%0 Journal Article
%T Histological Criteria that Distinguish Human and Mouse Bone Formed Within a Mouse Skeletal Repair Defect
%A Alexander C. Lichtler
%A Augustus D. Mazzocca
%A David W. Rowe
%A Li Chen
%A Liping Wang
%A Mary Beth McCarthy
%A Paiyz Mikael
%A Syam Nukavarapu
%A Xi Jiang
%A Xiaonan Xin
%J Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry
%@ 1551-5044
%D 2019
%R 10.1369/0022155419836436
%X The effectiveness of autologous cell-based skeletal repair continues to be controversial in part because in vitro predictors of in vivo human bone formation by cultured human progenitor cells are not reliable. To assist in the development of in vivo assays of human osteoprogenitor potential, a fluorescence-based histology of nondecalcified mineralized tissue is presented that provides multiple criteria to distinguish human and host osteoblasts, osteocytes, and accumulated bone matrix in a mouse calvarial defect model. These include detection of an ubiquitously expressed red fluorescent protein reporter by the implanted human cells, antibodies specific to human bone sialoprotein and a human nuclear antigen, and expression of a bone/fibroblast restricted green fluorescent protein reporter in the host tissue. Using low passage bone marrow-derived stromal cells, robust human bone matrix formation was obtained. However, a striking feature is the lack of mouse bone marrow investment and osteoclasts within the human bone matrix. This deficiency may account for the accumulation of a disorganized human bone matrix that has not undergone extensive remodeling. These features, which would not be appreciated by traditional decalcified paraffin histology, indicate the human bone matrix is not undergoing active remodeling and thus the full differentiation potential of the implanted human cells within currently used mouse models is not being realized
%K bone cell transplantation
%K bone matrix
%K calvarial defect model
%K cryohistology
%K epifluorescence imaging
%K GFP
%K immunostaining
%K mineralized tissues
%K primary human MSCs
%K RFP
%K xenograft
%U https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1369/0022155419836436