Matrix Stiffness and Nanoscale Spatial Organization of Cell-Adhesive Ligands Direct Stem Cell Fate.

One of the breakthroughs in biomaterials and regenerative medicine in the latest decade is the finding that matrix stiffness affords a crucial physical cue of stem cell differentiation. This statement was recently challenged by another understanding that protein tethering on material surfaces instead of matrix stiffness was the essential cue to regulate stem cells. Herein, we employed nonfouling poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) hydrogels as the matrix to prevent nonspecific protein adsorption, and meanwhile covalently bound cell-adhesive arginine-glycine-aspartate (RGD) peptides onto the hydrogel surfaces in the form of well-defined nanoarrays to control specific cell adhesion. This approach enables the decoupling of the effects of matrix stiffness and surface chemistry. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) were cultured on four substrates (two compressive moduli of the PEG hydrogels multiplied by two RGD nanospacings) and incubated in the mixed osteogenic and adipogenic medium. The results illustrate unambiguously that matrix stiffness is a potent regulator of stem cell differentiation. Moreover, we reveal that RGD nanospacing affects spreading area and differentiation of rat MSCs, regardless of the hydrogel stiffness. Therefore, both matrix stiffness and nanoscale spatial organization of cell-adhesive ligands direct stem cell fate.

[1]  Mark Schvartzman,et al.  Nanolithographic control of the spatial organization of cellular adhesion receptors at the single-molecule level. , 2011, Nano letters.

[2]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  The control of human mesenchymal cell differentiation using nanoscale symmetry and disorder. , 2007, Nature materials.

[3]  Jiandong Ding,et al.  Effect of cell anisotropy on differentiation of stem cells on micropatterned surfaces through the controlled single cell adhesion. , 2011, Biomaterials.

[4]  David J. Mooney,et al.  Harnessing Traction-Mediated Manipulation of the Cell-Matrix Interface to Control Stem Cell Fate , 2010, Nature materials.

[5]  Ravi A. Desai,et al.  Mechanical regulation of cell function with geometrically modulated elastomeric substrates , 2010, Nature Methods.

[6]  Nick J. Walters,et al.  Evolving insights in cell-matrix interactions: elucidating how non-soluble properties of the extracellular niche direct stem cell fate. , 2015, Acta biomaterialia.

[7]  B. Nies,et al.  Selective RGD-Mediated Adhesion of Osteoblasts at Surfaces of Implants. , 1999, Angewandte Chemie.

[8]  S. Thrun,et al.  Substrate Elasticity Regulates Skeletal Muscle Stem Cell Self-Renewal in Culture , 2010, Science.

[9]  F. Guilak,et al.  Control of stem cell fate by physical interactions with the extracellular matrix. , 2009, Cell stem cell.

[10]  Kato L. Killops,et al.  Advancements and challenges of patterning biomolecules with sub-50 nm features , 2013 .

[11]  Junmin Lee,et al.  Directing stem cell fate on hydrogel substrates by controlling cell geometry, matrix mechanics and adhesion ligand composition. , 2013, Biomaterials.

[12]  D E Ingber,et al.  Vinculin promotes cell spreading by mechanically coupling integrins to the cytoskeleton. , 1997, Experimental cell research.

[13]  Dennis E Discher,et al.  Material control of stem cell differentiation: challenges in nano-characterization. , 2014, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[14]  Dennis Discher,et al.  Substrate compliance versus ligand density in cell on gel responses. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[15]  J. Spatz,et al.  Combined effects of PEG hydrogel elasticity and cell-adhesive coating on fibroblast adhesion and persistent migration. , 2014, Biomacromolecules.

[16]  B. Geiger,et al.  Environmental sensing through focal adhesions , 2009, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[17]  Alexandra M. Greiner,et al.  Vinculin Regulates the Recruitment and Release of Core Focal Adhesion Proteins in a Force-Dependent Manner , 2013, Current Biology.

[18]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Impact of local versus global ligand density on cellular adhesion. , 2011, Nano letters.

[19]  K. Anseth,et al.  Small functional groups for controlled differentiation of hydrogel-encapsulated human mesenchymal stem cells. , 2008, Nature materials.

[20]  Jiandong Ding,et al.  Effect of RGD nanospacing on differentiation of stem cells. , 2013, Biomaterials.

[21]  Christopher S. Chen,et al.  Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. , 2004, Developmental cell.

[22]  Jian Tang,et al.  The regulation of stem cell differentiation by cell-cell contact on micropatterned material surfaces. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[23]  Nikolaj Gadegaard,et al.  Harnessing nanotopography and integrin-matrix interactions to influence stem cell fate. , 2014, Nature materials.

[24]  R. Lal,et al.  Engineering the cell-material interface for controlling stem cell adhesion, migration, and differentiation. , 2011, Biomaterials.

[25]  M. Sheetz,et al.  Local force and geometry sensing regulate cell functions , 2006, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[26]  David J. Mooney,et al.  Growth Factors, Matrices, and Forces Combine and Control Stem Cells , 2009, Science.

[27]  A. Rowlands,et al.  Directing osteogenic and myogenic differentiation of MSCs: interplay of stiffness and adhesive ligand presentation. , 2008, American journal of physiology. Cell physiology.

[28]  M. Dembo,et al.  Cell movement is guided by the rigidity of the substrate. , 2000, Biophysical journal.

[29]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Polymeric substrates with tunable elasticity and nanoscopically controlled biomolecule presentation. , 2010, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[30]  Shiyu Li,et al.  Fabrication of RGD micro/nanopattern and corresponding study of stem cell differentiation. , 2015, Nano letters.

[31]  Benjamin Geiger,et al.  Induction of cell polarization and migration by a gradient of nanoscale variations in adhesive ligand spacing. , 2008, Nano letters.

[32]  Jinghuan Huang,et al.  Nanostructured interfaces with RGD arrays to control cell–matrix interaction , 2010 .

[33]  Y. Wang,et al.  Cell locomotion and focal adhesions are regulated by substrate flexibility. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  Matthias P. Lutolf,et al.  Designing materials to direct stem-cell fate , 2009, Nature.

[35]  K. Salaita,et al.  Nanoparticle Tension Probes Patterned at the Nanoscale: Impact of Integrin Clustering on Force Transmission , 2014, Nano letters.

[36]  J. Spatz,et al.  Technique of surface modification of a cell-adhesion-resistant hydrogel by a cell-adhesion-available inorganic microarray. , 2008, Biomacromolecules.

[37]  K. Kilian,et al.  Directing stem cell fate by controlling the affinity and density of ligand-receptor interactions at the biomaterials interface. , 2012, Angewandte Chemie.

[38]  Adam J. Engler,et al.  Stiffness Gradients Mimicking In Vivo Tissue Variation Regulate Mesenchymal Stem Cell Fate , 2011, PloS one.

[39]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Lateral spacing of integrin ligands influences cell spreading and focal adhesion assembly. , 2006, European journal of cell biology.

[40]  Zhenhua Li,et al.  Adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells on RGD nanopatterns of varied nanospacings , 2013, Organogenesis.

[41]  Jiandong Ding,et al.  Effects of aspect ratios of stem cells on lineage commitments with and without induction media. , 2013, Biomaterials.

[42]  F. Frischknecht,et al.  Induction of malaria parasite migration by synthetically tunable microenvironments. , 2011, Nano letters.

[43]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Impact of order and disorder in RGD nanopatterns on cell adhesion. , 2009, Nano letters.

[44]  Todd C. McDevitt,et al.  Materials as stem cell regulators. , 2014, Nature materials.

[45]  J. Spatz,et al.  Block Copolymer Micelle Nanolithography , 2003 .

[46]  D. G. T. Strange,et al.  Extracellular-matrix tethering regulates stem-cell fate. , 2012, Nature materials.

[47]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Activation of integrin function by nanopatterned adhesive interfaces. , 2004, Chemphyschem : a European journal of chemical physics and physical chemistry.

[48]  Jiandong Ding,et al.  Effects of surface molecular chirality on adhesion and differentiation of stem cells. , 2013, Biomaterials.

[49]  Fiona M. Watt,et al.  Role of the extracellular matrix in regulating stem cell fate , 2013, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[50]  Yu Suk Choi,et al.  Interplay of Matrix Stiffness and Protein Tethering in Stem Cell Differentiation , 2014, Nature materials.

[51]  Thilo Stehle,et al.  Crystal Structure of the Extracellular Segment of Integrin αVβ3 in Complex with an Arg-Gly-Asp Ligand , 2002, Science.

[52]  Jiandong Ding,et al.  Cell–Material Interactions Revealed Via Material Techniques of Surface Patterning , 2013, Advanced materials.

[53]  P. Janmey,et al.  Tissue Cells Feel and Respond to the Stiffness of Their Substrate , 2005, Science.

[54]  J. Spatz,et al.  Surface Properties of Nanostructured Bio-Active Interfaces: Impacts of Surface Stiffness and Topography on Cell-Surface Interactions. , 2013, RSC advances.

[55]  Andrew W. Holle,et al.  More than a feeling: discovering, understanding, and influencing mechanosensing pathways. , 2011, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[56]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Mimicking cellular environments by nanostructured soft interfaces. , 2007, Nano letters.

[57]  S. Sen,et al.  Matrix Elasticity Directs Stem Cell Lineage Specification , 2006, Cell.

[58]  Jian Tang,et al.  The effect of culture conditions on the adipogenic and osteogenic inductions of mesenchymal stem cells on micropatterned surfaces. , 2012, Biomaterials.

[59]  Molly M. Stevens,et al.  Exploring and exploiting chemistry at the cell surface. , 2011, Nature chemistry.