Engineered cells along with smart scaffolds: critical factors for improving tissue engineering approaches

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

• 1. Davies JA, Cachat E. Synthetic biology meets tissue engineering. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 44(3), 696–701 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 2. Hoffman T, Antovski P, Tebon P et al. Synthetic biology and tissue engineering: toward fabrication of complex and smart cellular constructs. Adv. Funct. Mater. 30(26), 1909882 (2020). • Recent advances in the field of synthetic biology have resulted in powerful and flexible strategies for programming cells with artificial genetic circuits, where cell function and behavior can be controlled.
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 3. O'brien FJ. Biomaterials & scaffolds for tissue engineering. Mater. Today 14(3), 88–95 (2011).
  Google Scholar
• 4. Wang T, Naing MW. The potential role of synthetic biology in manufacturing of regenerative medicine. Presented at: IET/SynbiCITE Engineering Biology Conference. IET Conference, London, UK, 13–15 December 2016.
  Google Scholar
• 5. Savoji H, Mohammadi MH, Rafatian N et al. Cardiovascular disease models: a game changing paradigm in drug discovery and screening. Biomaterials 198, 3–26 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 6. Madry H, Venkatesan JK, Carballo-Pedrares N, Rey-Rico A, Cucchiarini M. Scaffold-mediated gene delivery for osteochondral repair. Pharmaceutics 12(10), 930 (2020).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 7. Jang J-H, Houchin TL, Shea LD. Gene delivery from polymer scaffolds for tissue engineering. Expert Rev. Med. Devices 1(1), 127–138 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 8. Yan X, Chen Y-R, Song Y-F et al. Scaffold-based gene therapeutics for osteochondral tissue engineering. Front. Pharmacol. 10, 1534 (2020).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 9. Jafarlou M, Baradaran B, Saedi T et al. An overview of the history, applications, advantages, disadvantages and prospects of gene therapy. J. Biol. Regul. Homeost. Agents 30(2), 315–321 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 10. Balmayor ER, Van Griensven M. Gene therapy for bone engineering. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 3, 9 (2015).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 11. Hosseinkhani H, Hosseinkhani M, Gabrielson NP, Pack DW, Khademhosseini A, Kobayashi H. DNA nanoparticles encapsulated in 3D tissue-engineered scaffolds enhance osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 85(1), 47–60 (2008).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 12. Bez M, Sheyn D, Tawackoli W et al. In situ bone tissue engineering via ultrasound-mediated gene delivery to endogenous progenitor cells in mini-pigs. Sci. Transl. Med. 9(390), doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aal3128 (2017).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 13. Jiang X, Zhao J, Wang S et al. Mandibular repair in rats with premineralized silk scaffolds and BMP-2-modified bMSCs. Biomaterials 30(27), 4522–4532 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 14. Qing W, Guang-Xing C, Lin G, Liu Y. The osteogenic study of tissue engineering bone with BMP2 and BMP7 gene-modified rat adipose-derived stem cell. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012, 410879 (2012).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 15. Liu X, Bao C, Xu HHK et al. Osteoprotegerin gene-modified BMSCs with hydroxyapatite scaffold for treating critical-sized mandibular defects in ovariectomized osteoporotic rats. Acta Biomater. 42, 378–388 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 16. Liu Z, Yuan X, Fernandes G et al. The combination of nano-calcium sulfate/platelet rich plasma gel scaffold with BMP2 gene-modified mesenchymal stem cells promotes bone regeneration in rat critical-sized calvarial defects. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 8(1), 122 (2017). • In critical-sized bone defects, scaffolds containing BMP2-modified mesenchymal stem cells successfully promote bone regeneration.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 17. Sun XJ, Xia LG, Chou LL et al. Maxillary sinus floor elevation using a tissue engineered bone complex with BMP-2 gene modified bMSCs and a novel porous ceramic scaffold in rabbits. Arch. Oral Biol. 55(3), 195–202 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 18. Wu D-J, Liu S-L, Hao A-H et al. Enhanced repair of segmental bone defects of rats with hVEGF-165 gene-modified endothelial progenitor cells seeded in nanohydroxyapatite/collagen/poly(l-lactic acid) scaffolds. J. Bioact. Compat. Polym. 27(3), 227–243 (2012).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 19. Zhu C, Chang Q, Zou D et al. LvBMP-2 gene-modified BMSCs combined with calcium phosphate cement scaffolds for the repair of calvarial defects in rats. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 22(8), 1965–1973 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 20. Loozen LD, Wegman F, Oner FC, Dhert WJA, Alblas J. Porous bioprinted constructs in BMP-2 non-viral gene therapy for bone tissue engineering. J. Mater. Chem. B 1(48), 6619–6626 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 21. Leng P, Ding CR, Zhang HN, Wang YZ. Reconstruct large osteochondral defects of the knee with hIGF-1 gene enhanced Mosaicplasty. Knee 19(6), 804–811 (2012).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 22. Rowland CR, Glass KA, Ettyreddy AR et al. Regulation of decellularized tissue remodeling via scaffold-mediated lentiviral delivery in anatomically-shaped osteochondral constructs. Biomaterials 177, 161–175 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 23. Raftery RM, Mencia Castano I, Chen G et al. Translating the role of osteogenic-angiogenic coupling in bone formation: highly efficient chitosan-pDNA activated scaffolds can accelerate bone regeneration in critical-sized bone defects. Biomaterials 149, 116–127 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 24. Raftery RM, Mencia-Castano I, Sperger S et al. Delivery of the improved BMP-2-Advanced plasmid DNA within a gene-activated scaffold accelerates mesenchymal stem cell osteogenesis and critical size defect repair. J. Control Rel. 283, 20–31 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 25. Li H, Ji Q, Chen X et al. Accelerated bony defect healing based on chitosan thermosensitive hydrogel scaffolds embedded with chitosan nanoparticles for the delivery of BMP2 plasmid DNA. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 105(1), 265–273 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 26. Keeney M, Chung MT, Zielins ER et al. Scaffold-mediated BMP-2 minicircle DNA delivery accelerated bone repair in a mouse critical-size calvarial defect model. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 104(8), 2099–2107 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 27. Komatsu K, Shibata T, Shimada A et al. Cationized gelatin hydrogels mixed with plasmid DNA induce stronger and more sustained gene expression than atelocollagen at calvarial bone defects in vivo. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 27(5), 419–430 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 28. Gonzalez-Fernandez T, Tierney EG, Cunniffe GM, O'brien FJ, Kelly DJ. Gene delivery of TGF-beta3 and BMP2 in an MSC-laden alginate hydrogel for articular cartilage and endochondral bone tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. Part A 22(9-10), 776–787 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 29. Plonka AB, Khorsand B, Yu N et al. Effect of sustained PDGF nonviral gene delivery on repair of tooth-supporting bone defects. Gene Ther. 24(1), 31–39 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 30. Lee YH, Wu HC, Yeh CW et al. Enzyme-crosslinked gene-activated matrix for the induction of mesenchymal stem cells in osteochondral tissue regeneration. Acta Biomater. 63, 210–226 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 31. Brunger JM, Huynh NP, Guenther CM et al. Scaffold-mediated lentiviral transduction for functional tissue engineering of cartilage. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111(9), E798–E806 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 32. Guo CA, Liu XG, Huo JZ, Jiang C, Wen XJ, Chen ZR. Novel gene-modified-tissue engineering of cartilage using stable transforming growth factor-beta1-transfected mesenchymal stem cells grown on chitosan scaffolds. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 103(6), 547–556 (2007).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 33. Yang S, Qian Z, Liu D, Wen N, Xu J, Guo X. Integration of C-type natriuretic peptide gene-modified bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells with chitosan/silk fibroin scaffolds as a promising strategy for articular cartilage regeneration. Cell Tissue Bank. 20(2), 209–220 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 34. Li B, Li F, Ma L et al. Poly(lactide-co-glycolide)/fibrin gel construct as a 3D model to evaluate gene therapy of cartilage in vivo. Mol. Pharm. 11(7), 2062–2070 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 35. Wang X, Li Y, Han R et al. Demineralized bone matrix combined bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, bone morphogenetic protein-2 and transforming growth factor-beta3 gene promoted pig cartilage defect repair. PLOS ONE 9(12), e116061 (2014).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 36. Cao L, Yang F, Liu G et al. The promotion of cartilage defect repair using adenovirus mediated SOX9 gene transfer of rabbit bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Biomaterials 32(16), 3910–3920 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 37. Li B, Yang J, Ma L, Li F, Tu Z, Gao C. Fabrication of poly(lactide-co-glycolide) scaffold filled with fibrin gel, mesenchymal stem cells, and poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(L-lysine)/TGF-beta1 plasmid DNA complexes for cartilage restoration in vivo. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 101(11), 3097–3108 (2013). • Shows that the synthesized construct has low cytotoxicity and high biocompatibility, making it an effective candidate for cartilage regeneration in vivo.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 38. Lolli A, Narcisi R, Lambertini E et al. Silencing of antichondrogenic microRNA-221 in human mesenchymal stem cells promotes cartilage repair in vivo. Stem Cells 34(7), 1801–1811 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 39. Moutos FT, Glass KA, Compton SA et al. Anatomically shaped tissue-engineered cartilage with tunable and inducible anticytokine delivery for biological joint resurfacing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113(31), E4513–4522 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 40. Griffin DJ, Ortved KF, Nixon AJ, Bonassar LJ. Mechanical properties and structure-function relationships in articular cartilage repaired using IGF-I gene-enhanced chondrocytes. J. Orthop. Res. 34(1), 149–153 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 41. Liang W, Zhu C, Liu F et al. Integrin beta1 gene therapy enhances in vitro creation of tissue-engineered cartilage under periodic mechanical stress. Cell Physiol. Biochem. 37(4), 1301–1314 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 42. Venkatesan JK, Gardner O, Rey-Rico A et al. Improved chondrogenic differentiation of rAAV SOX9-modified human MSCs seeded in fibrin-polyurethane scaffolds in a hydrodynamic environment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 19(9), 2635 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• 43. Venkatesan JK, Moutos FT, Rey-Rico A et al. Chondrogenic differentiation processes in human bone-marrow aspirates seeded in three-dimensional-woven poly(varepsilon-caprolactone) scaffolds enhanced by recombinant adeno-associated virus-mediated SOX9 gene transfer. Hum. Gene Ther. 29(11), 1277–1286 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 44. Lu CH, Yeh TS, Yeh CL et al. Regenerating cartilages by engineered ASCs: prolonged TGF-beta3/BMP-6 expression improved articular cartilage formation and restored zonal structure. Mol. Ther. 22(1), 186–195 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 45. Rey-Rico A, Venkatesan JK, Schmitt G et al. rAAV-mediated overexpression of TGF-beta via vector delivery in polymeric micelles stimulates the biological and reparative activities of human articular chondrocytes in vitro and in a human osteochondral defect model. Int. J. Nanomed. 12, 6985–6996 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 46. He S, Xia T, Wang H, Wei L, Luo X, Li X. Multiple release of polyplexes of plasmids VEGF and bFGF from electrospun fibrous scaffolds towards regeneration of mature blood vessels. Acta Biomater. 8(7), 2659–2669 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 47. Guo R, Xu S, Ma L, Huang A, Gao C. The healing of full-thickness burns treated by using plasmid DNA encoding VEGF-165 activated collagen-chitosan dermal equivalents. Biomaterials 32(4), 1019–1031 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 48. Liu X, Ma L, Liang J, Zhang B, Teng J, Gao C. RNAi functionalized collagen-chitosan/silicone membrane bilayer dermal equivalent for full-thickness skin regeneration with inhibited scarring. Biomaterials 34(8), 2038–2048 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 49. Hu DH, Zhang ZF, Zhang YG et al. A potential skin substitute constructed with hEGF gene modified HaCaT cells for treatment of burn wounds in a rat model. Burns 38(5), 702–712 (2012).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 50. Nelson CE, Gupta MK, Adolph EJ, Guelcher SA, Duvall CL. siRNA delivery from an injectable scaffold for wound therapy. Adv. Wound Care (New Rochelle) 2(3), 93–99 (2013).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 51. Thiersch M, Rimann M, Panagiotopoulou V et al. The angiogenic response to PLL-g-PEG-mediated HIF-1alpha plasmid DNA delivery in healthy and diabetic rats. Biomaterials 34(16), 4173–4182 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 52. De Laporte L, Yan AL, Shea LD. Local gene delivery from ECM-coated poly(lactide-co-glycolide) multiple channel bridges after spinal cord injury. Biomaterials 30(12), 2361–2368 (2009).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 53. De Laporte L, Huang A, Ducommun MM et al. Patterned transgene expression in multiple-channel bridges after spinal cord injury. Acta Biomater. 6(8), 2889–2897 (2010).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 54. Li LM, Huang LL, Jiang XC, Chen JC, Ouyang HW, Gao JQ. Transplantation of BDNF gene recombinant mesenchymal stem cells and adhesive peptide-modified hydrogel scaffold for spinal cord repair. Curr. Gene Ther. 18(1), 29–39 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 55. Li SL, Liu Y, Hui L. Construction of engineering adipose-like tissue in vivo utilizing human insulin gene-modified umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells with silk fibroin 3D scaffolds. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 9(12), E267–275 (2015). • The adenovirus-transfected human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells are compatible with the silk fibroin scaffold, and adenoviral transfection of the human insulin gene can be applied to construct tissue-engineered adipose tissue.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 56. Guan Y, Ou L, Hu G et al. Tissue engineering of urethra using human vascular endothelial growth factor gene-modified bladder urothelial cells. Artif. Organs 32(2), 91–99 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 57. Zhou W, He DQ, Liu JY et al. Angiogenic gene-modified myoblasts promote vascularization during repair of skeletal muscle defects. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 9(12), 1404–1416 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 58. Yang F, Cho SW, Son SM et al. Genetic engineering of human stem cells for enhanced angiogenesis using biodegradable polymeric nanoparticles. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107(8), 3317–3322 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 59. Charpentier E, Doudna JA. Rewriting a genome. Nature 495(7439), 50–51 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 60. Charpentier E, Marraffini LA. Harnessing CRISPR-Cas9 immunity for genetic engineering. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 19, 114–119 (2014). • The authors describe recent advancements for type II CRISPR-Cas immunity and how this research led to revolutionary genome editing applications.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 61. Zhang Y, Heidrich N, Ampattu BJ et al. Processing-independent CRISPR RNAs limit natural transformation in Neisseria meningitidis. Mol. Cell 50(4), 488–503 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 62. Davis B, Farhang N, Bowles R. Use of CRISPR genome-editing technology to promote osteogenic differentiation in human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hAD-MSCs). Presented at: UCUR 2016 (2022). https://epubs.utah.edu/index.php/URJ/article/view/2718 • The current applications of CRISPR-Cas systems in tissue engineering have highlighted tissue architecture construction, disease model development, cell differentiation, and immune response circumvention. Stem cells are excellent cell sources with enormous promise for tissue engineering applications.
  Google Scholar
• 63. Rodrigues LR, Kluskens LD. Synthetic biology & bioinformatics: prospects in the cancer arena. J. Appl. Bioinforma. Comput. Biol. 8, 159–186 (2011).
  Google Scholar
• 64. Evans A, Ratcliffe E. Rising influence of synthetic biology in regenerative medicine. Eng. Biol. 1(1), 24–29 (2017).
  Google Scholar
• 65. Cachat E, Davies J. Application of synthetic biology to regenerative medicine. J. Bioeng. Biomed. Sci. 2(3) doi: 10.4172/2155-9538.S2-003 (2011).
  Google Scholar
• 66. Huang B, Lou Y, Li T et al. Molecular dynamics simulations of adsorption and desorption of bone morphogenetic protein-2 on textured hydroxyapatite surfaces. Acta Biomater. 80, 121–130 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 67. Sarmadi M, Shamloo A, Mohseni M. Utilization of molecular dynamics simulation coupled with experimental assays to optimize biocompatibility of an electrospun PCL/PVA scaffold. PLOS ONE 12(1), e0169451 (2017). • A computational approach that estimates the adhesion of cells to the constructs may be effective for reducing the number of specimens and accelerating the optimization process. This approach is especially useful for composite constructs, which are made up of several polymers and for developing new polymers.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 68. Damasceno PKF, De Santana TA, Santos GC et al. Genetic engineering as a strategy to improve the therapeutic efficacy of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in regenerative medicine. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 8, 737 (2020).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 69. Nie W-B, Zhang D, Wang L-S. Growth factor gene-modified mesenchymal stem cells in tissue regeneration. Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 14, 1241 (2020). • Nonviral vectors (like polymers or lipids) and viral vectors (including retroviruses, lentiviruses, adenoviruses and adeno-associated viruses) have been employed to overexpress genes in cells such as mesenchymal stem cells.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 70. Frenz DA, Liu W, Williams JD et al. Induction of chondrogenesis: requirement for synergistic interaction of basic fibroblast growth factor and transforming growth factor-beta. Development 120(2), 415–424 (1994).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 71. Chen Z, Wei J, Zhu J et al. Chm-1 gene-modified bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells maintain the chondrogenic phenotype of tissue-engineered cartilage. Curr. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 7(1), 1–11 (2016).
  Google Scholar
• 72. Peng H, Wright V, Usas A et al. Synergistic enhancement of bone formation and healing by stem cell-expressed VEGF and bone morphogenetic protein-4. J. Clin. Investig. 110(6), 751–759 (2002).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 73. Huang YC, Kaigler D, Rice KG, Krebsbach PH, Mooney DJ. Combined angiogenic and osteogenic factor delivery enhances bone marrow stromal cell‐driven bone regeneration. J. Bone Miner. Res. 20(5), 848–857 (2005).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 74. Jiang J, Fan C-Y, Zeng B-F. Experimental construction of BMP2 and VEGF gene modified tissue engineering bone in vitro. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 12(3), 1744–1755 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 75. Dai F, Shi D, He W et al. hCTLA4-gene modified human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells as allogeneic seed cells in bone tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. 12(9), 2583–2590 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 76. Deng Y, Zhou H, Yan C et al. In vitro osteogenic induction of bone marrow stromal cells with encapsulated gene-modified bone marrow stromal cells and in vivo implantation for orbital bone repair. Tissue Eng. Part A 20(13-14), 2019–2029 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 77. Dong J-L, Li L-X, Mu W-D et al. Bone regeneration with BMP-2 gene-modified mesenchymal stem cells seeded on nano-hydroxyapatite/collagen/poly (l-lactic Acid) scaffolds. J. Bioact. Compat. Polym. 25(6), 547–566 (2010).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 78. Han Y, Han Y, Pan Y, Chen Y, Chai J. Transplantation of microencapsulated VEGF genetically modified cells improves angiogenesis of implanted xenogeneic acellular dermis on wound. Transplant. Proc. 42, 1935–1943 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 79. Han Y, Tao R, Han Y et al. Microencapsulated VEGF gene–modified umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells promote the vascularization of tissue-engineered dermis: an experimental study. Cytotherapy 16(2), 160–169 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 80. Hong W, Huang M, Wei Y, Wei X. A new and promising application of gene editing: CRISPR-controlled smart materials for tissue engineering, bioelectronics, and diagnostics. Sci. China Life Sci. 62(11), 1547–1549 (2019).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 81. English MA, Soenksen LR, Gayet RV et al. Programmable CRISPR-responsive smart materials. Science 365(6455), 780–785 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 82. Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, Doudna JA, Charpentier E. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337(6096), 816–821 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 83. Armstrong JPK, Stevens MM. Emerging technologies for tissue engineering: from gene editing to personalized medicine. Tissue Eng. Part A 25(9-10), 688–692 (2019).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 84. Ali Q, Malik S, Malik A, Hafeez MN, Salman S. Role of modern technologies in tissue engineering. Arch. Neurosci. 7(1), e90394 (2020).
  Google Scholar
• 85. Bakhshian-Dehkordi E, Safaei M, Fattahi S, Faghani M, Deris F, Chaleshtori MH. The association of VEGF rs833061 and rs2010963 polymorphisms with susceptibility to colorectal cancer in an Iranian population. Cancer Epidemiol. 75, 102041 (2021).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 86. Raftery RM, Walsh DP, Blokpoel Ferreras L et al. Highly versatile cell-penetrating peptide loaded scaffold for efficient and localised gene delivery to multiple cell types: from development to application in tissue engineering. Biomaterials 216, 119277 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 87. Doudna JA, Charpentier E. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science 346(6213), 1258096 (2014).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 88. Polstein LR, Gersbach CA. A light-inducible CRISPR-Cas9 system for control of endogenous gene activation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 11(3), 198–200 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 89. Ablain J, Durand EM, Yang S, Zhou Y, Zon LI. A CRISPR/Cas9 vector system for tissue-specific gene disruption in zebrafish. Dev. Cell 32(6), 756–764 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 90. Chew SY. Sequential drug/gene delivery in tissue engineering & regenerative medicine. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 149–150, 1 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 91. Malek-Khatabi A, Javar HA, Dashtimoghadam E, Ansari S, Hasani-Sadrabadi MM, Moshaverinia A. In situ bone tissue engineering using gene delivery nanocomplexes. Acta Biomater. 108, 326–336 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 92. Park K. Bioink-guided spatio-temporal gene delivery for tissue engineering. J. Control. Rel. 301, 190 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 93. Gonzalez-Fernandez T, Rathan S, Hobbs C et al. Pore-forming bioinks to enable spatio-temporally defined gene delivery in bioprinted tissues. J. Control. Rel. 301, 13–27 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 94. Gonzalez-Fernandez T, Sathy B, Hobbs C et al. Mesenchymal stem cell fate following non-viral gene transfection strongly depends on the choice of delivery vector. Acta Biomater. 55, 226–238 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 95. Curtin CM, Tierney EG, Mcsorley K, Cryan SA, Duffy GP, O'brien FJ. Combinatorial gene therapy accelerates bone regeneration: non‐viral dual delivery of VEGF and BMP2 in a collagen‐nanohydroxyapatite scaffold. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 4(2), 223–227 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 96. Gholami A, Hashemi SA, Yousefi K et al. 3D nanostructures for tissue engineering, cancer therapy, and gene delivery. J. Nanomater. 2020, 1–24 (2020).
  Google Scholar
• 97. Walsh DP, Raftery RM, Murphy R et al. Gene activated scaffolds incorporating star-shaped polypeptide-pDNA nanomedicines accelerate bone tissue regeneration in vivo. Biomater. Sci. 9(14), 4984–4999 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 98. Wu P, Chen H, Jin R et al. Non-viral gene delivery systems for tissue repair and regeneration. J. Transl. Med. 16(1), 29 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 99. Curtin CM, Cunniffe GM, Lyons FG et al. Innovative collagen nano‐hydroxyapatite scaffolds offer a highly efficient non‐viral gene delivery platform for stem cell‐mediated bone formation. Adv. Mater. 24(6), 749–754 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 100. Godbey W, Wu K, Hirasaki G, Mikos A. Improved packing of poly (ethylenimine)/DNA complexes increases transfection efficiency. Gene Ther. 6(8), 1380–1388 (1999).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 101. Kulkarni M, Greiser U, O'brien T, Pandit A. Liposomal gene delivery mediated by tissue-engineered scaffolds. Trends Biotechnol. 28(1), 28–36 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 102. Monteiro N, Ribeiro D, Martins A et al. Instructive nanofibrous scaffold comprising runt-related transcription factor 2 gene delivery for bone tissue engineering. ACS Nano 8(8), 8082–8094 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 103. Abbasi E, Aval SF, Akbarzadeh A et al. Dendrimers: synthesis, applications, and properties. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 9(1), 1–10 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 104. Walsh DP, Heise A, O'brien FJ, Cryan SA. An efficient, non-viral dendritic vector for gene delivery in tissue engineering. Gene Ther. 24(11), 681–691 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 105. Safaei M, Mobini GR, Abiri A, Shojaeian A. Synthetic biology in various cellular and molecular fields: applications, limitations, and perspective. Mol. Biol. Rep. 47(8), 6207–6216 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 106. Hodgkinson CP, Gomez JA, Mirotsou M, Dzau VJ. Genetic engineering of mesenchymal stem cells and its application in human disease therapy. Hum. Gene Ther. 21(11), 1513–1526 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 107. Karlsson M, Weber W, Fussenegger M. De novo design and construction of an inducible gene expression system in mammalian cells. In: Methods in Enzymology. 239–253, Elsevier, USA (2011).
  Google Scholar
• 108. Liu H, Yu X, Li K et al. Photoexcited CRY2 interacts with CIB1 to regulate transcription and floral initiation in Arabidopsis. Science 322(5907), 1535–1539 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 109. Sadelain M, Brentjens R, Rivière I. The basic principles of chimeric antigen receptor design. Cancer Discov. 3(4), 388–398 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 110. Ma Y, Li J, Yao Y, Wei D, Wang R, Wu Q. A controlled double-duration inducible gene expression system for cartilage tissue engineering. Sci. Rep. 6(1), 1–13 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 111. Sakar MS, Neal D, Boudou T et al. Formation and optogenetic control of engineered 3D skeletal muscle bioactuators. Lab Chip 12(23), 4976–4985 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 112. Chan V, Neal DM, Uzel SG, Kim H, Bashir R, Asada HH. Fabrication and characterization of optogenetic, multi-strip cardiac muscles. Lab Chip 15(10), 2258–2268 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 113. Ehrbar M, Schoenmakers R, Christen EH, Fussenegger M, Weber W. Drug-sensing hydrogels for the inducible release of biopharmaceuticals. Nat. Mater. 7(10), 800–804 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 114. Kämpf MM, Christen EH, Ehrbar M et al. A gene therapy technology‐based biomaterial for the trigger‐inducible release of biopharmaceuticals in mice. Adv. Funct. Mater. 20(15), 2534–2538 (2010).
  Google Scholar
• 115. Rajagopal K, Schneider JP. Self-assembling peptides and proteins for nanotechnological applications. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 14(4), 480–486 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 116. Vogel AM, Persson KM, Seamons TR, Deans TL. Synthetic biology for improving cell fate decisions and tissue engineering outcomes. Emerg. Top Life Sci. 3(5), 631–643 (2019).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 117. Shamloo A, Pedram MZ, Heidari H, Alasty A. Computing the blood–brain barrier (BBB) diffusion coefficient: a molecular dynamics approach. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 410, 187–197 (2016).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 118. Ebrahimi S, Ghafoori-Tabrizi K, Rafii-Tabar H. Molecular dynamics simulation of the adhesive behavior of collagen on smooth and randomly rough TiO2 and Al2O3 surfaces. Comput. Mater. Sci. 71, 172–178 (2013).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 119. Raffaini G, Ganazzoli F. Molecular modelling of protein adsorption on the surface of titanium dioxide polymorphs. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. A 370(1963), 1444–1462 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 120. Regis S, Youssefian S, Jassal M, Phaneuf MD, Rahbar N, Bhowmick S. Fibronectin adsorption on functionalized electrospun polycaprolactone scaffolds: experimental and molecular dynamics studies. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 102(6), 1697–1706 (2014).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 121. Gray JJ. The interaction of proteins with solid surfaces. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 14(1), 110–115 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 122. Hlady V, Buijs J. Protein adsorption on solid surfaces. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 7(1), 72–77 (1996).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 123. Marquetti I. Molecular modeling of bone morphogenetic protein for tissue engineering applications. Presented at: Proceedings of the 2018 IISE Annual Conference. 1759–1764 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• 124. Utesch T, Daminelli G, Mroginski MA. Molecular dynamics simulations of the adsorption of bone morphogenetic protein-2 on surfaces with medical relevance. Langmuir 27(21), 13144–13153 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 125. Oliveira A, Gemming S, Seifert G. Molecular dynamics simulations of BMP‐2 adsorption on a hydrophobic surface. Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik 41(12), 1048–1053 (2010).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 126. Mücksch C, Urbassek HM. Adsorption of BMP-2 on a hydrophobic graphite surface: a molecular dynamics study. Chem. Phy. Lett. 510(4-6), 252–256 (2011).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 127. Shen J-W, Wu T, Wang Q, Pan H-H. Molecular simulation of protein adsorption and desorption on hydroxyapatite surfaces. Biomaterials 29(5), 513–532 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 128. Lai ZB, Wang M, Yan C, Oloyede A. Molecular dynamics simulation of mechanical behavior of osteopontin-hydroxyapatite interfaces. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 36, 12–20 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 129. Plow EF, Haas TA, Zhang L, Loftus J, Smith JW. Ligand binding to integrins. J. Biol. Chem. 275(29), 21785–21788 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 130. Reverdatto S, Burz DS, Shekhtman A. Peptide aptamers: development and applications. Curr. Top Med. Chem. 15(12), 1082 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 131. Debaisieux S, Rayne F, Yezid H, Beaumelle B. The ins and outs of HIV-1 Tat. Traffic 13(3), 355–363 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 132. Clima L, Rotara A, Cojocaru C, Pinteala M, Simionescu B. Polymer engineering focusing on DRUG/GENE delivery and tissue engineering. Presented at: 2015 E-Health and Bioengineering Conference (EHB). doi: 10.1109/EHB.2015.7391491, 19–21 November 2015.
  Google Scholar
• 133. Perez JJ, Perez RA, Perez A. Computational modeling as a tool to investigate PPI: from drug design to tissue engineering. Front. Mol. Biosci. 8, 681617 (2021). • A scaffold based on computational methods with the feature of self-assembly peptide can be designed. These self-assembling peptides should contain a sequence capable of self-assembly and a sequence motif that is accessible and recognized via integrin in order to control their behavior.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 134. Zhu J, Zhu J, Negri A et al. Closed headpiece of integrin αIIbβ3 and its complex with an αIIbβ3-specific antagonist that does not induce opening. Blood 116(23), 5050–5059 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 135. Yin H, Slusky JS, Berger BW et al. Computational design of peptides that target transmembrane helices. Science 315(5820), 1817–1822 (2007).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 136. Shandler SJ, Korendovych IV, Moore DT et al. Computational design of a β-peptide that targets transmembrane helices. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133(32), 12378–12381 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 137. Lesch HP, Makkonen K-E, Laitinen A et al. Requirements for baculoviruses for clinical gene therapy applications. J. Invertebr. Pathol 107 S106–S112 (2011).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 138. Segura MM, Garnier A, Durocher Y, Ansorge S, Kamen A. New protocol for lentiviral vector mass production. In: Lentivirus Gene Engineering Protocols. Springer, NJ, USA, 39–52 (2010).
  Google Scholar
• 139. Walther W, Stein U. Viral vectors for gene transfer. Drugs 60(2), 249–271 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 140. Park S-Y, Kim K-H, Kim S, Lee Y-M, Seol Y-J. BMP-2 gene delivery-based bone regeneration in dentistry. Pharmaceutics 11(8), 393 (2019).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 141. Paolini Sguazzi G, Muto V, Tartaglia M, Bertini E, Compagnucci C. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and gene therapy: a new era for the treatment of neurological diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22(24), 13674 (2021).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 142. Johnson MB, March AR, Morsut L. Engineering multicellular systems: using synthetic biology to control tissue self-organization. Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng. 4, 163–173 (2017).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 143. Mitchell SM, Pajovich HT, Broas SM, Hugo MM, Banerjee IA. Molecular dynamics simulations and in vitro studies of hybrid decellularized leaf-peptide-polypyrrole composites for potential tissue engineering applications. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 1–16 (2021).
  Google Scholar
• 144. Kofron MD, Laurencin CT. Bone tissue engineering by gene delivery. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 58(4), 555–576 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 145. Giacca M. Ethical and social problems of gene therapy. In: Gene Therapy Springer, Milano, 283–292 (2010).
  Google Scholar
• 146. Paolini Sguazzi G, Muto V, Tartaglia M, Bertini E, Compagnucci C. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and gene therapy: a new era for the treatment of neurological diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22(24), 13674 (2021).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 147. Trump BD, Cegan JC, Wells E, Keisler J, Linkov I. A critical juncture for synthetic biology: lessons from nanotechnology could inform public discourse and further development of synthetic biology. EMBO Rep. 19(7), e46153 (2018).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 148. Hospital A, Goñi JR, Orozco M, Gelpí JL. Molecular dynamics simulations: advances and applications. Adv. Appl. Bio. Chem. 8, 37 (2015).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar