Dataset Information

Comparative intraindividual proteomic analysis of osteogenic differentiated adipose tissue-derived and bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells reveals integrin expression profile as distinctive feature

ABSTRACT: The treatment of bone defects caused by infection, trauma or neoplasms remains a clinical challenge. Autologous bone transplantation is limited by availability, donor site morbidity and surgical risk factors. This has given rise to stromal/stem-cell based therapy. Bone marrow derived stromal cells (BMSCs) have been studied to a large extent and show high regenerative potential but their use is limited by availability, donor site morbidity and the relatively low cell yield as they represent only <0.1% of cell harvested from bone marrow aspirate. At the same time, they are the closest mesenchymal stromal cells for bone tissue engineering given their tissue origin and, unlike other mesenchymal stromal cells, can support the formation of hematopoietic marrow. Adipose tissue derived stromal cells (ASCs) as part of the stromal vascular fraction of adipose tissue can as well undergo osteogenic differentiation but can be additionally isolated in a sufficient quantity from lipoaspirate after liposuction of abundant subcutaneous fat tissue. Here, it has been shown that there are no major differences in regard to proliferation or differentiation capacity of ASCs derived from subcutaneous fat of different anatomical regions. It has been shown that BMSCs are more prone to senescence during expansion and passage than ASCs and that ageing impacts proliferative capabilities of BMSCs more than that of ASCs while it has also been reported that osteogenic differentiation capacity is least impacted by age. Multiple studies have compared the characteristics of these two mesenchymal stromal cells in regard to bone tissue engineering in vitro. Most studies point to inferior extracellular matrix mineralization and lower expression of key osteogenic transcription markers like Runx2 in osteogenic differentiated ASCs compared to BMSCs. On the other hand, a study by Rath et al. found contrary results using particular culturing conditions like 3D bioglass scaffolds. An intraindividual comparison of human MSCs of three donors cultured on decellularized porcine bone confirmed superior osteogenic capacity of BMSCs compared to ASCs. In contrast to BMSCs, ASCs were not able to induce heterogenic ossification in a mouse model. In a sheep tibia defect model application of BMSCs resulted in a significantly higher amount of newly formed bone tissue. Importantly, Osteogenic differentiated ASCs do not support the formation of a hematopoietic marrow. Proteomics enables large-scale analysis of proteins present in a cell type and can be used to identify differentially regulated key proteins in a comparative approach. A comparative proteomic analysis of BMSCs and ASCs by Roche et al. in 2009 identified 556 proteins with 78% of these not being differentially regulated between these two cell populations, regarded as high similarity. Another comparative proteomic study of 2016 by Jeon et al. found 90 differentially regulated proteins out of 3000 total identified proteins. Both studies do not specify a number of different tissue donors and in part using cell lines. Looking for differences upon osteogenic differentiation, transcriptomic comparison of osteogenic differentiated porcine ASCs and BMSCs has been performed, resulting in 21 differentially expressed genes after 21 days of osteogenic culture conditions. Still, it remains unanswered, which are the key distinctive features of osteogenic differentiated ASCs and BMSCs at protein level that might help address the abovementioned weaknesses of ASCs in bone tissue engineering/regeneration for translational research. To overcome this need, an intraindividual comparative DIA based proteomic analysis of osteogenic differentiated human BMSC and ASCs was performed in this study.

INSTRUMENT(S): Q Exactive HF

ORGANISM(S): Homo Sapiens (human)

TISSUE(S): Stem Cell, Adipose Tissue, Bone Marrow

DISEASE(S): Bone Disease

SUBMITTER: Annika Guntermann

LAB HEAD: Dr. Caroline May

PROVIDER: PXD015223 | Pride | 2021-06-09

REPOSITORIES: Pride

ACCESS DATA

Dataset's files

Source:

Items per page:

1 - 5 of 198

Publications

Comparative proteomic analysis of osteogenic differentiated human adipose tissue and bone marrow-derived stromal cells.

Dadras Mehran M May Caroline C Wagner Johannes Maximilian JM Wallner Christoph C Becerikli Mustafa M Dittfeld Stephanie S Serschnitzki Bettina B Schilde Lukas L Guntermann Annika A Sengstock Christina C Köller Manfred M Seybold Dominik D Geßmann Jan J Schildhauer Thomas Armin TA Lehnhardt Marcus M Marcus Katrin K Behr Björn B

Journal of cellular and molecular medicine 20200903 20

Mesenchymal stromal cells are promising candidates for regenerative applications upon treatment of bone defects. Bone marrow-derived stromal cells (BMSCs) are limited by yield and donor morbidity but show superior osteogenic capacity compared to adipose-derived stromal cells (ASCs), which are highly abundant and easy to harvest. The underlying reasons for this difference on a proteomic level have not been studied yet. Human ASCs and BMSCs were characterized by FACS analysis and tri-lineage diffe ...[more]

PMID: 32885592

Similar Datasets

Project description:We have previously reported that the deficiency of p53 alone or in combination with Rb (Rb-/- p53-/-) in adipose-derived MSCs (ASCs) promotes leiomyosarcoma-like tumors in vivo. Here, we hypothesized that the source of MSCs and/or the cell differentiation stage could determine the phenotype of sarcoma development. To investigate whether there is a link between the source of MSCs and sarcoma phenotype, we generated p53-/- and Rb-/-p53-/- MSCs from bone marrow (BM-MSCs). Both genotypes of BM-MSCs initiated leiomyosarcoma formation similar to p53-/- and Rb-/-p53-/- ASCs. In addition, gene expression profiling revealed a link between p53- or Rb-p53-deficient BM-MSCs and ASCs and muscle-associated sarcomagenesis. These data suggest that the tissue source of MSC does not seem a crucial factor in the development of a particular sarcoma phenotype. To analyze whether the differentiation stage defines the sarcoma phenotype, BM-MSCs and ASCs were induced to differentiate towards the osteogenic lineage, and both p53 and Rb were excised using Cre-expressing adenovectors at different stages along osteogenic differentiation. Regardless of the level of osteogenic commitment, the inactivation of Rb and p53 in BM-MSC-derived, but not in ASC-derived, osteogenic progenitors gave rise to osteosarcoma-like tumors which could be serially transplanted. This indicates that the osteogenic differentiation stage of BM-MSCs imposes the phenotype of in vivo sarcoma development, and that BM-MSC-derived osteogenic progenitors rather than undifferentiated BM-MSCs, undifferentiated ASCs or ASC-derived osteogenic progenitors, represent the cell of origin for osteosarcoma development. To analyse whether the BM-MSC and Fat-MSC (ASC) differentiation stage may define the sarcoma phenotype, RbloxP/loxPp53loxP/loxP BM-MSCs and ASCs were induced to differentiate towards the osteogenic lineage and both Rb and p53 were excised with adenoviral vectors expressing the Cre-recombinase gene (Ad-CMV-Cre) at different stages (day 0 and 10) along osteogenic differentiation. NSG mice were inoculated subcutaneously with 5M-CM-^W10^6 mutant cells. Animals were killed when tumors reached 1 cm3 or 150 days after infusion. Some of the obtained tumors were mechanically disaggregated to establish ex vivo MSC-transformed cell lines. Gene expression analysis was performed using: WT BM-MSCs and ASCs, Rb-/-p53-/- BM-MSCs and ASCs previously differentiated to the osteogenic lineage for 10 days and a tumor cell line derived from p53-/-Rb-/- BM-MSC differentiated to the osteogenic lineage for 10 days.

			Action	DRS
	20190420_123152_ASC-BMSC_.sne	Other
	QExHF0615.raw	Raw
	QExHF0617.raw	Raw
	QExHF06209.raw	Raw
	QExHF0621.raw	Raw