Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-qxsvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-17T13:18:09.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tailoring Polymer Surfaces for Controlled Cell Behavior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

A.M. Mayes ,
D.J. Irvine  and
L.G. Griffith
A.M. Mayes
Affiliation:
Dept. of Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, amayes@monosparc.mit.edu
D.J. Irvine
Affiliation:
Dept. of Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
L.G. Griffith
Affiliation:
Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
Get access

Abstract

An ideal surface for many biomaterials applications would resist nonspecific protein adsorption while at the same time providing a means for specifically signaling cells to guide survival, growth, migration, and differentiation. This work was directed towards the investigation of model systems and clinically-applicable materials which provide both of these surface requirements. Model systems were prepared by chemically grafting end-functionalized star poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) to surfaces. The end-grafted polymers provide a means for cell-signaling through coupling of peptides to the free chain ends. Protein adsorption on star vs. linear grafted layers was compared. To further understand these results, neutron reflectivity studies were carried out in situ for solvated PEO surfaces to determine the concentration profiles of the swollen grafted layers. Surprisingly, grafted PEO layers which resist protein adsorption have low concentrations of polymer segments throughout the swollen layer. We find that dense star architectures which might be expected to impart improved protein resistance in fact allow small proteins to adsorb. For clinical materials, a novel approach to the surface modification of poly(lactide) (PLA) has been taken by surface segregating a comb copolymer containing a PLA backbone and poly(ethylene glycol) teeth. The ends of the teeth provide sites for surface tethering of peptide ligands. Comb surfaces without tethered ligands are cell adhesion resistant, indicating strong protein adsorption resistance. By then incorporating an adhesion ligand, modulation of cell morphology on comb surfaces has been demonstrated. Finally, the surface segregation of the comb to the surface of PLA was shown via cell attachment assays and XPS measurements.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 530: Symposium CC – Biomaterials Regulating Cell Function & Tissue Development , 1998 , 73
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hammer, D.A and Tirrell, M., Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 26, p. 6511 (1996). J.A. Hubbell, Bio/Tech. 13, p. 565 (1995).Google Scholar
2 Kuhl, P.R. and Griffith, L.G., Nat. Med. 2, p. 1,022 (1996).Google Scholar
3 Kornberg, L.J., Earp, H.S., Truner, C.E., Prockop, C., and Juliano, R.L., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88, p. 8,392 (1991).Google Scholar
4 Hern, D.L. and Hubbell, J.A., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 39, p. 2661 (1998).Google Scholar
5 Scheutjens, J.M.H.M. and Fleer, G.J., J. Phys. Chem. 83, p. 1,619 (1979).Google Scholar
6 Irvine, D.J., Mayes, A.M., and Griffith-Cima, L., Macromol. 29, p. 6,037 (1996).Google Scholar
7 Rein, D., Lamps, J.P., Rempp, P., Lutz, P., Papanagopoulos, D., and Tsitsilianis, C., Acta Polym. 44, p. 2251 (1993).Google Scholar
8 Irvine, D.J., Mayes, A.M., Satija, S.K., Barker, J.G., Sofia-Allgor, S.J., and Griffith, L.G., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 40, p. 4981 (1998).Google Scholar
9 Nilsson, K. and Mosbach, K., Meth. Enzymol. 104, p. 561 (1984).Google Scholar
10 Kitchens, T.A., Overshizen, L., Passell, L., and Schermer, R.I., Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, p. 7911 (1974).Google Scholar
11 Gross, R.A., Zhang, Y., Konrad, G., and Lenz, R.W., Macromol. 21, p. 2,657 (1988).Google Scholar
12 Gu, X.-P., Ikeda, I., and Okahara, M., Synthesis, p. 649 (1985).Google Scholar
13 Lee, J.H., Lee, H.B., and Andrade, J.D., Prog. Polym. Sci. 20, p. 1,043 (1995). I. Szleifer, Biophys. J. 72, p. 5951 (1997).Google Scholar
14 Gilding, D.K and Reed, A.M., Polymer 20, p. 1,459 (1979).Google Scholar