Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types

Ashwini Ketkar-Atre,1 Tom Struys,1,2 Stefaan J Soenen,3 Ivo Lambrichts,2 Catherine M Verfaillie,4 Marcel De Cuyper,5 Uwe Himmelreich1 1Biomedical MRI/MoSAIC, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Biomedical Sciences Group, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 2Lab of Histology, Biomedical...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Ketkar-Atre A, Struys T, Soenen SJ, Lambrichts I, Verfaillie CM, De Cuyper M, Himmelreich U
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2013
Materias:	Medicine (General) R5-920
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/83a224ab64ca4f6da9c340e050a8f4d8
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:83a224ab64ca4f6da9c340e050a8f4d8
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:83a224ab64ca4f6da9c340e050a8f4d82021-12-02T00:40:15ZVariability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types1176-91141178-2013https://doaj.org/article/83a224ab64ca4f6da9c340e050a8f4d82013-11-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.dovepress.com/variability-in-contrast-agent-uptake-by-different-but-similar-stem-cel-a15129https://doaj.org/toc/1176-9114https://doaj.org/toc/1178-2013Ashwini Ketkar-Atre,1 Tom Struys,1,2 Stefaan J Soenen,3 Ivo Lambrichts,2 Catherine M Verfaillie,4 Marcel De Cuyper,5 Uwe Himmelreich1 1Biomedical MRI/MoSAIC, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Biomedical Sciences Group, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 2Lab of Histology, Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Campus Diepenbeek, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium; 3Lab for General Biochemistry and Physical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; 4Interdepartmental Stem Cell Institute, O&N IV, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 5Laboratory of BioNanoColloids, Interdisciplinary Research Centre, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kortrijk, Belgium Abstract: The need to track and evaluate the fate of transplanted cells is an important issue in regenerative medicine. In order to accomplish this, pre-labelling cells with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents is a well-established method. Uptake of MRI contrast agents by non-phagocytic stem cells, and factors such as cell homeostasis or the adverse effects of contrast agents on cell biology have been extensively studied, but in the context of nanoparticle (NP)-specific parameters. Here, we have studied three different types of NPs (Endorem®, magnetoliposomes [MLs], and citrate coated C-200) to label relatively larger, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and, much smaller yet faster proliferating, multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs). Both cell types are similar, as they are isolated from bone marrow and have substantial regenerative potential, which make them interesting candidates for comparative experiments. Using NPs with different surface coatings and sizes, we found that differences in the proliferative and morphological characteristics of the cells used in the study are mainly responsible for the fate of endocytosed iron, intracellular iron concentration, and cytotoxic responses. The quantitative analysis, using high-resolution electron microscopy images, demonstrated a strong relationship between cell volume/surface, uptake, and cytotoxicity. Interestingly, uptake and toxicity trends are reversed if intracellular concentrations, and not amounts, are considered. This indicates that more attention should be paid to cellular parameters such as cell size and proliferation rate in comparative cell-labeling studies. Keywords: cell labeling, MR contrast agents, transmission electron microscopy, mesenchymal stem cells, multipotent adult progenitor cells, magnetic resonance imaging, nanoparticles, iron oxideKetkar-Atre AStruys TSoenen SJLambrichts IVerfaillie CMDe Cuyper MHimmelreich UDove Medical PressarticleMedicine (General)R5-920ENInternational Journal of Nanomedicine, Vol 2013, Iss Issue 1, Pp 4577-4591 (2013)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine (General) R5-920
spellingShingle	Medicine (General) R5-920 Ketkar-Atre A Struys T Soenen SJ Lambrichts I Verfaillie CM De Cuyper M Himmelreich U Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
description	Ashwini Ketkar-Atre,1 Tom Struys,1,2 Stefaan J Soenen,3 Ivo Lambrichts,2 Catherine M Verfaillie,4 Marcel De Cuyper,5 Uwe Himmelreich1 1Biomedical MRI/MoSAIC, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Biomedical Sciences Group, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 2Lab of Histology, Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Campus Diepenbeek, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium; 3Lab for General Biochemistry and Physical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; 4Interdepartmental Stem Cell Institute, O&N IV, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 5Laboratory of BioNanoColloids, Interdisciplinary Research Centre, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kortrijk, Belgium Abstract: The need to track and evaluate the fate of transplanted cells is an important issue in regenerative medicine. In order to accomplish this, pre-labelling cells with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents is a well-established method. Uptake of MRI contrast agents by non-phagocytic stem cells, and factors such as cell homeostasis or the adverse effects of contrast agents on cell biology have been extensively studied, but in the context of nanoparticle (NP)-specific parameters. Here, we have studied three different types of NPs (Endorem®, magnetoliposomes [MLs], and citrate coated C-200) to label relatively larger, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and, much smaller yet faster proliferating, multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs). Both cell types are similar, as they are isolated from bone marrow and have substantial regenerative potential, which make them interesting candidates for comparative experiments. Using NPs with different surface coatings and sizes, we found that differences in the proliferative and morphological characteristics of the cells used in the study are mainly responsible for the fate of endocytosed iron, intracellular iron concentration, and cytotoxic responses. The quantitative analysis, using high-resolution electron microscopy images, demonstrated a strong relationship between cell volume/surface, uptake, and cytotoxicity. Interestingly, uptake and toxicity trends are reversed if intracellular concentrations, and not amounts, are considered. This indicates that more attention should be paid to cellular parameters such as cell size and proliferation rate in comparative cell-labeling studies. Keywords: cell labeling, MR contrast agents, transmission electron microscopy, mesenchymal stem cells, multipotent adult progenitor cells, magnetic resonance imaging, nanoparticles, iron oxide
format	article
author	Ketkar-Atre A Struys T Soenen SJ Lambrichts I Verfaillie CM De Cuyper M Himmelreich U
author_facet	Ketkar-Atre A Struys T Soenen SJ Lambrichts I Verfaillie CM De Cuyper M Himmelreich U
author_sort	Ketkar-Atre A
title	Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
title_short	Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
title_full	Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
title_fullStr	Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
title_full_unstemmed	Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
title_sort	variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2013
url	https://doaj.org/article/83a224ab64ca4f6da9c340e050a8f4d8
work_keys_str_mv	AT ketkaratrea variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes AT struyst variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes AT soenensj variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes AT lambrichtsi variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes AT verfailliecm variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes AT decuyperm variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes AT himmelreichu variabilityincontrastagentuptakebydifferentbutsimilarstemcelltypes
_version_	1718403565856227328

Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types

Ejemplares similares