Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

Silk Proteins Strengthen Tendon Repair and Tissue Regeneration

Researchers at the Terasaki Institute for Biomedical Innovation (TIBI) have turned to a silk protein, silk fibroin (SF), produced by the Bombyx mori silkworm as a biomaterial for tendon repair. The researchers report their method has yielded significant improv

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

Researchers at the Terasaki Institute for Biomedical Innovation (TIBI) have turned to a silk protein, silk fibroin (SF), produced by the Bombyx mori silkworm as a biomaterial for tendon repair. The researchers report their method has yielded significant improvements in mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) tendon regeneration.

Their findings are published in the journal Small in a paper titled, “Co-Electrospun Silk Fibroin and Gelatin Methacryloyl Sheet Seeded with Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Tendon Regeneration.”

SF is a promising biomaterial for tendon repair, but its relatively rigid mechanical properties and low cell affinity have limited its application in regenerative medicine,” wrote the researchers. “Meanwhile, gelatin-based polymers have advantages in cell attachment and tissue remodeling but have insufficient mechanical strength to regenerate tough tissue such as tendons. Taking these aspects into account, in this study, gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) is combined with SF to create a mechanically strong and bioactive nanofibrous scaffold (SG).”

Possible treatments for tendon injuries include tendon tissue grafts from patients or donors, but these pose risks such as infections, transplant rejection, or necrosis. Synthetic transplants have been attempted, but mechanical, biocompatibility, and biodegradation issues have hampered these efforts.

Another approach is to use MSCs. However, treatment methods using systemic infusion, direct injection, or genetic modification of MSCs may result in not targeting specificity to the injury site, prohibitively high cell numbers, or cells that are unable to isolate.

The team first turned to silk fibroin because of its strength, durability, biocompatibility, and bio-degradative qualities.

In order to improve the scaffold’s ability for tissue regeneration, the team next paired silk fibroin with GelMA, a gelatin-based, water-retaining gel, due to GelMA’s biocompatibility, controllable degradation, stiffness, and ability to promote cell attachment and growth.

“The synergistic effects of GelMA’s capacity for supporting regenerative tissue formation and the structural advantages of silk fibroin make our composite material well suited for tendon repair,” said HanJun Kim, PhD, DVM, TIBI’s team leader on the project.

They prepared mixtures with varying ratios of silk fibroin and GelMA (SG) and fabricated them into thin nanofiber sheets. They then tested the sheets for fiber structure and stretchiness and chose an optimum formulation with the best mechanical properties. They also observed that the silk fibroin imparted an increased porosity to the material; this enhances tendon repair.

The MSCs on the SG sheets showed an increase in cell viability and proliferation over those on silk fibroin sheets without GelMA (SF). Genetic analysis showed that relevant gene activity in SG MSCs was significantly increased, in contrast to those on SF sheets, which was decreased.

Further tests on a growth factor secreted by MSCs seeded onto nanofiber sheets showed that the growth factors produced by the MSCs on the SG sheets were best able to repair injured tendon tissue cultivated in a culture dish.

Experiments were also conducted on live rats with injured Achilles tendons.

“Tissue remodeling for tendon repair is especially difficult to achieve,” said Ali Khademhosseini, PhD, TIBI’s director and CEO. “The work done here significantly advances that achievement.”

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
02Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →