)%]. Further, acdECM exhibited a higher degree of swelling compared with scdECM d7 [scdECM d7: 1624.3 (±96.4)% (this value is already published by us in Nellinger et al 2020)] independent of the day. The degree of swelling of scdECMd14 [1764.5 (±421.0)%] was significantly lower compared with acdECM d7, within the different evaluation days of cdECM.…”

“…Degree of swelling. The degree of swelling was calculated from the dry and wet weight of ECM samples according to Equation (3) and displayed in percentual amount (¥ = data from Nellinger et al, 2020; ** p ≤ 0.01; *** p ≤ 0.001; n = 9). ECM, extracellular matrix…”

Endoglin Modulates TGFβR2 Induced VEGF and Proinflammatory Cytokine Axis Mediated Angiogenesis in Prolonged DEHP-Exposed Breast Cancer Cells

“…Approximately 2 × 10 5 of the control and DEHP-exposed (mock-treated and ENG knockdown) MDA-MB-231 cells were seeded in 6-well plates and incubated overnight. After incubation, serum-free culture medium was replaced, and cells were incubated for 48–72 h. Culture medium was collected and used to perform VEGF quantification using a Human VEFG 165 Standard TBM ELISA Development kit (900-T10, PEPROTech, Hamburg, Germany), as described previously [ 48 ].…”

An Advanced ‘clickECM’ That Can be Modified by the Inverse‐Electron‐Demand Diels‐Alder Reaction

“…Next to the interaction with ECM, bioactive molecules such as growth factors are known to be bound to ECM and might enhance proliferation. We previously demonstrated the presence of different growth factors in ASC‐derived ECM [29] . As there are no differences between the approaches with coECM and the functionalized ECMs (AzECM and CpECM), the functionalization exhibits no effect on the parameters shown in Figure 5 (cellular survival, proliferation, and metabolic activity) and therefore represents a promising method for ECM modification without unintentionally affecting cellular behavior.…”