Labeled as promising for bone healing, bioactive glass scaffolds enhance osteogenic differentiation but limit primary cell proliferation.
Alginate-hydroxyapatite (AL) scaffolds modified with fibronectin (FN), or bioactive glass (BGMS10) have recently been characterized for their physicochemical properties and proposed as promising candidates for bone regeneration. Here, we present their first systematic biological evaluation, focusing on adhesion, proliferation, osteogenic differentiation in vitro, and in vivo host response. We compared FN-, BG-, and unmodified AL scaffolds using an immortalized mesenchymal stromal cell line (M-SOD) and primary human bone marrow-derived (BM-MSCs) and adipose-derived stromal cells (ASCs). FN scaffolds enhanced initial adhesion across all cell types and supported proliferation in M-SODs, while primary BM-MSCs and ASCs showed minimal expansion, regardless of scaffold type. BG scaffolds promoted expression of late-stage osteogenic markers in BM-MSCs, consistent with their ion release profile, but had limited impact on ASCs. In vivo subcutaneous implantation of acellular scaffolds in nude mice revealed robust host cell infiltration and extracellular matrix deposition across all scaffold types, confirming biocompatibility and integration. However, vascularization remained limited and did not differ substantially between formulations. Together, these findings highlight a critical discrepancy between immortalized and primary stromal cell response to scaffold cues, underscoring the challenge of sustaining primary cell proliferation in vitro. At the same time, the effective in vivo integration observed across scaffold types emphasizes the importance of host tissue responses for translational evaluation of functional biomaterials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guagnini et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: