Cell interactions under controlled of surface substrate
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22034/JATE.2016.14Keywords:
cell interaction, substrate surface, nanotopography, fibronectin, stiffnessAbstract
The interactions between cells and substrates are critical for biological processes as intercellular signaling, proliferation and differentiation into tissue or organ formation. The improvement of controlling the cell behavior relevant to another or substrate surface leads the more precise regenerative approaches of tissue engineering. While the presence of extra cellular matrix (ECM) components triggers into cell attachment, a specified chemical group deposited on the substrate surface is able to hamper cell adhesion and can change cell fate to death. Currently, benefiting from nanostructured surfaces has progressed the spatial arrangement of cells with nanometer level resolution. Also, the value of surface roughness as the presence of unique biomolecules or taking the advantage of a specified pattern governs the cell cycle strongly. Herein, we summarized the studies which were focused on the examination of cell fate relative to surface properties. In total, cell activity is directly influenced by surface modifications those try to provide a more biocompatible as well as biologic environment.
References
1. Boulaiz, H., et al., Nanomedicine: application areas and development prospects. Int J Mol Sci, 2011. 12(5): p. 3303-21.
2. A. Gholipour Kanani, S.H.B., Review on Electrospun Nanofibers Scaffold and Biomedical Applications. Trends Biomater. Artif. Organs 2010. 24(2): p. 93-115.
3. Catherine P. Barnes, S.A.S., Eugene D. Boland, David G. Simpson, Gary L. Bowlin, Nanofiber technology: Designing the next generation of tissue engineering scaffolds. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 59 (2007) 1413–1433, 2007 59: p. 1413-1433.
4. Leong, C.C.a.K.W., Biomaterials Approach to Expand and Direct Differentiation of Stem Cells. Molecular Therapy march. 2007. 15(3): p. 467-480.
5. CARTER, J.H.H.a.D.R., Mechanical Induction in Limb Morphogenesis: The Role of Growth-generated Strains and Pressures. Bone December, 2002. 31(6): p. 645- 653.
6. Marina E Chicurel, C.S.C.a.D.E.I., Cellular control lies in the balance of forces. Current Opinion in Cell Biology, 1998. 10: p. 232-239.
7. Nathalie Q. Balaban, U.S.S., Daniel Riveline, Polina Goichberg, Gila Tzur, Ilana Sabanay, and S.S. Diana Mahalu, Alexander Bershadsky, Lia Addadi and Benjamin Geiger, Force and focal adhesion assembly: a close relationship studied using elastic micropatterned substrates. NATURE CELL BIOLOGY VOL MAY 2001. 3.
8. INGBER, D.E., Fibronectin controls capillary endothelial cell growth by modulating cell shape. Cell Biology, 1990. 87: p. 3579-3583.
9. Wohlrab, S., et al., Cell adhesion and proliferation on RGD-modified recombinant spider silk proteins. Biomaterials, 2012. 33(28): p. 6650-6659.
10. Frith, J.E., R.J. Mills, and J.J. Cooper-White, Lateral spacing of adhesion peptides influences human mesenchymal stem cell behaviour. Journal of cell science, 2012. 125(2): p. 317-327.
11. Kim, D.H. and D. Wirtz, Focal adhesion size uniquely predicts cell migration. The FASEB Journal, 2013. 27(4): p. 1351-1361.
12. Schlie-Wolter, S., A. Ngezahayo, and B.N. Chichkov, The selective role of ECM components on cell adhesion, morphology, proliferation and communication in vitro. Experimental cell research, 2013. 319(10): p. 1553-1561.
13. Christianne Gaudet, W.A.M., Sooyoung Kim, Christopher T. Brown, Vaibhavi Gunderia, and a.J.Y.W. Micah Dembo, Influence of Type I Collagen Surface Density on Fibroblast Spreading, Motility, and Contractility. Biophysical Journal Volume November 2003. 85: p. 3329-3335.
14. Rønning, S.B., et al., The combination of glycosaminoglycans and fibrous proteins improves cell proliferation and early differentiation of bovine primary skeletal muscle cells. Differentiation, 2013. 86(1): p. 13-22.
15. Edna Cukierman, R.P.a.K.M.Y., Cell interactions with three-dimensional matrices. Current Opinion in Cell Biology, 2002. 14: p. 633-639.
16. Tony Yeung, P.C.G., Lisa A. Flanagan, Beatrice Marg, Miguelina Ortiz, Makoto Funaki, Nastaran Zahir, Wenyu Ming, Valerie Weaver, and Paul A. Janmey, Effects of Substrate Stiffness on Cell Morphology, Cytoskeletal Structure, and Adhesion. Cell Motility and the Cytoskeleton 2005. 60: p. 24-34.
17. M.J. Honda, Y.S., Y. Sumita, A. Tonomura, H. Kagami, M. Ueda, Shear stress facilitates tissue-engineered odontogenesis. Bone 2006. 39: p. 125-133.
18. NATHAN J. SNIADECKI, R.A.D., SAMI ALOM RUIZ and CHRISTOPHER S. CHEN, Nanotechnology for Cell–Substrate Interactions. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, January 2006. 34(1): p. 59-74.
19. Cavalcanti‐Adam, E.A., et al., Cell adhesion and response to synthetic nanopatterned environments by steering receptor clustering and spatial location. HFSP journal, 2008. 2(5): p. 276-285.
20. Chun-Min Lo, H.-B.W., Micah Dembo, and Yu-li Wang, Cell Movement Is Guided by the Rigidity of the Substrate. Biophysical Journal July, 2000. 79: p. 144-152.
21. Huang, S. and D.E. Ingber, The structural and mechanical complexity of cell-growth control. Nature cell biology, 1999. 1(5): p. E131-E138.
22. Evans, N.D., et al., Substrate stiffness affects early differentiation events in embryonic stem cells. Eur Cell Mater, 2009. 18(1): p. e13.
23. Eroshenko, N., et al., Effect of substrate stiffness on early human embryonic stem cell differentiation. Journal of biological engineering, 2013. 7(1): p. 1.
24. Van Tam, J.K., et al., Mesenchymal stem cell adhesion but not plasticity is affected by high substrate stiffness. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials, 2016.
25. Chung-Yao Yang, L.-Y.H., Tang-Long Shen, and J. Andrew Yeh, Interactions between Cells and Nanoscale Surfaces of Oxidized Silicon Substrates. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2011. 76.
26. Fu, R.H., et al., Differentiation of stem cells: strategies for modifying surface biomaterials. Cell Transplant, 2011. 20(1): p. 37-47.
27. Genes, N.G., Chondrocyte Adhesion to RGD-bonded Alginate: Effect on Mechanotransduction and Matrix Metabolism: a Dissertation. GSBS Dissertations, 2003: p. 89.
28. Grover, C.N., et al., Crosslinking and composition influence the surface properties, mechanical stiffness and cell reactivity of collagen-based films. Acta biomaterialia, 2012. 8(8): p. 3080-3090.
29. Jagur-Grodzinski, J., Polymers for tissue engineering, medical devices, and regenerative medicine. Concise general review of recent studies. Polymers for advanced technologies, 2006. 17: p. 395-418.
30. Yanzhong Zhang, C.T.L., Seeram Ramakrishna and Zheng-Ming Huang, Recent development of polymer nanofibers for biomedical and biotechnological applications Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Number, 2005. 16, 10, : p. 933-946.
31. K. Anselme, P.D., A.M. Popa, M. Giazzon, M. Liley, L. Ploux, The interaction of cells and bacteria with surfaces structured at the nanometre scale. Acta Biomaterialia 2010. 6: p. 3824-3846.
32. Sangamesh G. Kumbar, S.P.N., Roshan James,Lakshmi S. Nair and Cato T. Laurencinabc, Electrospun Poly(lactic acid-co-glycolic acid) Scaffolds for Skin Tissue Engineering. Biomaterials. , October, 2009: p. 4100-4107.
33. Dalby, M.J., et al., Increasing fibroblast response to materials using nanotopography: morphological and genetic measurements of cell response to 13-nm-high polymer demixed islands. Experimental cell research, 2002. 276(1): p. 1-9.
34. Vincenzo Bucci-Sabattini, M., Alberto Minnici, DDS, Clara Cassinelli, PhD, Alberto Trani, DDS, Paulo G. Coelho, DDS, PhD and David M. Dohan Ehrenfest, DDS, MS, PhD,, Effect of titanium implant surface nanoroughness and calcium phosphate low impregnation on bone cell activity in vitro. Oral and maxillofacial implants, February 2010. 109(2).
35. Jin San Choi, S.J.L., George J. Christ, Anthony Atala, James J. Yoo, The influence of electrospun aligned poly(ɛ-caprolactone)/collagen nanofiber meshes on the formation of self-aligned skeletal muscle myotubes. Biomaterials, July 2008. 29(19): p. 2899-2906.
36. Tabata, Y., Biomaterials Design of Culture Substrates for Cell Research. Inflammation and Regeneration March 2011. 31(2).
37. Pasquale Emanuele Scopelliti, A.B., Marco Indrieri, Luca Giorgetti, Gero and R.C. Bongiorno, Alessandro Podesta, Paolo Milani, The Effect of Surface Nanometre-Scale Morphology on Protein Adsorption. PLoS ONE, July 2010. 5(7).
38. Catherine C. Berry, G.C., Antonio Spadiccino, Mary Robertson, Adam S.G. Curtis, The influence of microscale topography on fibroblast attachment and motility. Biomaterials, November 2004. 25(26): p. 5781-5788.
39. Chen, W., et al., Nanotopography influences adhesion, spreading, and self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells. ACS nano, 2012. 6(5): p. 4094-4103.
40. Teo, B.K.K., et al., Nanotopography modulates mechanotransduction of stem cells and induces differentiation through focal adhesion kinase. Acs Nano, 2013. 7(6): p. 4785-4798.
41. Fiedler, J., et al., The effect of substrate surface nanotopography on the behavior of multipotnent mesenchymal stromal cells and osteoblasts. Biomaterials, 2013. 34(35): p. 8851-8859.
42. Wan, Y., et al., Adhesion and proliferation of OCT-1 osteoblast-like cells on micro- and nano-scale topography structured poly(l-lactide). Biomaterials, 2005. 26(21): p. 4453-4459.
43. Xu Zhang, X.G., Lei Jiang, Xulang Zhang, and Jianhua Qin Nanofiber-modified surface directed cell migration and orientation in microsystem. Biomicrofluidics, 2011. 5.
44. Paul Roach, D.F.a.C.C.P., Surface tailoring for controlled protein adsorption: Effect of topography at the nanometer scale and chemistry. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006. 128(12): p. 3939-3945.
45. Jiang, F.L.a.B., Biomimetic nanocoating promotes osteoblast cell adhesion on biomedical implants. J. Mater. Res., Vol. 23, No. 12, , Dec 2008 23(12).
46. Jost W. Lussi, R.M., Ilya Reviakine, Didier Falconnet , Andreas Goessl , Gabor Csucs , Jeffrey A. Hubbell , Marcus Textor A novel generic platform for chemical patterning of surfaces. Progress in Surface Science 2004. 76: p. 55-69.
47. SANDRA M. LUNA, S.S.S., MANUELA E. GOMES, JOA˜O F. MANO AND RUI L. REIS, Cell Adhesion and Proliferation onto Chitosan-based Membranes Treated by Plasma Surface Modification. Journal of biomaterials applications, July 2011. 26.
48. P.K. Chu , J.Y.C., L.P. Wang , N. Huang, Plasma-surface modification of biomaterials. Materials Science and Engineering R 2002. 36: p. 143-206.
49. Solouk, A., et al., Application of plasma surface modification techniques to improve hemocompatibility of vascular grafts: A review. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry, 2011. 58(5): p. 311-327.
50. Tambe, N.M., Surface Modification Techniques for Polymeric Biomaterials for use as Tissue Engineering Scaffolds, in Textile Chemistry 2011, North Carolina State University: Raleigh, North Carolina.
51. Martin Ja ger, F.S., Marcus Pietzsch, Ru diger Poll, Matthias Rabenau, Surface Modification of Polymers by using Excimer Laser for Biomedical Applications. Plasma Process. Polym. , 2007. 4(416-418).
52. Park, E.J., Development of Photochemical Surface Modification Tehcnique in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. 2011, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: COLUMBIA.
53. J.M. Goddard, J.H.H., Polymer surface modification for the attachment of bioactive compounds. Prog. Polym. Sci. , 2007. 32: p. 698-725.
54. Alexis J. Torres, M.W., David Holowka, and Barbara Baird, Nanobiotechnology and Cell Biology: Micro- and Nanofabricated Surfaces to Investigate ReceptorMediated Signaling. Annu. Rev. Biophys., 2008. 37(265-88).
55. Michael Junkin, S.Ling L., Yongliang Yang, Yi Lu, Justin Volmering, Pak Kin Wong, Plasma Lithography Surface Patterning for Creation of Cell Networks. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 2011. 52.
56. McClary, K.B., T. Ugarova, and D.W. Grainger, Modulating fibroblast adhesion, spreading, and proliferation using self‐assembled monolayer films of alkylthiolates on gold. Journal of biomedical materials research, 2000. 50(3): p. 428-439.
57. Tegoulia, V.A. and S.L. Cooper, Leukocyte adhesion on model surfaces under flow: effects of surface chemistry, protein adsorption, and shear rate. Journal of biomedical materials research, 2000. 50(3): p. 291-301.
58. Luca, A.C., G. Terenghi, and S. Downes, Chemical surface modification of poly‐ε‐caprolactone improves Schwann cell proliferation for peripheral nerve repair. Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2014. 8(2): p. 153-163.
59. Chieh, H.-F., et al., Migration patterns and cell functions of adipose-derived stromal cells on self-assembled monolayers with different functional groups. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, 2013. 24(1): p. 94-117.
60. Kian-Ngiap Chuaa, C.C., Peng-Chou Leeb, Yen-Ni Tangb, Seeram Ramakrishnaa, Kam W. Leongb, Hai-Quan Mao, Surface-aminated electrospun nanofibers enhance adhesion and expansion of human umbilical cord blood hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Biomaterials, December 2006. 27(36): p. 6043-6051.
61. Naganuma, T. and E. Traversa, The effect of cerium valence states at cerium oxide nanoparticle surfaces on cell proliferation. Biomaterials, 2014. 35(15): p. 4441-4453.
62. Yu, X.-L., et al., Different fate of cancer cells on several chemical functional groups. Surface and Coatings Technology, 2013. 228: p. S48-S54.
63. Ayala, R., et al., Engineering the cell-material interface for controlling stem cell adhesion, migration, and differentiation. Biomaterials, 2011. 32(15): p. 3700-11.
64. Esther Rebollar, I.F., Michael Olbrich, Thomas Peterbauer, Steffen Hering, Johannes Preiner, Peter Hinterdorfer, Christoph Romanin, Johannes Heitz, Proliferation of aligned mammalian cells on laser-nanostructured polystyrene. Biomaterials, 2008: p. 1-11.
65. Chang, H.-I. and Y. Wang, Cell responses to surface and architecture of tissue engineering scaffolds. 2011: INTECH Open Access Publisher.
66. Mazaheri, M., O. Akhavan, and A. Simchi, Flexible bactericidal graphene oxide–chitosan layers for stem cell proliferation. Applied Surface Science, 2014. 301: p. 456-462.
67. M. Ben Alia, F.B., J.M. Chovelond, A. Abdelghanib, N. Jaffrezic-Renaultc, M.A. Maarefb, C. Martelete, Use of ultra-thin organic silane films for the improvement of gold adhesion to the silicon dioxide wafers for (bio)sensor applications. Materials Science and Engineering, 1 July 2008. 28(5-6): p. 628-632.
68. Ye, K., et al., Matrix stiffness and nanoscale spatial organization of cell-adhesive ligands direct stem cell fate. Nano letters, 2015. 15(7): p. 4720-4729.
69. Wu, A.T., et al., Enhancing osteogenic differentiation of MC3T3-E1 cells by immobilizing inorganic polyphosphate onto hyaluronic acid hydrogel. Biomacromolecules, 2014. 16(1): p. 166-173.
70. Oikari, L.E., et al., Cell surface heparan sulfate proteoglycans as novel markers of human neural stem cell fate determination. Stem cell research, 2016. 16(1): p. 92-104.
71. Silva, N.A., et al., The effects of peptide modified gellan gum and olfactory ensheathing glia cells on neural stem/progenitor cell fate. Biomaterials, 2012. 33(27): p. 6345-6354.
72. Li, Y.Y., et al., Scaffold composition affects cytoskeleton organization, cell–matrix interaction and the cellular fate of human mesenchymal stem cells upon chondrogenic differentiation. Biomaterials, 2015. 52: p. 208-220.
73. Rajput, D., et al., Cell interaction study method using novel 3D silica nanoneedle gradient arrays. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 2013. 102: p. 111-116.
74. Ferlin, K.M., et al., Influence of 3D Printed Porous Architecture on Mesenchymal Stem Cell Enrichment and Differentiation. Acta Biomaterialia, 2016.
75. Kolf, C.M., et al., Nascent osteoblast matrix inhibits osteogenesis of human mesenchymal stem cells in vitro. Stem cell research & therapy, 2015. 6(1): p. 1-16.
76. Sart, S., S.N. Agathos, and Y. Li, Engineering stem cell fate with biochemical and biomechanical properties of microcarriers. Biotechnology progress, 2013. 29(6): p. 1354-1366.
77. Cai, R., et al., Influence of stepwise chondrogenesis-mimicking 3D extracellular matrix on chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Biomaterials, 2015. 52: p. 199-207.
78. Murphy, C.M., et al., Mesenchymal stem cell fate is regulated by the composition and mechanical properties of collagen–glycosaminoglycan scaffolds. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 2012. 11: p. 53-62.
79. Mehr, N.G., et al., Pore size and LbL chitosan coating influence mesenchymal stem cell in vitro fibrosis and biomineralization in 3D porous poly (epsilon‐caprolactone) scaffolds. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2015. 103(7): p. 2449-2459.
80. Rampichová, M., et al., Elastic three‐dimensional poly (ε‐caprolactone) nanofibre scaffold enhances migration, proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Cell proliferation, 2013. 46(1): p. 23-37.
2. A. Gholipour Kanani, S.H.B., Review on Electrospun Nanofibers Scaffold and Biomedical Applications. Trends Biomater. Artif. Organs 2010. 24(2): p. 93-115.
3. Catherine P. Barnes, S.A.S., Eugene D. Boland, David G. Simpson, Gary L. Bowlin, Nanofiber technology: Designing the next generation of tissue engineering scaffolds. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 59 (2007) 1413–1433, 2007 59: p. 1413-1433.
4. Leong, C.C.a.K.W., Biomaterials Approach to Expand and Direct Differentiation of Stem Cells. Molecular Therapy march. 2007. 15(3): p. 467-480.
5. CARTER, J.H.H.a.D.R., Mechanical Induction in Limb Morphogenesis: The Role of Growth-generated Strains and Pressures. Bone December, 2002. 31(6): p. 645- 653.
6. Marina E Chicurel, C.S.C.a.D.E.I., Cellular control lies in the balance of forces. Current Opinion in Cell Biology, 1998. 10: p. 232-239.
7. Nathalie Q. Balaban, U.S.S., Daniel Riveline, Polina Goichberg, Gila Tzur, Ilana Sabanay, and S.S. Diana Mahalu, Alexander Bershadsky, Lia Addadi and Benjamin Geiger, Force and focal adhesion assembly: a close relationship studied using elastic micropatterned substrates. NATURE CELL BIOLOGY VOL MAY 2001. 3.
8. INGBER, D.E., Fibronectin controls capillary endothelial cell growth by modulating cell shape. Cell Biology, 1990. 87: p. 3579-3583.
9. Wohlrab, S., et al., Cell adhesion and proliferation on RGD-modified recombinant spider silk proteins. Biomaterials, 2012. 33(28): p. 6650-6659.
10. Frith, J.E., R.J. Mills, and J.J. Cooper-White, Lateral spacing of adhesion peptides influences human mesenchymal stem cell behaviour. Journal of cell science, 2012. 125(2): p. 317-327.
11. Kim, D.H. and D. Wirtz, Focal adhesion size uniquely predicts cell migration. The FASEB Journal, 2013. 27(4): p. 1351-1361.
12. Schlie-Wolter, S., A. Ngezahayo, and B.N. Chichkov, The selective role of ECM components on cell adhesion, morphology, proliferation and communication in vitro. Experimental cell research, 2013. 319(10): p. 1553-1561.
13. Christianne Gaudet, W.A.M., Sooyoung Kim, Christopher T. Brown, Vaibhavi Gunderia, and a.J.Y.W. Micah Dembo, Influence of Type I Collagen Surface Density on Fibroblast Spreading, Motility, and Contractility. Biophysical Journal Volume November 2003. 85: p. 3329-3335.
14. Rønning, S.B., et al., The combination of glycosaminoglycans and fibrous proteins improves cell proliferation and early differentiation of bovine primary skeletal muscle cells. Differentiation, 2013. 86(1): p. 13-22.
15. Edna Cukierman, R.P.a.K.M.Y., Cell interactions with three-dimensional matrices. Current Opinion in Cell Biology, 2002. 14: p. 633-639.
16. Tony Yeung, P.C.G., Lisa A. Flanagan, Beatrice Marg, Miguelina Ortiz, Makoto Funaki, Nastaran Zahir, Wenyu Ming, Valerie Weaver, and Paul A. Janmey, Effects of Substrate Stiffness on Cell Morphology, Cytoskeletal Structure, and Adhesion. Cell Motility and the Cytoskeleton 2005. 60: p. 24-34.
17. M.J. Honda, Y.S., Y. Sumita, A. Tonomura, H. Kagami, M. Ueda, Shear stress facilitates tissue-engineered odontogenesis. Bone 2006. 39: p. 125-133.
18. NATHAN J. SNIADECKI, R.A.D., SAMI ALOM RUIZ and CHRISTOPHER S. CHEN, Nanotechnology for Cell–Substrate Interactions. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, January 2006. 34(1): p. 59-74.
19. Cavalcanti‐Adam, E.A., et al., Cell adhesion and response to synthetic nanopatterned environments by steering receptor clustering and spatial location. HFSP journal, 2008. 2(5): p. 276-285.
20. Chun-Min Lo, H.-B.W., Micah Dembo, and Yu-li Wang, Cell Movement Is Guided by the Rigidity of the Substrate. Biophysical Journal July, 2000. 79: p. 144-152.
21. Huang, S. and D.E. Ingber, The structural and mechanical complexity of cell-growth control. Nature cell biology, 1999. 1(5): p. E131-E138.
22. Evans, N.D., et al., Substrate stiffness affects early differentiation events in embryonic stem cells. Eur Cell Mater, 2009. 18(1): p. e13.
23. Eroshenko, N., et al., Effect of substrate stiffness on early human embryonic stem cell differentiation. Journal of biological engineering, 2013. 7(1): p. 1.
24. Van Tam, J.K., et al., Mesenchymal stem cell adhesion but not plasticity is affected by high substrate stiffness. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials, 2016.
25. Chung-Yao Yang, L.-Y.H., Tang-Long Shen, and J. Andrew Yeh, Interactions between Cells and Nanoscale Surfaces of Oxidized Silicon Substrates. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2011. 76.
26. Fu, R.H., et al., Differentiation of stem cells: strategies for modifying surface biomaterials. Cell Transplant, 2011. 20(1): p. 37-47.
27. Genes, N.G., Chondrocyte Adhesion to RGD-bonded Alginate: Effect on Mechanotransduction and Matrix Metabolism: a Dissertation. GSBS Dissertations, 2003: p. 89.
28. Grover, C.N., et al., Crosslinking and composition influence the surface properties, mechanical stiffness and cell reactivity of collagen-based films. Acta biomaterialia, 2012. 8(8): p. 3080-3090.
29. Jagur-Grodzinski, J., Polymers for tissue engineering, medical devices, and regenerative medicine. Concise general review of recent studies. Polymers for advanced technologies, 2006. 17: p. 395-418.
30. Yanzhong Zhang, C.T.L., Seeram Ramakrishna and Zheng-Ming Huang, Recent development of polymer nanofibers for biomedical and biotechnological applications Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Number, 2005. 16, 10, : p. 933-946.
31. K. Anselme, P.D., A.M. Popa, M. Giazzon, M. Liley, L. Ploux, The interaction of cells and bacteria with surfaces structured at the nanometre scale. Acta Biomaterialia 2010. 6: p. 3824-3846.
32. Sangamesh G. Kumbar, S.P.N., Roshan James,Lakshmi S. Nair and Cato T. Laurencinabc, Electrospun Poly(lactic acid-co-glycolic acid) Scaffolds for Skin Tissue Engineering. Biomaterials. , October, 2009: p. 4100-4107.
33. Dalby, M.J., et al., Increasing fibroblast response to materials using nanotopography: morphological and genetic measurements of cell response to 13-nm-high polymer demixed islands. Experimental cell research, 2002. 276(1): p. 1-9.
34. Vincenzo Bucci-Sabattini, M., Alberto Minnici, DDS, Clara Cassinelli, PhD, Alberto Trani, DDS, Paulo G. Coelho, DDS, PhD and David M. Dohan Ehrenfest, DDS, MS, PhD,, Effect of titanium implant surface nanoroughness and calcium phosphate low impregnation on bone cell activity in vitro. Oral and maxillofacial implants, February 2010. 109(2).
35. Jin San Choi, S.J.L., George J. Christ, Anthony Atala, James J. Yoo, The influence of electrospun aligned poly(ɛ-caprolactone)/collagen nanofiber meshes on the formation of self-aligned skeletal muscle myotubes. Biomaterials, July 2008. 29(19): p. 2899-2906.
36. Tabata, Y., Biomaterials Design of Culture Substrates for Cell Research. Inflammation and Regeneration March 2011. 31(2).
37. Pasquale Emanuele Scopelliti, A.B., Marco Indrieri, Luca Giorgetti, Gero and R.C. Bongiorno, Alessandro Podesta, Paolo Milani, The Effect of Surface Nanometre-Scale Morphology on Protein Adsorption. PLoS ONE, July 2010. 5(7).
38. Catherine C. Berry, G.C., Antonio Spadiccino, Mary Robertson, Adam S.G. Curtis, The influence of microscale topography on fibroblast attachment and motility. Biomaterials, November 2004. 25(26): p. 5781-5788.
39. Chen, W., et al., Nanotopography influences adhesion, spreading, and self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells. ACS nano, 2012. 6(5): p. 4094-4103.
40. Teo, B.K.K., et al., Nanotopography modulates mechanotransduction of stem cells and induces differentiation through focal adhesion kinase. Acs Nano, 2013. 7(6): p. 4785-4798.
41. Fiedler, J., et al., The effect of substrate surface nanotopography on the behavior of multipotnent mesenchymal stromal cells and osteoblasts. Biomaterials, 2013. 34(35): p. 8851-8859.
42. Wan, Y., et al., Adhesion and proliferation of OCT-1 osteoblast-like cells on micro- and nano-scale topography structured poly(l-lactide). Biomaterials, 2005. 26(21): p. 4453-4459.
43. Xu Zhang, X.G., Lei Jiang, Xulang Zhang, and Jianhua Qin Nanofiber-modified surface directed cell migration and orientation in microsystem. Biomicrofluidics, 2011. 5.
44. Paul Roach, D.F.a.C.C.P., Surface tailoring for controlled protein adsorption: Effect of topography at the nanometer scale and chemistry. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006. 128(12): p. 3939-3945.
45. Jiang, F.L.a.B., Biomimetic nanocoating promotes osteoblast cell adhesion on biomedical implants. J. Mater. Res., Vol. 23, No. 12, , Dec 2008 23(12).
46. Jost W. Lussi, R.M., Ilya Reviakine, Didier Falconnet , Andreas Goessl , Gabor Csucs , Jeffrey A. Hubbell , Marcus Textor A novel generic platform for chemical patterning of surfaces. Progress in Surface Science 2004. 76: p. 55-69.
47. SANDRA M. LUNA, S.S.S., MANUELA E. GOMES, JOA˜O F. MANO AND RUI L. REIS, Cell Adhesion and Proliferation onto Chitosan-based Membranes Treated by Plasma Surface Modification. Journal of biomaterials applications, July 2011. 26.
48. P.K. Chu , J.Y.C., L.P. Wang , N. Huang, Plasma-surface modification of biomaterials. Materials Science and Engineering R 2002. 36: p. 143-206.
49. Solouk, A., et al., Application of plasma surface modification techniques to improve hemocompatibility of vascular grafts: A review. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry, 2011. 58(5): p. 311-327.
50. Tambe, N.M., Surface Modification Techniques for Polymeric Biomaterials for use as Tissue Engineering Scaffolds, in Textile Chemistry 2011, North Carolina State University: Raleigh, North Carolina.
51. Martin Ja ger, F.S., Marcus Pietzsch, Ru diger Poll, Matthias Rabenau, Surface Modification of Polymers by using Excimer Laser for Biomedical Applications. Plasma Process. Polym. , 2007. 4(416-418).
52. Park, E.J., Development of Photochemical Surface Modification Tehcnique in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. 2011, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: COLUMBIA.
53. J.M. Goddard, J.H.H., Polymer surface modification for the attachment of bioactive compounds. Prog. Polym. Sci. , 2007. 32: p. 698-725.
54. Alexis J. Torres, M.W., David Holowka, and Barbara Baird, Nanobiotechnology and Cell Biology: Micro- and Nanofabricated Surfaces to Investigate ReceptorMediated Signaling. Annu. Rev. Biophys., 2008. 37(265-88).
55. Michael Junkin, S.Ling L., Yongliang Yang, Yi Lu, Justin Volmering, Pak Kin Wong, Plasma Lithography Surface Patterning for Creation of Cell Networks. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 2011. 52.
56. McClary, K.B., T. Ugarova, and D.W. Grainger, Modulating fibroblast adhesion, spreading, and proliferation using self‐assembled monolayer films of alkylthiolates on gold. Journal of biomedical materials research, 2000. 50(3): p. 428-439.
57. Tegoulia, V.A. and S.L. Cooper, Leukocyte adhesion on model surfaces under flow: effects of surface chemistry, protein adsorption, and shear rate. Journal of biomedical materials research, 2000. 50(3): p. 291-301.
58. Luca, A.C., G. Terenghi, and S. Downes, Chemical surface modification of poly‐ε‐caprolactone improves Schwann cell proliferation for peripheral nerve repair. Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2014. 8(2): p. 153-163.
59. Chieh, H.-F., et al., Migration patterns and cell functions of adipose-derived stromal cells on self-assembled monolayers with different functional groups. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, 2013. 24(1): p. 94-117.
60. Kian-Ngiap Chuaa, C.C., Peng-Chou Leeb, Yen-Ni Tangb, Seeram Ramakrishnaa, Kam W. Leongb, Hai-Quan Mao, Surface-aminated electrospun nanofibers enhance adhesion and expansion of human umbilical cord blood hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Biomaterials, December 2006. 27(36): p. 6043-6051.
61. Naganuma, T. and E. Traversa, The effect of cerium valence states at cerium oxide nanoparticle surfaces on cell proliferation. Biomaterials, 2014. 35(15): p. 4441-4453.
62. Yu, X.-L., et al., Different fate of cancer cells on several chemical functional groups. Surface and Coatings Technology, 2013. 228: p. S48-S54.
63. Ayala, R., et al., Engineering the cell-material interface for controlling stem cell adhesion, migration, and differentiation. Biomaterials, 2011. 32(15): p. 3700-11.
64. Esther Rebollar, I.F., Michael Olbrich, Thomas Peterbauer, Steffen Hering, Johannes Preiner, Peter Hinterdorfer, Christoph Romanin, Johannes Heitz, Proliferation of aligned mammalian cells on laser-nanostructured polystyrene. Biomaterials, 2008: p. 1-11.
65. Chang, H.-I. and Y. Wang, Cell responses to surface and architecture of tissue engineering scaffolds. 2011: INTECH Open Access Publisher.
66. Mazaheri, M., O. Akhavan, and A. Simchi, Flexible bactericidal graphene oxide–chitosan layers for stem cell proliferation. Applied Surface Science, 2014. 301: p. 456-462.
67. M. Ben Alia, F.B., J.M. Chovelond, A. Abdelghanib, N. Jaffrezic-Renaultc, M.A. Maarefb, C. Martelete, Use of ultra-thin organic silane films for the improvement of gold adhesion to the silicon dioxide wafers for (bio)sensor applications. Materials Science and Engineering, 1 July 2008. 28(5-6): p. 628-632.
68. Ye, K., et al., Matrix stiffness and nanoscale spatial organization of cell-adhesive ligands direct stem cell fate. Nano letters, 2015. 15(7): p. 4720-4729.
69. Wu, A.T., et al., Enhancing osteogenic differentiation of MC3T3-E1 cells by immobilizing inorganic polyphosphate onto hyaluronic acid hydrogel. Biomacromolecules, 2014. 16(1): p. 166-173.
70. Oikari, L.E., et al., Cell surface heparan sulfate proteoglycans as novel markers of human neural stem cell fate determination. Stem cell research, 2016. 16(1): p. 92-104.
71. Silva, N.A., et al., The effects of peptide modified gellan gum and olfactory ensheathing glia cells on neural stem/progenitor cell fate. Biomaterials, 2012. 33(27): p. 6345-6354.
72. Li, Y.Y., et al., Scaffold composition affects cytoskeleton organization, cell–matrix interaction and the cellular fate of human mesenchymal stem cells upon chondrogenic differentiation. Biomaterials, 2015. 52: p. 208-220.
73. Rajput, D., et al., Cell interaction study method using novel 3D silica nanoneedle gradient arrays. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 2013. 102: p. 111-116.
74. Ferlin, K.M., et al., Influence of 3D Printed Porous Architecture on Mesenchymal Stem Cell Enrichment and Differentiation. Acta Biomaterialia, 2016.
75. Kolf, C.M., et al., Nascent osteoblast matrix inhibits osteogenesis of human mesenchymal stem cells in vitro. Stem cell research & therapy, 2015. 6(1): p. 1-16.
76. Sart, S., S.N. Agathos, and Y. Li, Engineering stem cell fate with biochemical and biomechanical properties of microcarriers. Biotechnology progress, 2013. 29(6): p. 1354-1366.
77. Cai, R., et al., Influence of stepwise chondrogenesis-mimicking 3D extracellular matrix on chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Biomaterials, 2015. 52: p. 199-207.
78. Murphy, C.M., et al., Mesenchymal stem cell fate is regulated by the composition and mechanical properties of collagen–glycosaminoglycan scaffolds. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 2012. 11: p. 53-62.
79. Mehr, N.G., et al., Pore size and LbL chitosan coating influence mesenchymal stem cell in vitro fibrosis and biomineralization in 3D porous poly (epsilon‐caprolactone) scaffolds. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2015. 103(7): p. 2449-2459.
80. Rampichová, M., et al., Elastic three‐dimensional poly (ε‐caprolactone) nanofibre scaffold enhances migration, proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Cell proliferation, 2013. 46(1): p. 23-37.
Downloads
Published
2019-12-08
How to Cite
Hosseinzadeh, S. ., Zarei, Z. ., Esna-ashari, S. ., & Soleimani, M. . (2019). Cell interactions under controlled of surface substrate . The Journal of Applied Tissue Engineering, 3(1), 6–24. https://doi.org/10.22034/JATE.2016.14
Issue
Section
Review Articels
