Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:54:44.914Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Time-Dependent Extracellular Matrix Organization and Secretion from Vascular Endothelial Cells due to Macromolecular Crowding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2014

Frances D. Liu ,
Adam S. Zeiger  and
Krystyn J. Van Vliet
Frances D. Liu
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139 Biosystems & Micromechanics Interdisciplinary Research Group (BioSyM), Singapore-MIT Alliance in Research & Technology (SMART), Singapore
Adam S. Zeiger
Affiliation:
Biosystems & Micromechanics Interdisciplinary Research Group (BioSyM), Singapore-MIT Alliance in Research & Technology (SMART), Singapore Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
Krystyn J. Van Vliet
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139 Biosystems & Micromechanics Interdisciplinary Research Group (BioSyM), Singapore-MIT Alliance in Research & Technology (SMART), Singapore Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
Get access

Abstract

Interactions between biological cells and surrounding extracellular matrix (ECM) materials modulate many cell behaviors including adhesion and migration. One key example of this cellmatrix reciprocity is in the context of angiogenesis, the sprouting of new blood vessels from preexisting vasculature. Vascular endothelial cells (VECs) create and remodel the ECM during this process. In vivo, the surrounding fluid environment includes high concentrations of macromolecules, and is considered “crowded” in comparison to in vitro environments. Here, we quantified the amount and organization of collagen IV, a prominent ECM component of VECs, that was produced by these cells over four weeks in vitro in the presence or absence of macromolecular crowder (MMC) nanoparticles that approximated in vivo crowding. In the presence of MMCs, the amount and degree of alignment of collagen IV was greater. This ECM difference emerged within one week and was sustained for over four weeks. We explored the effect of initial cell density (cells/µm2) on this matrix production, to consider potential differences at a wound site versus an intact vessel. Moreover, we found the biophysical effect of MMCs to be unmodulated by secretions from an adjacent cell type in microvessels (pericytes). These results suggest that macromolecular crowding plays a direct role in remodeling the basement membrane, and that such crowding can be induced in vitro to more closely approximate the cell microenvironment.

Keywords

biomaterialbiomimetic (assembly)self-assembly
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1623: Symposium F – Synthetic Tools for Understanding Biological Phenomena , 2014 , mrsf13-1623-f02-10
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Davis, G. E. and Senger, D. R., Circ. Res., vol. 97, no. 11, pp. 1093–107, Nov. 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, L. and Álvarez-Vallina, L., Trends Mol. Med., vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 256–262, Jun. 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. J., Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 114–9, Feb. 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minton, A. P., J. Biol. Chem., vol. 276, no. 14, pp. 10577–80, Apr. 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aukland, K., Kramer, G. C., and Renkin, E. M., Am. J. Physiol., vol. 247, pp. H74–H79, 1984.Google Scholar
Bates, D. O., Levick, J. R., and Mortimer, P. S., Clin. Sci., vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 737–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wadsworth, G. R. and Oliveiro, C. J., Br. Med. J., vol. 2, no. 4846, pp. 1138–1139, 1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van den Berg, B., Wain, R., Dobson, C. M., and Ellis, R. J., EMBO J., vol. 19, no. 15, pp. 3870–5, Aug. 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, C., Saurabh, S., Bruchez, M. P., Schwartz, R., and Leduc, P., Nat. Nanotechnol., vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 602–8, Aug. 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeiger, A. S., Loe, F. C., Li, R., Raghunath, M., and Van Vliet, K. J., PLoS One, vol. 7, no. 5, p. e37904, Jan. 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergers, G. and Song, S., Neuro. Oncol., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 452–64, Oct. 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribatti, D., Nico, B., and Crivellato, E., Int. J. Dev. Biol., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 261–8, Jan. 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutcher, M. E. and Herman, I. M., Microvasc. Res., vol. 77, no. 3, pp. 235–46, May 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar