Donor Sex and Passage Conditions Influence MSC Osteogenic Response in Mineralized Collagen Scaffolds

Vasiliki Kolliopoulos, Aleczandria Tiffany, Maxwell Polanek, Brendan A. C. Harley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Contemporary tissue engineering efforts often seek to use mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) due to their multi-potent potential and ability to generate a pro-regenerative secretome. While many have reported the influence of matrix environment on MSC osteogenic response, few have investigated the effects of donor and sex. Here, a well-defined mineralized collagen scaffold is used to study the influence of passage number and donor-reported sex on MSC proliferation and osteogenic potential. A library of bone marrow and adipose tissue-derived stem cells from eight donors to examine donor viability in osteogenic capacity in mineralized collagen scaffolds is obtained. MSCs displayed reduced proliferative capacity as a function of passage duration. Further, MSCs showed significant sex-associated variability in osteogenic capacity. Notably, MSCs from male donors displayed significantly higher cell proliferation while MSCs from female donors displayed significantly higher osteogenic response via increased alkaline phosphate activity, osteoprotegerin release, and mineral formation in vitro. The study highlights the essentiality of including donor-reported sex as an experimental variable and reporting culture expansion in future studies of biomaterial regenerative potential.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number2400039
JournalAdvanced Healthcare Materials
DOIs
StateE-pub ahead of print - Jul 22 2024

Keywords

  • bone tissue engineering
  • donor variability
  • mesenchymal stem cells
  • sex variation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biomaterials
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Pharmaceutical Science

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Donor Sex and Passage Conditions Influence MSC Osteogenic Response in Mineralized Collagen Scaffolds'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this