Loureiro Renata Ruoco, Cristovam Priscila Cardoso, Martins Caio Marques, Covre Joyce Luciana, Sobrinho Juliana Aparecida, Ricardo José Reinaldo da Silva, Hazarbassanov Rossen Myhailov, Höfling-Lima Ana Luisa, Belfort Rubens, Nishi Mauro, Gomes José Álvaro Pereira
Ocular Surface Advanced Center, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Mol Vis. 2013;19:69-77. Epub 2013 Jan 17.
To compare the effectiveness of three culture media for growth, proliferation, differentiation, and viability of ex vivo cultured limbal epithelial progenitor cells.
Limbal epithelial progenitor cell cultures were established from ten human corneal rims and grew on plastic wells in three culture media: supplemental hormonal epithelial medium (SHEM), keratinocyte serum-free medium (KSFM), and Epilife. The performance of culturing limbal epithelial progenitor cells in each medium was evaluated according to the following parameters: growth area of epithelial migration; immunocytochemistry for adenosine 5'-triphosphate-binding cassette member 2 (ABCG2), p63, Ki67, cytokeratin 3 (CK3), and vimentin (VMT) and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for CK3, ABCG2, and p63, and cell viability using Hoechst staining.
Limbal epithelial progenitor cells cultivated in SHEM showed a tendency to faster migration, compared to KSFM and Epilife. Immunocytochemical analysis showed that proliferated cells in the SHEM had lower expression for markers related to progenitor epithelial cells (ABCG2) and putative progenitor cells (p63), and a higher percentage of positive cells for differentiated epithelium (CK3) when compared to KSFM and Epilife. In PCR analysis, ABCG2 expression was statistically higher for Epilife compared to SHEM. Expression of p63 was statistically higher for Epilife compared to SHEM and KSFM. However, CK3 expression was statistically lower for KSFM compared to SHEM.
Based on our findings, we concluded that cells cultured in KSFM and Epilife media presented a higher percentage of limbal epithelial progenitor cells, compared to SHEM.
比较三种培养基对体外培养的角膜缘上皮祖细胞生长、增殖、分化和活力的有效性。
从十个供体角膜缘建立角膜缘上皮祖细胞培养物,并在三种培养基中于塑料培养孔中生长:补充激素的上皮培养基(SHEM)、无血清角质形成细胞培养基(KSFM)和Epilife培养基。根据以下参数评估每种培养基中角膜缘上皮祖细胞的培养性能:上皮迁移的生长面积;三磷酸腺苷结合盒转运体成员2(ABCG2)、p63、Ki67、细胞角蛋白3(CK3)和波形蛋白(VMT)的免疫细胞化学检测,以及CK3、ABCG2和p63的实时逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR),并使用Hoechst染色检测细胞活力。
与KSFM和Epilife相比,在SHEM中培养的角膜缘上皮祖细胞显示出更快的迁移趋势。免疫细胞化学分析表明,与KSFM和Epilife相比,SHEM中增殖的细胞与祖上皮细胞相关标志物(ABCG2)和假定祖细胞(p63)的表达较低,而分化上皮(CK3)的阳性细胞百分比更高。在PCR分析中,与SHEM相比,Epilife中ABCG2的表达在统计学上更高。与SHEM和KSFM相比,Epilife中p63的表达在统计学上更高。然而,与SHEM相比,KSFM中CK3的表达在统计学上更低。
根据我们的研究结果,我们得出结论,与SHEM相比,在KSFM和Epilife培养基中培养的细胞中角膜缘上皮祖细胞的百分比更高。