MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3049537661 · doi:10.1097/corr.0000000000001422

Is Use of BMP-2 Associated with Tumor Growth and Osteoblastic Differentiation in Murine Models of Osteosarcoma?

2020· article· en· W3049537661 sur OpenAlexaff
Joseph K. Kendal, Arvind K. Singla, Asmaa Affan, Kurt Hildebrand, Abdullah Al-Ani, Mark Ungrin, Douglas J. Mahoney, Doha Itani, Frank R. Jirik, Michael J. Monument

Notice bibliographique

RevueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Établissements canadiensAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineOsteosarcomaBone morphogenetic protein 2Bone morphogenetic proteinCancer researchPathologyGeneGeneticsIn vitro

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The putative benefit of rhBMP-2 is in the setting of limb reconstruction using structural allografts, whether it be allograft-prosthetic composites, osteoarticular allografts, or intercalary segmental grafts. There are also potential advantages in augmenting osseointegration of uncemented endoprosthetics and in reducing infection. Recombinant human BMP-2 might mitigate nonunion in structural allograft augmented osteosarcoma limb salvage surgery; however, its use is limited because of concerns about the prooncogenic effects of the agent. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) To assess if BMP-2 signaling influences osteosarcoma cell line growth. (2) To characterize degree of osteosarcoma cell line osteoblastic differentiation in response to BMP-2. (3) To assess if BMP-2 signaling has a consistent effect on local or systemic tumor burden in various orthotopic murine models of osteosarcoma. METHODS: In this study, 143b, SaOS-2 and DLM8-M1 osteosarcoma cell lines were transfected with BMP-2 cDNA controlled by a constitutive promoter (experimental) or an empty vector (control) using a PiggyBac transposon system. Cellular proliferation was assessed using a quantitative MTT colorimetric assay. Osteoblastic differentiation was compared between control and experimental cell lines using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction of the osteoblastic markers connective tissue growth factor, Runx-2, Osterix, alkaline phosphatase and osteocalcin. Experimental and control cell lines were injected into the proximal tibia of either NOD-SCID (143b and SaOS-2 xenograft model), or C3H (DLM8-M1 syngeneic model) mice. Local tumor burden was quantitatively assessed using tumor volume caliper measurements and bioluminescence, and qualitatively assessed using post-mortem ex vivo microCT. Lung metastasis was qualitatively assessed by the presence of bioluminescence, and incidence was confirmed using histology. rhBMP-2 soaked absorbable collagen sponges (experimental) and sterile-H2O soaked absorbable collagen sponges (control) were implanted adjacent to 143b proximal tibial cell line injections to compare the effects of exogenous BMP-2 application with endogenous upregulation. RESULTS: Constitutive expression of BMP-2 increased the in vitro proliferation of 143b cells (absorbance values 1.2 ± 0.1 versus 0.89 ± 0.1, mean difference 0.36 [95% CI 0.12 to 0.6]; p = 0.01), but had no effect on SaOS-2 and DLM8-M1 cell proliferation. In response to constitutive BMP-2 expression, 143b cells had no differences in osteoblastic differentiation, while DLM8-M1 cells downregulated the early marker connective tissue growth factor (mean ΔCt 0.2 ± 0.1 versus 0.6 ± 0.1; p = 0.002) and upregulated the early-mid range marker Runx-2 (mean ΔCt -0.8 ± 0.1 versus -1.1 ± 0.1; p = 0.002), and SaOS-2 cells upregulated the mid-range marker Osterix (mean ΔCt -2.1 ± 0.6 versus -3.9 ± 0.6; p = 0.002). Constitutive expression of BMP-2 resulted in greater 143b and DLM8-M1 local tumor volume (143b: 307.2 ± 106.8 mm versus 1316 ± 387.4 mm, mean difference 1009 mm [95% CI 674.5 to 1343]; p < 0.001, DLM8-M1 week four: 0 mm versus 326.1 ± 72.8 mm, mean difference 326.1 mm [95% CI 121.2 to 531]; p = 0.009), but modestly reduced local tumor growth in SaOS-2 (9.5 x 10 ± 8.3x10 photons/s versus 9.3 x 10 ± 1.5 x 10 photons/s, mean difference 8.6 x 10 photons/s [95% CI 5.1 x 10 to 1.2 x 10]; p < 0.001). Application of exogenous rhBMP-2 also increased 143b local tumor volume (495 ± 91.9 mm versus 1335 ± 102.7 mm, mean difference 840.3 mm [95% CI 671.7 to 1009]; p < 0.001). Incidence of lung metastases was not different between experimental or control groups for all experimental conditions. CONCLUSIONS: As demonstrated by others, ectopic BMP-2 signaling has unpredictable effects on local tumor proliferation in murine models of osteosarcoma and does not consistently result in osteosarcoma cell line differentiation. Further investigations into other methods of safe bone and soft tissue healing augmentation and the use of differentiation therapies is warranted. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our results indicate that BMP-2 has the potential to stimulate the growth of osteosarcoma cells that are poorly responsive to BMP-2 mediated osteoblastic differentiation. As this differentiation potential is unpredictable in the clinical setting, BMP-2 may promote the growth of microscopic residual tumor burden after resection. Our study provides further support for the recommendation to avoid the use of BMP-2 after limb-salvage surgery in patients with osteosarcoma.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,611
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,431

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,095
Tête enseignante GPT0,313
Écart entre enseignants0,218 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations19
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueClinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchMême sujetBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsTravaux en français237 207