In vivo acute and humoral response to three-dimensional porous soy protein scaffolds.

Increasing interest in using soy biomaterials for tissue engineering applications has prompted investigation into the in vivo biocompatibility of soy implants. In this study, the biocompatibility of soy protein scaffolds fabricated using freeze-drying and 3-D printing was assessed using a subcutaneous implant model in BALB/c mice. The main objectives of this study were: (1) to compare soy protein with bovine collagen, a well-characterized natural protein implant, by implanting scaffolds of the same protein weight, and (2) to observe the effects of soy scaffold microstructure and amount of protein loading, which also alters the degradation properties, on the acute and humoral immune responses towards soy. Results showed that freeze-dried soy scaffolds fully degraded after 14 days, whereas collagen scaffolds (of the same protein weight) remained intact for 56 days. Furthermore, Masson's trichrome staining showed little evidence of damage or fibrosis at the soy implant site. Scaffolds of higher soy protein content, however, were still present after 56 days. H&E staining revealed that macrophage infiltration was hindered in the denser bioplotted soy scaffolds, causing slower degradation. Analysis of soy-specific antibodies in mouse serum after implantation revealed levels of IgG1 that correlated with higher scaffold weight and protein density. However, no soy-specific IgE was detected, indicating the absence of an allergic response to the soy implants. These results demonstrate that soy protein could be an acceptable biocompatible implant for tissue regeneration, and that scaffold porosity, soy protein density and scaffold degradation rate significantly affect the acute and humoral immune response.

[1]  K. Faber,et al.  Effect of pyrolyzation temperature on wood-derived carbon and silicon carbide , 2009 .

[2]  Jin-Ye Wang,et al.  In vivo biocompatibility and mechanical properties of porous zein scaffolds. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[3]  R. Reis,et al.  Chitosan improves the biological performance of soy-based biomaterials. , 2010, Tissue engineering. Part A.

[4]  L. Ambrosio,et al.  Soybean-based biomaterials: preparation, properties and tissue regeneration potential , 2008, Expert review of medical devices.

[5]  Ramille N Shah,et al.  Novel soy protein scaffolds for tissue regeneration: Material characterization and interaction with human mesenchymal stem cells. , 2012, Acta biomaterialia.

[6]  J. Cheftel,et al.  Determination of sulfhydryl groups and disulfide bonds in heat-induced gels of soy protein isolate , 1988 .

[7]  Gabriela A Silva,et al.  Natural-origin polymers as carriers and scaffolds for biomolecules and cell delivery in tissue engineering applications. , 2007, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[8]  R. Wood,et al.  The natural history of soy allergy. , 2009, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[9]  M. Zilberman,et al.  Novel soy protein wound dressings with controlled antibiotic release: mechanical and physical properties. , 2012, Acta biomaterialia.

[10]  Xiaomei Wang,et al.  Preparation, Characterization, and In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation of Cellulose/Soy Protein Isolate Composite Sponges , 2010, Journal of biomaterials applications.

[11]  Lorna J. Gibson,et al.  Cellular materials as porous scaffolds for tissue engineering , 2001 .

[12]  S. Brix,et al.  Immune response in mice to ingested soya protein: antibody production, oral tolerance and maternal transfer. , 2004, British Journal of Nutrition.

[13]  M. Subirade,et al.  Kinetics of the breakdown of cross-linked soy protein films for drug delivery. , 2008, Biomaterials.

[14]  M. Zilberman,et al.  Soy protein films for wound‐healing applications: antibiotic release, bacterial inhibition and cellular response , 2013, Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.

[15]  Ramille N Shah,et al.  Three-dimensional printing of soy protein scaffolds for tissue regeneration. , 2013, Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods.

[16]  A. Ogale,et al.  Viscoelastic, Thermal, and Microstructural Characterization of Soy Protein Isolate Films , 2000 .

[17]  R. Reis,et al.  In vitro degradation and cytocompatibility evaluation of novel soy and sodium caseinate-based membrane biomaterials , 2003, Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine.

[18]  G. Charriere,et al.  Tissue reaction to subcutaneous implantation of a collagen sponge. A histological, ultrastructural, and immunological study. , 1990, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[19]  L. Nicolais,et al.  A degradable soybean-based biomaterial used effectively as a bone filler in vivo in a rabbit , 2010, Biomedical materials.

[20]  M. Subirade,et al.  Soy protein cold-set hydrogels as controlled delivery devices for nutraceutical compounds , 2009 .

[21]  L. Nicolais,et al.  A new class of bioactive and biodegradable soybean-based bone fillers. , 2007, Biomacromolecules.

[22]  Moon Suk Kim,et al.  An in vivo study of the host tissue response to subcutaneous implantation of PLGA- and/or porcine small intestinal submucosa-based scaffolds. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[23]  L. Nicolais,et al.  Synthesis and characterization of soybean-based hydrogels with an intrinsic activity on cell differentiation. , 2012, Tissue engineering. Part A.

[24]  Curtis L. Weller,et al.  Edible films and coatings from soy protein , 1993 .

[25]  D. Williams,et al.  Immune response in biocompatibility. , 1992, Biomaterials.

[26]  Rui L. Reis,et al.  In vitro degradation behaviour of biodegradable soy plastics: effects of crosslinking with glyoxal and thermal treatment , 2003 .

[27]  S. Utsumi,et al.  Forces Involved in Soy Protein Gelation: Effects of Various Reagents on the Formation, Hardness and Solubility of Heat-Induced Gels Made from 7S, 11S, and Soy Isolate , 1985 .

[28]  Paul Martin,et al.  Inflammatory cells during wound repair: the good, the bad and the ugly. , 2005, Trends in cell biology.

[29]  S. Husby,et al.  Normal immune responses to ingested foods. , 2000, Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition.

[30]  W. Horwitz,et al.  Official methods of analysis of AOAC International , 2010 .

[31]  F Moussy,et al.  In vivo evaluation of a dexamethasone/PLGA microsphere system designed to suppress the inflammatory tissue response to implantable medical devices. , 2002, Journal of biomedical materials research.