Isolation and characterisation of human gingival margin-derived STRO-1/MACS(+) and MACS(-) cell populations.
- Author:
Karim M Fawzy EL-SAYED
1
;
Sebastian PARIS
2
;
Christian GRAETZ
3
;
Neemat KASSEM
4
;
Mohamed MEKHEMAR
3
;
Hendrick UNGEFROREN
5
;
Fred FÄNDRICH
5
;
Christof DÖRFER
3
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Base Sequence; Cell Differentiation; Cell Lineage; Cells, Cultured; DNA Primers; Gene Expression Profiling; Gingiva; cytology; metabolism; Humans; Immunomagnetic Separation; methods; Immunophenotyping; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
- From: International Journal of Oral Science 2015;7(2):80-88
- CountryChina
- Language:English
- Abstract: Recently, gingival margin-derived stem/progenitor cells isolated via STRO-1/magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS) showed remarkable periodontal regenerative potential in vivo. As a second-stage investigation, the present study's aim was to perform in vitro characterisation and comparison of the stem/progenitor cell characteristics of sorted STRO-1-positive (MACS⁺) and STRO-1-negative (MACS⁻) cell populations from the human free gingival margin. Cells were isolated from the free gingiva using a minimally invasive technique and were magnetically sorted using anti-STRO-1 antibodies. Subsequently, the MACS⁺ and MACS⁻ cell fractions were characterized by flow cytometry for expression of CD14, CD34, CD45, CD73, CD90, CD105, CD146/MUC18 and STRO-1. Colony-forming unit (CFU) and multilineage differentiation potential were assayed for both cell fractions. Mineralisation marker expression was examined using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). MACS⁺ and MACS(-) cell fractions showed plastic adherence. MACS⁺ cells, in contrast to MACS⁻ cells, showed all of the predefined mesenchymal stem/progenitor cell characteristics and a significantly higher number of CFUs (P<0.01). More than 95% of MACS⁺ cells expressed CD105, CD90 and CD73; lacked the haematopoietic markers CD45, CD34 and CD14, and expressed STRO-1 and CD146/MUC18. MACS⁻ cells showed a different surface marker expression profile, with almost no expression of CD14 or STRO-1, and more than 95% of these cells expressed CD73, CD90 and CD146/MUC18, as well as the haematopoietic markers CD34 and CD45 and CD105. MACS⁺ cells could be differentiated along osteoblastic, adipocytic and chondroblastic lineages. In contrast, MACS⁻ cells demonstrated slight osteogenic potential. Unstimulated MACS⁺ cells showed significantly higher expression of collagen I (P<0.05) and collagen III (P<0.01), whereas MACS⁻ cells demonstrated higher expression of osteonectin (P<0.05; Mann-Whitney). The present study is the first to compare gingival MACS⁺ and MACS⁻ cell populations demonstrating that MACS⁺ cells, in contrast to MACS⁻ cells, harbour stem/progenitor cell characteristics. This study also validates the effectiveness of the STRO-1/MACS⁺ technique for the isolation of gingival stem/progenitor cells. Human free gingival margin-derived STRO-1/MACS⁺ cells are a unique renewable source of multipotent stem/progenitor cells.