Polymeric Materials for Cell Microencapsulation

Protocol
First Online:
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1479)

Abstract

Mammalian cells have been microencapsulated within both natural and synthetic polymers for over half a century. Specifically, in the last 36 years microencapsulated cells have been used therapeutically to deliver a wide range of drugs, cytokines, growth factors, and hormones while enjoying the immunoisolation provided by the encapsulating material. In addition to preventing immune attack, microencapsulation prevents migration of entrapped cells. Cells can be microencapsulated in a variety of geometries, the most common being solid microspheres and hollow microcapsules. The micrometer scale permits delivery by injection and is within diffusion limits that allow the cells to provide the necessary factors that are missing at a target site, while also permitting the exchange of nutrients and waste products. The majority of cell microencapsulation is performed with alginate/poly-l-lysine microspheres. Since alginate itself can be immunogenic, for cell-based therapy applications various groups are investigating synthetic polymers to microencapsulate cells. We describe a protocol for the formation of microspheres and microcapsules using the synthetic polymer poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA).

Key words

Cell microencapsulation Microsphere Microcapsule Hydrogel PEGDA Cell therapy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang JJ (2013) Mechanisms of cell therapy for clinical investigations: an urgent need for large-animal models. Circulation 128:92–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim JK et al (2010) Autologous bone marrow infusion activates the progenitor cell compartment in patients with advanced liver cirrhosis. Cell Transplant 19:1237–1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camussi G, Dereqibus MC, Tetta C (2010) Paracrine/endocrine mechanism of stem cells on kidney repair: role of microvesicle-mediated transfer of genetic information. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 19(1):7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abumaree M, Al Jumah M, Pace RA, Kalionis B (2012) Immunosuppressive properties of mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cell Rev 8(2):375–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moutsatsos IK et al (2001) Exogenously regulated stem cell-mediated gene therapy for bone regeneration. Mol Ther 3:449–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goren A, Dahan N, Goren E et al (2010) Encapsulated human mesenchymal stem cells: a unique hypoimmunogenic platform for long-term cellular therapy. FASEB J 24(1):22–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ausländer S, Wieland M, Fussenegger M (2012) Smart medication through combination of synthetic biology and cell microencapsulation. Metab Eng 14(3):252–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tomaro-Duchesneau C, Saha S, Malhotra M et al (2013) Microencapsulation for the therapeutic delivery of drugs, live mammalian and bacterial cells, and other biopharmaceutics: current status and future directions. J Pharm 2013:103527Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Teramura Y, Minh LN, Kawamoto T, Hiroo Iwata H (2010) Microencapsulation of islets with living cells using PolyDNA-PEG-lipid conjugate. Bioconjugate Chem 21(4):792–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olabisi RM, Lazard ZW, Franco CL et al (2010) Hydrogel microsphere encapsulation of a cell-based gene therapy system increases cell survival of injected cells, transgene expression, and bone volume in a model of heterotopic ossification. Tissue Eng Part A 16(12):3727–3736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Afkhami F, Yves Durocher Y, Satya Prakash S (2010) Investigation of antiangiogenic tumor therapy potential of microencapsulated HEK293 VEGF165b producing cells. J Biomed Biotechnol 2010:645610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chang TMS, Macintosh FC, Mason SG (1966) Semipermeable aqueous microcapsules: I. Preparation and properties. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 44:115–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lim F, Sun AM (1980) Microencapsulated islets as bioartificial endocrine pancreas. Science 210:908–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Olabisi RM (2015) Cell microencapsulation with synthetic polymers. Tissue Eng Pt A 103:846–859Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hong JS, Shin SJ, Lee S, Wong E et al (2007) Spherical and cylindrical microencapsulation of living cells using microfluidic devices. Korea Aust Rheol J 19(3):157–164Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hunt NC, Grover LM (2010) Cell encapsulation using biopolymer gels for regenerative medicine. Biotechnol Lett 32(6):733–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu L, Shujun Gao S, Yu Y et al (2006) Bio-ceramic hollow fiber membranes for immunoisolation and gene delivery: I: membrane development. J Membrane Sci 280:375–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baker J. A phase I/IIa open-label investigation of the safety and effectiveness of DIABECELL(R) [immunoprotected (alginate-encapsulated) porcine islets for Xenotransplantation] in patients with type I diabetes mellitus (study NCT00940173). Available at: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed 18 Sept 2015
  19. 19.
    Dufrane D. A monocentre phase 1 trial to assess a monolayer cellular device in the treatment of type 1 diabetes (study NCT00790257). Available at: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed 18 Sept 2015
  20. 20.
    Keymeulen B. Functional survival of beta cell allografts after transplantation in the peritoneal cavity of non-uremic type 1 diabetic patients (study NCT01379729). Available at: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed 18 Sept 2015
  21. 21.
    Schwartz S, Mulgrew P. A single-center phase I/II study of PEG-encapsulated islet allografts implanted in patients with type I diabetes (study NCT00260234). Available at: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed 18 Sept 2015
  22. 22.
    Bryant SJ, Anseth KS (2002) Hydrogel properties influence ECM production by chondrocytes photoencapsulated in poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels. J Biomed Mater Res 59:63–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tibbitt MW, Anseth KS (2009) Hydrogels as extracellular matrix mimics for 3D cell culture. Biotechnol Bioeng 103:655–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aijaz A, Faulknor R, Berthiaume F, Olabisi RM (2015) Hydrogel microencapsulated insulin-secreting cells increase keratinocyte migration, epidermal thickness, collagen fiber density, and wound closure in a diabetic mouse model of wound healing. Tissue Eng Part A. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2015.0069 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Franco CL, Price J, West JL (2011) Development and optimization of a dual-photoinitiator, emulsion-based technique for rapid generation of cell-laden hydrogel microspheres. Acta Biomater 7(9):3267–3276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mumaw J, Jordan ET, Sonnet C et al (2012) Rapid heterotrophic ossification with cryopreserved poly(ethylene glycol-) microencapsulated BMP2-expressing MSCs. Int J Biomater 2012:861794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sonnet C, Simpson CL, Olabisi RM et al (2013) Rapid healing of femoral defects in rats with low dose sustained BMP2 expression from PEGDA hydrogel microspheres. J Orthop Res 31(10):1597–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA

Personalised recommendations