Wyles Cody C, Houdek Matthew T, Crespo-Diaz Ruben J, Norambuena German A, Stalboerger Paul G, Terzic Andre, Behfar Atta, Sierra Rafael J
Mayo Medical School, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Oct;473(10):3080-90. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4385-8. Epub 2015 Jun 13.
Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (bmMSCs) have been used as a cellular therapeutic option for treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. However, use of bmMSCs as a treatment adjuvant for orthopaedic disorders in general has achieved limited success. Adipose-derived MSCs (aMSCs) may be a more-efficient regenerative cell source given their greater quantity and protection from physiologic stress.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked the following questions in a paired analysis of MSCs from patients with osteonecrosis: (1) Is there a difference in proliferation potential between aMSCs and bmMSCs? (2) Is there a difference in osteogenic differentiation potential between aMSCs and bmMSCs? (3) Are genetic pathways differentially expressed between aMSCs and bmMSCs that may govern functional phenotypic discrepancies?
Periarticular samples of adipose tissue and bone marrow from the femoral canal were obtained from 15 patients undergoing hip replacement for late-stage (Steinberg Stages III-VI) osteonecrosis. MSCs were isolated from both tissue sources and taken through a standardized 20-day cell division protocol to establish cumulative cell count. They also were grown in osteogenic differentiation media for 14 days with subsequent measurement of alkaline phosphatase in units of optical density. RNA was isolated from aMSCs and bmMSCs in five patients to assess differentially expressed genetic pathways using the Affymetrix GeneChip Human Transcriptome Array 2.0 platform.
Proliferation capacity was increased by fourfold in aMSCs compared with bmMSCs after 20 days in culture. The mean difference in cumulative cell count was 3.99 × 10(8) cells (SD = 1.67 × 10(8) cells; 95% CI, 3.07 × 10(8)-4.92 × 10(8) cells; p < 0.001). Bone differentiation efficiency as measured by optical density was increased by 2.25-fold in aMSCs compared with bmMSCs. The mean difference in optical density was 1.27 (SD = 0.34; 95% CI, 1.08-1.46; p < 0.001). RNA transcriptome analysis showed 284 genes that met statistical (p < 0.05) and biological (fold change > 1.5) significance cutoffs for differential expression between cell populations. Subsequent network topology of differentially expressed genes showed alterations in pathways critical for musculoskeletal tissue development in addition to many nonspecific findings.
aMSCs outperform bmMSCs in growth rate and bone differentiation potential in the setting of osteonecrosis, suggesting they may provide a more-potent regenerative therapeutic strategy in this population. Differential expression of genes and cellular pathways highlighted in this study may provide therapeutic targets for cellular optimization or acellular treatment strategies.
aMSCs may provide a more robust cellular therapeutic than bmMSCs for treatment of osteonecrosis. Ideally, a well-designed prospective study will be able to evaluate the efficacy of these cellular therapies side-by-side in patients with bilateral early stage disease.
骨髓间充质干细胞(bmMSCs)已被用作治疗股骨头坏死的一种细胞治疗选择。然而,一般而言,将bmMSCs用作骨科疾病的治疗辅助手段取得的成功有限。鉴于脂肪来源的间充质干细胞(aMSCs)数量更多且能免受生理应激影响,其可能是一种更有效的再生细胞来源。
问题/目的:在对股骨头坏死患者的间充质干细胞进行配对分析时,我们提出了以下问题:(1)aMSCs和bmMSCs的增殖潜能是否存在差异?(2)aMSCs和bmMSCs的成骨分化潜能是否存在差异?(3)aMSCs和bmMSCs之间是否存在可能控制功能表型差异的基因途径差异表达?
从15例因晚期(Steinberg III - VI期)股骨头坏死接受髋关节置换术的患者获取关节周围脂肪组织和股骨髓腔样本。从这两种组织来源中分离出间充质干细胞,并通过标准化的20天细胞分裂方案以确定累积细胞计数。它们还在成骨分化培养基中培养14天,随后以光密度单位测量碱性磷酸酶。从5例患者的aMSCs和bmMSCs中提取RNA,使用Affymetrix GeneChip Human Transcriptome Array 2.0平台评估差异表达的基因途径。
培养20天后,aMSCs的增殖能力相较于bmMSCs提高了四倍。累积细胞计数的平均差异为3.99×10⁸个细胞(标准差 = 1.67×10⁸个细胞;95%置信区间,3.07×10⁸ - 4.92×10⁸个细胞;p < 0.001)。与bmMSCs相比,aMSCs中以光密度测量的骨分化效率提高了2.25倍。光密度的平均差异为1.27(标准差 = 0.34;95%置信区间,1.08 - 1.46;p < 0.001)。RNA转录组分析显示,有284个基因满足细胞群体间差异表达的统计学(p < 0.05)和生物学(倍数变化 > 1.5)显著性阈值。随后对差异表达基因进行的网络拓扑分析显示,除了许多非特异性结果外,对肌肉骨骼组织发育至关重要的途径也发生了改变。
在股骨头坏死的情况下,aMSCs在生长速率和成骨分化潜能方面优于bmMSCs,这表明它们可能为该人群提供一种更有效的再生治疗策略。本研究中突出的基因和细胞途径的差异表达可能为细胞优化或非细胞治疗策略提供治疗靶点。
对于治疗股骨头坏死,aMSCs可能比bmMSCs提供更强大的细胞治疗。理想情况下,一项精心设计的前瞻性研究将能够在双侧早期疾病患者中并排评估这些细胞疗法的疗效。