Application of nanomaterials in three‐dimensional stem cell culture

Aziz, Shiva Gholizadeh‐Ghaleh; Pashaiasl, Maryam; Khodadadi, Khodadad; Ocheje, Onuche

doi:10.1002/jcb.29133

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 83 publications

(155 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…24 Therefore, the performance and function of MSC may be maintained in a setting that more closely reflects the natural environment. 41 Using 3D culture is also beneficial in cell yield compared to 2D culture. 20 If large scale manufacturing of MSCs is intended, the 3D culture approach may be an alternative.…”

Section: Mesenchymal Stem Cell In 3d Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Mesenchymal Stem Cell in 3D Culture: Diminishing Cell Senescence in Cryopreservation and Long-term Expansion

Jundan,

Amalia,

Sartika

2023

Mol Cell Biomed Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are widely recognized in cell treatment due to their capacity to secrete trophic factors, differentiate multipotent, and self-renew. Although there is growing evidence that MSCs have therapeutic benefits in various clinical settings, these cells eventually lose their ability to regenerate as they age, which increases cellular dysfunction. Several factors may affect MSCs aging, such as culture dimensions, cryopreservation process, and long-term expansion. Traditional two-dimensional (2D) culture conditions lack the complexities required to recreate MSCs in their natural environment. Meanwhile, three-dimensional (3D) culture mimics the niche, dynamic, and specialized microenvironments of the cells in vivo. The most used storage technique for MSCs, cryopreservation, requires a very low temperature reduction, which stresses cells and can cause the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines. For the utilization of MSCs in therapeutic applications, an in vitro expansion technique is required. Repeated expansion may reduce proliferative capacity, disrupts cellular shape, and impairs the somatic cell function of MSCs. Various processes and techniques may influence MSCs leading to cell aging. One of the culture methods, 3D culture, is shown to reduce the factors that will compromise the therapeutic effects of MSCs, especially cell senescence. The effect of culture dimensions, cryopreservation, and long-term expansion on cell senescence will be discussed in this review article.Keywords: cell aging, mesenchymal stem cell, 3D culture, cell senescence, cryopreservation, long-term expansion

show abstract

Section: Mesenchymal Stem Cell In 3d Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Mesenchymal Stem Cell in 3D Culture: Diminishing Cell Senescence in Cryopreservation and Long-term Expansion

Jundan,

Amalia,

Sartika

2023

Mol Cell Biomed Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, cell monolayers are also far from being realistic biological barriers as they lack both three-dimensionality and histological organization. Consequently, many 3D cell culture systems ( Figure 2 ), often including the extracellular matrix, have been constructed [ 15 , 16 ]. Although 3D models are time-consuming, require trained handling, and has low reproducibility between research groups, they more closely mimic the normal cell–matrix and cell–cell interactions than 2D models, being thus more appropriate to test in vitro the NP delivery through complex biological barriers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vitro Models of Biological Barriers for Nanomedical Research

Carton

Malatesta

2022

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanoconstructs developed for biomedical purposes must overcome diverse biological barriers before reaching the target where playing their therapeutic or diagnostic function. In vivo models are very complex and unsuitable to distinguish the roles plaid by the multiple biological barriers on nanoparticle biodistribution and effect; in addition, they are costly, time-consuming and subject to strict ethical regulation. For these reasons, simplified in vitro models are preferred, at least for the earlier phases of the nanoconstruct development. Many in vitro models have therefore been set up. Each model has its own pros and cons: conventional 2D cell cultures are simple and cost-effective, but the information remains limited to single cells; cell monolayers allow the formation of cell–cell junctions and the assessment of nanoparticle translocation across structured barriers but they lack three-dimensionality; 3D cell culture systems are more appropriate to test in vitro nanoparticle biodistribution but they are static; finally, bioreactors and microfluidic devices can mimicking the physiological flow occurring in vivo thus providing in vitro biological barrier models suitable to reliably assess nanoparticles relocation. In this evolving context, the present review provides an overview of the most representative and performing in vitro models of biological barriers set up for nanomedical research.

show abstract