CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 289Mesenchymal stem cell researchBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tissue source determines the differentiation potentials of mesenchymal stem cells: a comparative study of human mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow and adipose tissue

Open access
Xu, Liangliang, Liu, Yamei, Sun, Yuxin, Wang, Bin, Xiong, Yunpu, Lin, Weiping, Wei, Qiushi, Wang, Haibin, He, Wei, Wang, Bin, Li, Gang·2017·Stem Cell Research & Therapy
DOI 10.1186/s13287-017-0716-xPMC PMC5718061
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) possess intrinsic regeneration capacity as part of the repair process in response to injury, such as fracture or other tissue injury. Bone marrow and adipose tissue are the major sources of MSCs. However, which cell type is more effective and suitable for cell therapy remains to be answered. The intrinsic molecular mechanism supporting the assertion has also been lacking. METHODS: Human bone marrow-derived MSCs (BMSCs) and adipose tissue-derived MSCs (ATSCs) were isolated from bone marrow and adipose tissue obtained after total hip arthroplasty. ATSCs and BMSCs were incubated in standard growth medium. Trilineage differentiation including osteogenesis, adipogenesis, and chondrogenesis was performed by addition of relevant induction mediums. The expression levels of trilineage differentiation marker genes were evaluated by quantitative RT-PCR. The methylation status of CpG sites of Runx2, PPARγ, and Sox9 promoters were checked by bisulfite sequencing. In addition, ectopic bone formation and calvarial bone critical defect models were used to evaluate the bone regeneration ability of ATSCs and BMSCs in vivo. RESULTS: The results showed that BMSCs possessed stronger osteogenic and lower adipogenic differentiation potentials compared to ATSCs. There was no significant difference in the chondrogenic differentiation potential. The CpG sites of Runx2 promoter in BMSCs were hypomethylated, while in ATSCs they were hypermethylated. The CpG sites of PPARγ promoter in ATSCs were hypomethylated, while in BMSCs they were hypermethylated. The methylation status of Sox9 promoter in BMSCs was only slightly lower than that in ATSCs. CONCLUSIONS: The epigenetic memory obtained from either bone marrow or adipose tissue favored MSC differentiation along an osteoblastic or adipocytic lineage. The methylation status of the main transcription factors controlling MSC fate contributes to the differential differentiation capacities of different source-derived MSCs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13287-017-0716-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Characterization of cell surface markers of ATSCs and BMSCs. Cell surface markers of ATSCs and BMSCs (both at passage 3) were analyzed using flow cytometry. Antibodies against CD90, CD44, CD73, CD31, and CD45 were used to characterize ATSCs and BMSCs. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cell
Fig. 1 Characterization of cell surface markers of ATSCs and BMSCs. Cell surface markers of ATSCs and BMSCs (both at passage 3) were analyzed using flow cytometry. Antibodies against CD90, CD44, CD73, CD31, and CD45 were used to characterize ATSCs and BMSCs. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cellCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Difference in osteogenesis ability between ATSCs and BMSCs in vitro. a–d Total RNA extracted from ATSCs and BMSCs or cells subjected to OIM for 7 days. Relative expression levels of ALP, Runx2, OPN, and OCN checked by qRT-PCR. β-actin as an internal control. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). *p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in OIM; #p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in α-MEM. e, f Alizarin Red S staining of calcium deposits formed by ATSCs and BMSCs. ATSCs and BMSCs cultured in OIM for 14 days, then cells fixed and stained with Alizarin Red S. ALP: alkaline phosphatase, ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MEM: minimum essential medium, MSC: mesenchymal stem cell, OCN: Osteocalcin, OIM: osteogenic induction medium, OPN: Osteopontin, Runx2: runt-related transcription factor 2
Fig. 2 Difference in osteogenesis ability between ATSCs and BMSCs in vitro. a–d Total RNA extracted from ATSCs and BMSCs or cells subjected to OIM for 7 days. Relative expression levels of ALP, Runx2, OPN, and OCN checked by qRT-PCR. β-actin as an internal control. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). *p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in OIM; #p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in α-MEM. e, f Alizarin Red S staining of calcium deposits formed by ATSCs and BMSCs. ATSCs and BMSCs cultured in OIM for 14 days, then cells fixed and stained with Alizarin Red S. ALP: alkaline phosphatase, ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MEM: minimum essential medium, MSC: mesenchymal stem cell, OCN: Osteocalcin, OIM: osteogenic induction medium, OPN: Osteopontin, Runx2: runt-related transcription factor 2CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Difference of adipogenesis between ATSCs and BMSCs in vitro. a–d Total RNA extracted from ATSCs and BMSCs when cells were subjected to AIM for 7 days. Relative expression levels of PPARγ, CEBPα, AP2, and LPL checked by qRT-PCR. β-actin as an internal control. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). *p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in OIM; #p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in α-MEM. e, f ATSCs and BMSCs cultured in AIM for 21 days, then cells fixed and stained with Oil Red O. AP2 adipocyte protein 2, ATSC adipose tissue-derived MSC, CEBPα CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein alpha, BMSC bone marrow-derived MSC, LPL lipoprotein lipase, MEM minimum essential medium, MSC mesenchymal stem cell, OIM osteogenic induction medium, PPARγ peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma
Fig. 3 Difference of adipogenesis between ATSCs and BMSCs in vitro. a–d Total RNA extracted from ATSCs and BMSCs when cells were subjected to AIM for 7 days. Relative expression levels of PPARγ, CEBPα, AP2, and LPL checked by qRT-PCR. β-actin as an internal control. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). *p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in OIM; #p < 0.05, compared with MSCs in α-MEM. e, f ATSCs and BMSCs cultured in AIM for 21 days, then cells fixed and stained with Oil Red O. AP2 adipocyte protein 2, ATSC adipose tissue-derived MSC, CEBPα CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein alpha, BMSC bone marrow-derived MSC, LPL lipoprotein lipase, MEM minimum essential medium, MSC mesenchymal stem cell, OIM osteogenic induction medium, PPARγ peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gammaCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 DNA methylation status of Runx2 and PPARγ in ATSCs and BMSCs. DNA methylation status of Runx2 (a) and PPARγ (b) promoters in ATSCs and BMSCs were examed using sodium bisulfite sequencing. Top panel indicates CpG dinucleotide position of the Runx2 and PPARγ promoter regions. Each PCR product was subcloned and subjected to nucleotide sequencing analysis. Ten representative sequenced clones depicted by filled (methylated) and open (unmethylated) circles for each CpG site. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cell, PPARγ: peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, Runx2: runt-related transcription factor 2
Fig. 4 DNA methylation status of Runx2 and PPARγ in ATSCs and BMSCs. DNA methylation status of Runx2 (a) and PPARγ (b) promoters in ATSCs and BMSCs were examed using sodium bisulfite sequencing. Top panel indicates CpG dinucleotide position of the Runx2 and PPARγ promoter regions. Each PCR product was subcloned and subjected to nucleotide sequencing analysis. Ten representative sequenced clones depicted by filled (methylated) and open (unmethylated) circles for each CpG site. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cell, PPARγ: peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, Runx2: runt-related transcription factor 2CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 BMSCs showed slightly stronger chondrogenic differentiation potential. a, b Total RNA extracted from ATSCs and BMSCs when cells were subjected to CIM for 10 days. Relative expression levels of Sox9 and Col2 checked by qRT-PCR. β-actin as an internal control. Data expressed as mean ± SD. p < 0.05. c DNA methylation status of Sox9 promoter in ATSCs and BMSCs using sodium bisulfite sequencing. Top panel indicates CpG dinucleotide position of the Sox9 promoter region and numbers show positions of CpGs relative to the translation start site. Each PCR product was subcloned and subjected to nucleotide sequencing analysis. Ten representative sequenced clones depicted by filled (methylated) and open (unmethylated) circles for each CpG site. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, Col2: Collagen type II, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cell
Fig. 5 BMSCs showed slightly stronger chondrogenic differentiation potential. a, b Total RNA extracted from ATSCs and BMSCs when cells were subjected to CIM for 10 days. Relative expression levels of Sox9 and Col2 checked by qRT-PCR. β-actin as an internal control. Data expressed as mean ± SD. p < 0.05. c DNA methylation status of Sox9 promoter in ATSCs and BMSCs using sodium bisulfite sequencing. Top panel indicates CpG dinucleotide position of the Sox9 promoter region and numbers show positions of CpGs relative to the translation start site. Each PCR product was subcloned and subjected to nucleotide sequencing analysis. Ten representative sequenced clones depicted by filled (methylated) and open (unmethylated) circles for each CpG site. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, Col2: Collagen type II, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cellCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 Ectopic bone formation of ATSCs and BMSCs in nude mice. a, ATSCs and BMSCs were loaded onto sterilized porous calcium phosphate restorable granules, then implanted subcutaneously into the dorsal surfaces of nude mice. Transplants were harvested 8 weeks later for histological examination. Sections stained with routine hematoxylin and eosin (HE) and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining with anti-OCN antibody. b, The bone formation area were measured and there were significantly more bone formation in the BMSC group, *p,<0.05. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cells, NB: new bone tissue, OCN: Osteocalcin
Fig. 6 Ectopic bone formation of ATSCs and BMSCs in nude mice. a, ATSCs and BMSCs were loaded onto sterilized porous calcium phosphate restorable granules, then implanted subcutaneously into the dorsal surfaces of nude mice. Transplants were harvested 8 weeks later for histological examination. Sections stained with routine hematoxylin and eosin (HE) and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining with anti-OCN antibody. b, The bone formation area were measured and there were significantly more bone formation in the BMSC group, *p,<0.05. ATSC: adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC: bone marrow-derived MSC, MSC: mesenchymal stem cells, NB: new bone tissue, OCN: OsteocalcinCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 7 ATSCs and BMSCs enhanced calvarial bone repair in nude mice. a X-ray and microCT analysis 3D reconstruction of calvarial bone samples. b MicroCT analysis showed the new bone volume in the BMSC group was significantly increased (*) compared to that of the control group. ATSC adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC bone marrow-derived MSC, CT computed tomography, MSC mesenchymal stem cell
Fig. 7 ATSCs and BMSCs enhanced calvarial bone repair in nude mice. a X-ray and microCT analysis 3D reconstruction of calvarial bone samples. b MicroCT analysis showed the new bone volume in the BMSC group was significantly increased (*) compared to that of the control group. ATSC adipose tissue-derived MSC, BMSC bone marrow-derived MSC, CT computed tomography, MSC mesenchymal stem cellCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 289

Related

Metadata

Authors
Xu, L., Liu, Y., Sun, Y., Wang, B., Xiong, Y., Lin, W., Wei, Q., Wang, H., He, W., Wang, B., & Li, G.
Affiliations
  • Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
  • He, Wei
  • Li, Gang
ORCID
Venue
Stem Cell Research & Therapy
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-12
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
275-275
ISSN
1757-6512 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s13287-017-0716-x
PMC
PMC5718061
OpenAlex
W2773440515
Cited by
284
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 14
FWCI
12.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Stem Cell Research & Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • City University of Hong Kong
  • Lui Che Woo Institute of Innovative Medicine
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (14119115, 81772322, 81430049, 81371946)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong
  • Hong Kong Government
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Mesenchymal stem cell research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Keywords
mesenchymal stem cells, bone marrow-derived stem cells, adipose-derived stem cells, trilineage differentiation, osteogenic differentiation, adipogenesis, chondrogenic differentiation, DNA methylation, Runx2, PPARγ, SOX9, epigenetic memory, bone regeneration, cell therapy
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Bone Marrow Cells, Bone Regeneration, Cell Differentiation, Humans, Organ Specificity, Osteogenesis, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Skull, Biomarkers, Gene Expression, CpG Islands, DNA Methylation, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Chondrogenesis, Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation, PPAR gamma, Adipogenesis, Core Binding Factor Alpha 1 Subunit, SOX9 Transcription Factor, Mesenchymal Stem Cells, Primary Cell Culture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review