Advertisement

Gradient Biomaterials and Their Impact on Cell Migration

  • Zhengwei MaoEmail author
  • Shan Yu
  • Tanchen Ren
  • Changyou GaoEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Cell migration participates in a variety of physiological and pathological processes such as embryonic development, cancer metastasis, blood vessel formation and remolding, tissue regeneration, immune surveillance, and inflammation. The cells specifically migrate up along gradually varying concentration (gradient) of soluble signaling factors and/or ligands bound into the extracellular matrix (ECM) in the body during wound healing process. Therefore, regulating cell migration behaviors is of paramount importance in regenerative medicine. A potential solution is to create artificial microenvironments by incorporating physical, chemical, and biological signal gradients within engineered biomaterials. In this chapter, the gradients existing in vivo and their influences on cell migration are firstly described. Recent progress in fabrication of gradient biomaterials is then discussed. The impact of gradient biomaterials on cell responses, especially the cell migration, is discussed, highlighting their potential application in regenerative medicine. The future trends in gradient biomaterials and programmed cell migration in context with tissue regeneration are prospected.

Keywords

Gradient biomaterials Cell migration Material–cell interaction Tissue regeneration Regenerative medicine 

References

  1. 1.
    Godwin, Brockes. Regeneration, tissue injury and the immune response. J Anat. 2006;209:423–32.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jagur-Grodzinski. Polymers for tissue engineering, medical devices, and regenerative medicine. Concise general review of recent studies. Polym Adv Technol. 2006;17:395–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Redd, et al. Imaging macrophage chemotaxis in vivo: studies of microtubule function in zebrafish wound inflammation. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton. 2006;63:415–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cara, et al. Role of p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase in chemokine-induced emigration and chemotaxis in vivo. J Immunol. 2001;167:6552–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cajal. La Rétine des Vertébrés. Cellule. 1892;9:119–257.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Keenan, Folch. Biomolecular gradients in cell culture systems. Lab Chip. 2008;8:34–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Genzer, Bhat. Surface-bound soft matter gradients. Langmuir. 2008;24:2294–317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    DeLong, et al. Covalent immobilization of RGDS on hydrogel surfaces to direct cell alignment and migration. J Control Release. 2005;109:139–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chung, et al. Microfluidic platforms for studies of angiogenesis, cell migration, and cell-cell interactions. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38:1164–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mimura, et al. A novel exogenous concentration-gradient collagen scaffold augments full-thickness articular cartilage repair. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008;16:1083–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singh, et al. Strategies and applications for incorporating physical and chemical signal gradients in tissue engineering. Tissue Eng B-Rev. 2008;14:341–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gunawan, et al. Cell migration and polarity on microfabricated gradients of extracellular matrix proteins. Langmuir. 2006;22:4250–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin. Wound healing – aiming for perfect skin regeneration. Science. 1997;276:75–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bernstein, Liotta. Molecular mediators of interactions with extracellular matrix components in metastasis and angiogenesis. Curr Opin Oncol. 1994;6:106–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ceradini, et al. Progenitor cell trafficking is regulated by hypoxic gradients through HIF-1 induction of SDF-1. Nat Med. 2004;10:858–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tedgui, Mallat. Cytokines in atherosclerosis: pathogenic and regulatory pathways. Physiol Rev. 2006;86:515–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Casscells. Migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells. Critical events in restenosis. Circulation. 1992;86:723–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Galis, et al. Targeted disruption of the matrix metalloproteinase-9 gene impairs smooth muscle cell migration and geometrical arterial remodeling. Circ Res. 2002;91:852–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ahmed, et al. GFP expression in the mammary gland for imaging of mammary tumor cells in transgenic mice. Cancer Res. 2002;62:7166–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ridley AJ, et al. Cell migration: integrating signals from front to back. Science. 2003;302:1704–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Friedl, Weigelin. Interstitial leukocyte migration and immune function. Nat Immunol. 2008;9:960–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ananthakrishnan, Ehrlicher. The forces behind cell movement. Int J Biol Sci. 2007;3:303–17.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Raftopoulou, Hall. Cell migration: Rho GTPases lead the way. Dev Biol. 2004;265:23–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mitchison, Cramer. Actin-based cell motility and cell locomotion. Cell. 1996;84:371–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wu, et al. Controlling the migration behaviors of vascular smooth muscle cells by methoxy poly(ethylene glycol) brushes of different molecular weight and density. Biomaterials. 2012;33:810–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wehrle-Haller, Imhof. Actin, microtubules and focal adhesion dynamics during cell migration. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2003;35:39–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hall. Rho GTPases and the control of cell behaviour. Biochem Soc Trans. 2005;33:891–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wong, et al. Signal transduction in neuronal migration: roles of GTPase activating proteins and the small GTPase Cdc42 in the slit-robo pathway. Cell. 2001;107:209–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Manabe, et al. GIT1 functions in a motile, multi-molecular signaling complex that regulates protrusive activity and cell migration. J Cell Sci. 2002;115:1497–510.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Klemke, et al. Regulation of cell motility by mitogen-activated protein kinase. J Cell Biol. 1997;137:481–92.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cheresh, et al. Regulation of cell contraction and membrane ruffling by distinct signals in migratory cells. J Cell Biol. 1999;146:1107–16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nguyen, et al. Myosin light chain kinase functions downstream of Ras/ERK to promote migration of urokinase-type plasminogen activator-stimulated cells in an integrin-selective manner. J Cell Biol. 1999;146:149–64.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Obermeier, et al. PAK promotes morphological changes by acting upstream of Rac. Embo J. 1998;17:4328–39.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vaughan, Trinkaus. Movements of epithelial cell sheets in vitro. J Cell Sci. 1966;1:407–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Friedl, et al. Collective cell migration in morphogenesis and cancer. Int J Dev Biol. 2004;48:441–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Friedl. Prespecification and plasticity: shifting mechanisms of cell migration. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2004;16:14–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Montell. Morphogenetic cell movements: diversity from modular mechanical properties. Science. 2008;322:1502–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Carmona-Fontaine, et al. Contact inhibition of locomotion in vivo controls neural crest directional migration. Nature. 2008;456:957–61.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Friedl, Wolf. Proteolytic interstitial cell migration: a five-step process. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2009;28:129–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Friedl, Gilmour. Collective cell migration in morphogenesis, regeneration and cancer. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2009;10:445–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lin, et al. Influence of physical properties of biomaterials on cellular behavior. Pharm Res. 2011;28:1422–30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tampieri, et al. Porosity-graded hydroxyapatite ceramics to replace natural bone. Biomaterials. 2001;22:1365–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Karageorgiou, Kaplan. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials. 2005;26:5474–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cullinane, Einhorn. Biomechanics of bone. Princ Bone Biol. 2002;1:17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ho, et al. The tooth attachment mechanism defined by structure, chemical composition and mechanical properties of collagen fibers in the periodontium. Biomaterials. 2007;28:5238–45.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lange, Fabry. Cell and tissue mechanics in cell migration. Exp Cell Res. 2013;319:2418–23.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lo, et al. Cell movement is guided by the rigidity of the substrate. Biophys J. 2000;79:144–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang, et al. Mechanotransduction across the cell-surface and through the cytoskeleton. Science. 1993;260:1124–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Choquet, et al. Extracellular matrix rigidity causes strengthening of integrin-cytoskeleton linkages. Cell. 1997;88:39–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sheetz, et al. Cell migration: regulation of force on extracellular-matrix-integrin complexes. Trends Cell Biol. 1998;8:51–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lee, et al. Regulation of cell movement is mediated by stretch-activated calcium channels. Nature. 1999;400:382–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pelham, Wang. High resolution detection of mechanical forces exerted by locomoting fibroblasts on the substrate. Mol Biol Cell. 1999;10:935–45.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Breckenridge, et al. Substrates with engineered step changes in rigidity induce traction force polarity and durotaxis. Cel Mol Bioeng. 2014;7:26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Myers, et al. Bmp activity gradient regulates convergent extension during zebrafish gastrulation. Dev Biol. 2002;243:81–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Jones, Smith. Establishment of a BMP-4 morphogen gradient by long-range inhibition. Dev Biol. 1998;194:12–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Piccolo, et al. The head inducer Cerberus is a multifunctional antagonist of nodal, BMP and Wnt signals. Nature. 1999;397:707–10.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Isbister, et al. Gradient steepness influences the pathfinding decisions of neuronal growth cones in vivo. J Neurosci. 2003;23:193–202.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Zhou, et al. Nutrient gradients in engineered cartilage: metabolic kinetics measurement and mass transfer modeling. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2008;101:408–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Swartz, Fleury. Interstitial flow and its effects in soft tissues. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2007;9:229–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Luhmann, Hall. Cell guidance by 3D-gradients in hydrogel matrices: importance for biomedical applications. Materials. 2009;2:1058–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kim, Wu. Microfluidics for mammalian cell chemotaxis. Ann Biomed Eng. 2012;40:1316–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Roussos, et al. Chemotaxis in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;11:573–87.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Herzmark, et al. Bound attractant at the leading vs. the trailing edge determines chemotactic prowess. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:13349–54.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Servant, et al. Polarization of chemoattractant receptor signaling during neutrophil chemotaxis. Science. 2000;287:1037–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Haessler, et al. Dendritic cell chemotaxis in 3D under defined chemokine gradients reveals differential response to ligands CCL21 and CCL19. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108:5614–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Carmeliet, Jain. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature. 2000;407:249–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Choi, et al. Phosphorescent nanoparticles for quantitative measurements of oxygen profiles in vitro and in vivo. Biomaterials. 2012;33:2710–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Helmlinger, et al. Interstitial pH and pO(2) gradients in solid tumors in vivo: high-resolution measurements reveal a lack of correlation. Nat Med. 1997;3:177–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Verbridge, et al. Oxygen-controlled three-dimensional cultures to analyze tumor angiogenesis. Tissue Eng Part A. 2010;16:2133–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Paradise, et al. Directional cell migration in an extracellular pH gradient: a model study with an engineered cell line and primary microvascular endothelial cells. Exp Cell Res. 2013;319:487–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Ruhrberg, et al. Spatially restricted patterning cues provided by heparin-binding VEGF-A control blood vessel branching morphogenesis. Genes Dev. 2002;16:2684–98.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Ito, et al. The movement of a water droplet on a gradient surface prepared by photodegradation. Langmuir. 2007;23:1845–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Singer, Kupfer. The directed migration of eukaryotic cells. Annu Rev Cell Biol. 1986;2:337–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Lauffenburger, Horwitz. Cell migration: a physically integrated molecular process. Cell. 1996;84:359–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sullivan, et al. Asymmetric distribution of the chemotactic peptide receptor on polymorphonuclear leukocytes. J Cell Biol. 1984;99:1461–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Chan, Yousaf. A photo-electroactive surface strategy for immobilizing ligands in patterns and gradients for studies of cell polarization. Mol Biosyst. 2008;4:746–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Arnold, et al. Induction of cell polarization and migration by a gradient of nanoscale variations in adhesive ligand spacing. Nano Lett. 2008;8:2063–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hirschfeld-Warneken, et al. Cell adhesion and polarisation on molecularly defined spacing gradient surfaces of cyclic RGDfK peptide patches. Eur J Cell Biol. 2008;87:743–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Smith, et al. Directed cell migration on fibronectin gradients: effect of gradient slope. Exp Cell Res. 2006;312:2424–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Tu, Tirrell. Bottom-up design of biomimetic assemblies. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2004;56:1537–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Morgenthaler, et al. Surface-chemical and -morphological gradients. Soft Matter. 2008;4:419–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Wang, et al. Tunable wettability and rewritable wettability gradient from superhydrophilicity to superhydrophobicity. Langmuir. 2010;26:12203–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Riepl, et al. Molecular gradients: an efficient approach for optimizing the surface properties of biomaterials and biochips. Langmuir. 2005;21:1042–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Dertinger, et al. Generation of gradients having complex shapes using microfluidic networks. Anal Chem. 2001;73:1240–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Kraus, et al. Printing chemical gradients. Langmuir. 2005;21:7796–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Choi, Newby. Micrometer-scaled gradient surfaces generated using contact printing of octadecyltrichlorosilane. Langmuir. 2003;19:7427–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Tomlinson, Genzer. Formation of grafted macromolecular assemblies with a gradual variation of molecular weight on solid substrates. Macromolecules. 2003;36:3449–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Matyjaszewski, et al. Polymers at interfaces: using atom transfer radical polymerization in the controlled growth of homopolymers and block copolymers from silicon surfaces in the absence of untethered sacrificial initiator. Macromolecules. 1999;32:8716–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Li, et al. Fabrication of thermoresponsive polymer gradients for study of cell adhesion and detachment. Langmuir. 2008;24:13632–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Venkataraman, et al. Order and composition of methyl-carboxyl and methyl-hydroxyl surface-chemical gradients. Langmuir. 2006;22:4184–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Yu, et al. Surface gradient material: from superhydrophobicity to superhydrophilicity. Langmuir. 2006;22:4483–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Morgenthaler, et al. A simple, reproducible approach to the preparation of surface-chemical gradients. Langmuir. 2003;19:10459–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Chaudhury, Whitesides. How to make water run uphill. Science. 1992;256:1539–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Zhao. A combinatorial approach to study solvent-induced self-assembly of mixed poly(methyl methacrylate)/polystyrene brushes on planar silica substrates: effect of relative grafting density. Langmuir. 2004;20:11748–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Wu, et al. Combinatorial study of the mushroom-to-brush crossover in surface anchored polyacrylamide. J Am Chem Soc. 2002;124:9394–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Genzer, et al. Formation mechanisms and properties of semifluorinated molecular gradients on silica surfaces. Langmuir. 2006;22:8532–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Liedberg, Tengvall. Molecular gradients of omega-substituted alkanethiols on gold – preparation and characterization. Langmuir. 1995;11:3821–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Mougin, et al. Construction of a tethered poly(ethylene glycol) surface gradient for studies of cell adhesion kinetics. Langmuir. 2005;21:4809–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Karpiak, et al. Density gradient multilayer polymerization for creating complex tissue. Adv Mater. 2012;24:1466–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Claussen, et al. Learning from nature: synthesis and characterization of longitudinal polymer gradient materials inspired by mussel byssus threads. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2012;33:206–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Cai, et al. Lubricated biodegradable polymer networks for regulating nerve cell behavior and fabricating nerve conduits with a compositional gradient. Biomacromolecules. 2012;13:358–68.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Irimia, et al. Universal microfluidic gradient generator. Anal Chem. 2006;78:3472–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Zaari, et al. Photopolymerization in microfluidic gradient generators: microscale control of substrate compliance to manipulate cell response. Adv Mater. 2004;16:2133–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Chiu, et al. Patterned deposition of cells and proteins onto surfaces by using three-dimensional microfluidic systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000;97:2408–13.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Wigenius, et al. Limits to nanopatterning of fluids on surfaces in soft lithography. Adv Funct Mater. 2008;18:2563–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Childs, Nuzzo. Decal transfer microlithography: a new soft-lithographic patterning method. J Am Chem Soc. 2002;124:13583–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Wang, et al. Metal transfer printing and its application in organic field-effect transistor fabrication. Adv Mater. 2003;15:1009–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Bhangale, et al. Biologically active protein gradients via microstamping. Adv Mater. 2005;17:809–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Jeon, et al. Structure and stability of patterned self-assembled films of octadecyltrichlorosilane formed by contact printing. Langmuir. 1997;13:3382–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Lang, et al. Growth cone response to ephrin gradients produced by microfluidic networks. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2008;390:809–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Liu, et al. Programming nanostructures of polymer brushes by dip-pen nanodisplacement lithography (DNL). Nanoscale. 2010;2:2614–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Zhou, et al. Fabrication of arbitrary three-dimensional polymer structures by rational control of the spacing between nanobrushes. Angew Chem-Int Ed. 2011;50:6506–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Righetti, Bossi. Isoelectric focusing in immobilized pH gradients: an update. J Chromatogr B. 1997;699:77–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Venkateswar, et al. An electrophoretic method for microstamping biomolecule gradients. Biomed Microdevices. 2000;2:255–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Plummer, et al. Electrochemically derived gradients of the extracellular matrix protein fibronectin on gold. Langmuir. 2003;19:7528–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Spijker, et al. Protein adsorption on gradient surfaces on polyethylene prepared in a shielded gas plasma. Colloids Surf B-Biointerfaces. 1999;15:89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Shin, et al. Adhesion comparison of human bone marrow stem cells on a gradient wettable surface prepared by corona treatment. Appl Surf Sci. 2008;255:293–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Blondiaux, et al. Fabrication of multiscale surface-chemical gradients by means of photocatalytic lithography. Langmuir. 2007;23:3489–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Mangindaan, et al. Experimental and numerical modeling of the controllable wettability gradient on poly(propylene) created by SF6 plasma. Plasma Processes Polym. 2010;7:754–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Pitt. Fabrication of a continuous wettability gradient by radio-frequency plasma discharge. J Colloid Interface Sci. 1989;133:223–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Golander, Pitt. Characterization of hydrophobicity gradients prepared by means of radio-frequency plasma discharge. Biomaterials. 1990;11:32–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Whittle, et al. A method for the deposition of controllable chemical gradients. Chem Commun. 2003;9:1766–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Lee, et al. Interaction of different types of cells on polymer surfaces with wettability gradient. J Colloid Interface Sci. 1998;205:323–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Lee, et al. Platelet adhesion onto chargeable functional group gradient surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;40:180–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Khang, et al. The effect of fluid shear stress on endothelial cell adhesiveness to modified polyurethane surfaces. Korea Polym J. 2000;8:179–85.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Kim, et al. Gradient polymer surfaces for biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci. 2008;33:138–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Lee, Lee. A wettability gradient as a tool to study protein adsorption and cell-adhesion on polymer surfaces. J Biomater Sci-Polym Ed. 1993;4:467–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Kim, et al. First preparation of biotinylated gradient polyethylene surface to bind photoactive caged streptavidin. Langmuir. 2005;21:4066–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Lee, et al. Preparation and characterization of functional-group gradient surfaces. J Polym Sci A-Polym Chem. 1994;32:1569–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Gijsman, et al. Comparison of the UV-degradation chemistry of polypropylene, polyethylene, polyamide 6 and polybutylene terephthalate. Polym Degrad Stab. 1999;65:433–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Li, et al. A technique for preparing protein gradients on polymeric surfaces: effects on PC12 pheochromocytoma cells. Biomaterials. 2005;26:1487–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Li, et al. Influence of carboxyl group density on neuron cell attachment and differentiation behavior: gradient-guided neurite outgrowth. Biomaterials. 2005;26:4956–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Ding, et al. Spatial variation of the charge and sulfur oxidation state in a surface gradient affects plasma protein adsorption. Langmuir. 2010;26:12140–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Zhu, et al. Immobilization of biomacromolecules onto aminolyzed poly(L-lactic acid) toward acceleration of endothelium regeneration. Tissue Eng. 2004;10:53–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Zhu, et al. Endothelium regeneration on luminal surface of polyurethane vascular scaffold modified with diamine and covalently grafted with gelatin. Biomaterials. 2004;25:423–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Zhu, et al. Endothelial cell functions in vitro cultured on poly(L-lactic acid) membranes modified with different methods. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2004;69A:436–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Li, et al. PCL film surfaces conjugated with P(DMAEMA)/gelatin complexes for improving cell immobilization and gene transfection. Bioconjug Chem. 2011;22:1842–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Uedayukoshi, Matsuda. Cellular-responses on a wettability gradient surface with continuous variations in surface compositions of carbonate and hydroxyl-groups. Langmuir. 1995;11:4135–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Tan, et al. Microscale control over collagen gradient on poly(L-lactide) membrane surface for manipulating chondrocyte distribution. Colloids Surf B-Biointerfaces. 2008;67:210–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Wu, et al. Covalently immobilized gelatin gradients within three-dimensional porous scaffolds. Chin Sci Bull. 2009;54:3174–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Han, et al. Modulating the structure and properties of poly(sodium 4-styrenesulfonate)/poly(diallyldimethylammonium chloride) multilayers with concentrated salt solutions. Langmuir. 2012;28:193–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Kunzler, et al. Systematic study of osteoblast and fibroblast response to roughness by means of surface-morphology gradients. Biomaterials. 2007;28:2175–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Han, et al. Directional cell migration through cell-cell interaction on polyelectrolyte multilayers with swelling gradients. Biomaterials. 2013;34:975–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Roy, et al. Performance of degradable composite bone repair products made via three-dimensional fabrication techniques. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003;66A:283–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Woodfield, et al. Polymer scaffolds fabricated with pore-size gradients as a model for studying the zonal organization within tissue-engineered cartilage constructs. Tissue Eng. 2005;11:1297–311.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Oh, et al. In vitro and in vivo characteristics of PCL scaffolds with pore size gradient fabricated by a centrifugation method. Biomaterials. 2007;28:1664–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Meredith. Advances in combinatorial and high-throughput screening of biofunctional polymers for gene delivery, tissue engineering and anti-fouling coatings. J Mater Chem. 2009;19:34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Meredith, et al. Combinatorial characterization of cell interactions with polymer surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003;66A:483–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Sormana, Meredith. High-throughput discovery of structure-mechanical property relationships for segmented poly(urethane-urea)s. Macromolecules. 2004;37:2186–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    DeLong, et al. Covalently immobilized gradients of bFGF on hydrogel scaffolds for directed cell migration. Biomaterials. 2005;26:3227–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Kapur, Shoichet. Immobilized concentration gradients of nerve growth factor guide neurite outgrowth. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2004;68A:235–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Wong, et al. Partitioning microfluidic channels with hydrogel to construct tunable 3-D cellular microenvironments. Biomaterials. 2008;29:1853–61.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Guarnieri, et al. Engineering of covalently immobilized gradients of RGD peptides on hydrogel scaffolds: effect on cell behaviour. Macromol Symp. 2008;266:36–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Luo, Shoichet. A photolabile hydrogel for guided three-dimensional cell growth and migration. Nat Mater. 2004;3:249–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Wong, et al. Directed movement of vascular smooth muscle cells on gradient-compliant hydrogels. Langmuir. 2003;19:1908–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Hansen, et al. Fabrication of arrays of polymer gradients using inkjet printing. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2012;33:1114–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Oh, et al. Creating growth factor gradients in three dimensional porous matrix by centrifugation and surface immobilization. Biomaterials. 2011;32:8254–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Barry, et al. Using a core-sheath distribution of surface chemistry through 3D tissue engineering scaffolds to control cell ingress. Adv Mater. 2006;18:1406–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Macner, et al. Condensation on surface energy gradient shifts drop size distribution toward small drops. Langmuir. 2014;30:1788–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Hernandez, et al. Chemical gradients on graphene to drive droplet motion. ACS Nano. 2013;7:4746–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Maheshwari, et al. Cell adhesion and motility depend on nanoscale RGD clustering. J Cell Sci. 2000;113:1677–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Bhat, et al. Tailoring cell adhesion using surface-grafted polymer gradient assemblies. Adv Mater. 2005;17:2802–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Borkenhagen, et al. Three-dimensional extracellular matrix engineering in the nervous system. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;40:392–400.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Pelham, Wang. Cell locomotion and focal adhesions are regulated by substrate flexibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94:13661–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Cheung, et al. Microscale control of stiffness in a cell-adhesive substrate using microfluidics-based lithography. Angew Chem-Int Ed. 2009;48:7188–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Hopp, et al. The influence of substrate stiffness gradients on primary human dermal fibroblasts. Biomaterials. 2013;34:5070–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Liang, et al. Dynamic changes in focal adhesion kinase during cell migration induced by bFGF and the significance. Sheng Li Xue Bao: [Acta Physiologica Sinica]. 2004;56:509–14.Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Martinez, et al. Cell durotaxis on polyelectrolyte multilayers with photogenerated gradients of modulus. Biomacromolecules. 2013;14:1311–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Kuo, et al. Complex stiffness gradient substrates for studying mechanotactic cell migration. Adv Mater. 2012;24:6059–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Wang, et al. Focal adhesion kinase is involved in mechanosensing during fibroblast migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98:11295–300.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Kim, et al. Mechanosensitivity of fibroblast cell shape and movement to anisotropic substratum topography gradients. Biomaterials. 2009;30:5433–44.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Kim, et al. Guided cell migration on microtextured substrates with variable local density and anisotropy. Adv Funct Mater. 2009;19:1579–86.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Mak, et al. Microfabricated physical spatial gradients for investigating cell migration and invasion dynamics. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e20825.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Han, et al. Unidirectional migration of single smooth muscle cells under the synergetic effects of gradient swelling cue and parallel groove patterns. Colloids Surf B-Biointerfaces. 2013;111:1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Han, et al. Polyelectrolyte multilayer patterns created by capillary force and their impact on cell migration. Chin J Chem. 2014;32:66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Peret, Murphy. Controllable soluble protein concentration gradients in hydrogel networks. Adv Funct Mater. 2008;18:3410–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. 177.
    Zelzer, et al. Investigation of cell-surface interactions using chemical gradients formed from plasma polymers. Biomaterials. 2008;29:172–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Ren, et al. Directional migration of vascular smooth muscle cells guided by a molecule weight gradient of poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) brushes. Langmuir. 2013;29:6386–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Zhu, Evans. Analysis of the roles of RGD-binding integrins, alpha(4)/alpha(9) integrins, alpha(6) integrins, and CD9 in the interaction of the fertilin beta (ADAM2) disintegrin domain with the mouse egg membrane. Biol Reprod. 2002;66:1193–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Chan, et al. In vitro and in vivo consequences of Vla-2 expression on rhabdomyosarcoma cells. Science. 1991;251:1600–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Rajagopalan, et al. Direct comparison of the spread area, contractility, and migration of balb/c 3T3 fibroblasts adhered to fibronectin- and RGD-modified substrata. Biophys J. 2004;87:2818–27.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Smith, et al. Measurement of cell migration on surface-bound fibronectin gradients. Langmuir. 2004;20:8279–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. 183.
    Cai, et al. Regulation of endothelial cells migration on poly(D, L-lactic acid) films immobilized with collagen gradients. Colloids Surf B-Biointerfaces. 2010;79:291–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. 184.
    Yu, et al. Preparation of gelatin density gradient on poly(epsilon-caprolactone) membrane and its influence on adhesion and migration of endothelial cells. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2015;451:177–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. 185.
    Wu, et al. Gradient biomaterials and their influences on cell migration. Interface Focus. 2012;2:337–55.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  186. 186.
    Adams, et al. Growth cones turn and migrate up an immobilized gradient of the laminin IKVAV peptide. J Neurobiol. 2005;62:134–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. 187.
    Guarnieri, et al. Covalently immobilized RGD gradient on PEG hydrogel scaffold influences cell migration parameters. Acta Biomater. 2010;6:2532–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. 188.
    Sarvestani, Jabbari. Analysis of cell locomotion on ligand gradient substrates. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2009;103:424–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Liu, et al. Endothelial cell migration on surface-density gradients of fibronectin, VEGF, or both proteins. Langmuir. 2007;23:11168–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Stefonek-Puccinelli, Masters. Co-immobilization of gradient-patterned growth factors for directed cell migration. Ann Biomed Eng. 2008;36:2121–33.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Frevert, et al. Measurement of cell migration in response to an evolving radial chemokine gradient triggered by a microvalve. Lab Chip. 2006;6:849–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Bernal, et al. L-selectin and SDF-1 enhance the migration of mouse and human cardiac mesoangioblasts. Cell Death Differ. 2012;19:345–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. 193.
    Cornejo, et al. Effect of NRG1, GDNF, EGF and NGF in the migration of a Schwann cell precursor line. Neurochem Res. 2010;35:1643–51.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. 194.
    de Simone, et al. NGF promotes microglial migration through the activation of its high affinity receptor: modulation by TGF-beta. J Neuroimmunol. 2007;190:53–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. 195.
    Wang, et al. Differential effects of EGF gradient profiles on MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell chemotaxis. Exp Cell Res. 2004;300:180–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  196. 196.
    Sutton, et al. The response of endothelial-cells to Tgf-beta-1 is dependent upon cell-shape, proliferative state and the nature of the substratum. J Cell Sci. 1991;99:777–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  197. 197.
    Ennett, Mooney. Tissue engineering strategies for in vivo neovascularisation. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2002;2:805–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. 198.
    Kawano, Kidoaki. Elasticity boundary conditions required for cell mechanotaxis on microelastically-patterned gels. Biomaterials. 2011;32:2725–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. 199.
    Park, et al. Simple haptotactic gradient generation within a triangular microfluidic channel. Lab Chip. 2010;10:2130–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. 200.
    Hale, et al. Cell migration at the interface of a dual chemical-mechanical gradient. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2010;2:2317–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. 201.
    Rao, et al. The migration of cancer cells in gradually varying chemical gradients and mechanical constraints. Micromachines. 2014;5:13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. 202.
    Mendelson, et al. Competitive stem cell recruitment by multiple cytotactic cues dagger. Lab Chip. 2013;13:1156–64.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. 203.
    Wu, et al. Directional migration of vascular smooth muscle cells guided by synergetic surface gradient and chemical pattern of poly(ethylene glycol) brushes. J Bioact Compat Polym. 2013;28:605–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  204. 204.
    Ren, et al. Complementary density gradient of poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) and YIGSR selectively guides migration of endotheliocytes. Biomacromolecules. 2014;15:2256–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. 205.
    Dodla, Bellamkonda. Anisotropic scaffolds facilitate enhanced neurite extension in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2006;78A:213–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  206. 206.
    Moore, et al. Immobilized concentration gradients of neurotrophic factors guide neurite outgrowth of primary neurons in macroporous scaffolds. Tissue Eng. 2006;12:267–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  207. 207.
    Musoke-Zawedde, Shoichet. Anisotropic three-dimensional peptide channels guide neurite outgrowth within a biodegradable hydrogel matrix. Biomed Mater. 2006;1:162–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  208. 208.
    Hofmann, et al. Control of in vitro tissue-engineered bone-like structures using human mesenchymal stem cells and porous silk scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2007;28:1152–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. 209.
    Sundararaghavan, Burdick. Gradients with depth in electrospun fibrous scaffolds for directed cell behavior. Biomacromolecules. 2011;12:2344–50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  210. 210.
    Kunkel, Butcher. Chemokines and the tissue-specific migration of lymphocytes. Immunity. 2002;16:1–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. 211.
    Taniuchi, et al. Induction of nerve growth-factor receptor in Schwann-cells after axotomy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986;83:4094–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  212. 212.
    Fields, Stevens-Graham. Neuroscience – new insights into neuron-glia communication. Science. 2002;298:556–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. 213.
    Richard, et al. Endoneurial fibroblast-like cells. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2012;71:938–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. 214.
    Atkins, et al. Scarring impedes regeneration at sites of peripheral nerve repair. Neuroreport. 2006;17:1245–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. 215.
    Dreesmann, et al. Nerve fibroblast impact on Schwann cell behavior. Eur J Cell Biol. 2009;88:285–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MOE Key Laboratory of Macromolecular Synthesis and Functionalization, Department of Polymer Science and EngineeringZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations