@article{SchmidtAbinzanoMensingaetal.2020,
  author    = {Schmidt, Stefanie and Abinzano, Florencia and Mensinga, Anneloes and Teßmar, J{\"o}rg and Groll, J{\"u}rgen and Malda, Jos and Levato, Riccardo and Blunk, Torsten},
  title     = {Differential production of cartilage ECM in 3D agarose constructs by equine articular cartilage progenitor cells and mesenchymal stromal cells},
  series = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences},
  volume    = {21},
  journal   = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences},
  number    = {19},
  issn      = {1422-0067},
  doi       = {10.3390/ijms21197071},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-236180},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Identification of articular cartilage progenitor cells (ACPCs) has opened up new opportunities for cartilage repair. These cells may be used as alternatives for or in combination with mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) in cartilage engineering. However, their potential needs to be further investigated, since only a few studies have compared ACPCs and MSCs when cultured in hydrogels. Therefore, in this study, we compared chondrogenic differentiation of equine ACPCs and MSCs in agarose constructs as monocultures and as zonally layered co-cultures under both normoxic and hypoxic conditions. ACPCs and MSCs exhibited distinctly differential production of the cartilaginous extracellular matrix (ECM). For ACPC constructs, markedly higher glycosaminoglycan (GAG) contents were determined by histological and quantitative biochemical evaluation, both in normoxia and hypoxia. Differential GAG production was also reflected in layered co-culture constructs. For both cell types, similar staining for type II collagen was detected. However, distinctly weaker staining for undesired type I collagen was observed in the ACPC constructs. For ACPCs, only very low alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, a marker of terminal differentiation, was determined, in stark contrast to what was found for MSCs. This study underscores the potential of ACPCs as a promising cell source for cartilage engineering.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HenkeNandigamaErguen2020,
  author    = {Henke, Erik and Nandigama, Rajender and Erg{\"u}n, S{\"u}leyman},
  title     = {Extracellular matrix in the tumor microenvironment and its impact on cancer therapy},
  series = {Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences},
  number    = {160},
  issn      = {2296-889X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fmolb.2019.00160},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-199341},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Solid tumors are complex organ-like structures that consist not only of tumor cells but also of vasculature, extracellular matrix (ECM), stromal, and immune cells. Often, this tumor microenvironment (TME) comprises the larger part of the overall tumor mass. Like the other components of the TME, the ECM in solid tumors differs significantly from that in normal organs. Intratumoral signaling, transport mechanisms, metabolisms, oxygenation, and immunogenicity are strongly affected if not controlled by the ECM. Exerting this regulatory control, the ECM does not only influence malignancy and growth of the tumor but also its response toward therapy. Understanding the particularities of the ECM in solid tumor is necessary to develop approaches to interfere with its negative effect. In this review, we will also highlight the current understanding of the physical, cellular, and molecular mechanisms by which the pathological tumor ECM affects the efficiency of radio-, chemo-, and immunotherapy. Finally, we will discuss the various strategies to target and modify the tumor ECM and how they could be utilized to improve response to therapy.},
  language  = {en}
}