Phenotypic differences between oral and skin fibroblasts in wound contraction and growth factor expression

• Published in: Wound repair and regeneration Vol. 14; no. 2; pp. 172 - 178
• Main Authors: Shannon, Diane B., McKeown, Scott T.W., Lundy, Fionnuala T., Irwin, Chris R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Malden, USA Blackwell Publishing Inc 01.03.2006
• Subjects: Actins - metabolism; Adult; Analysis of Variance; Animals; Blotting, Western; Cells, Cultured; Collagen - metabolism; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay; Female; Fibroblasts - physiology; Gels; Growth Substances - metabolism; Humans; Mouth Mucosa - injuries; Mouth Mucosa - physiology; Phenotype; Rats; Statistics, Nonparametric; Wound Healing - physiology
• ISSN: 1067-1927; 1524-475X
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2006.00107.x

ABSTRACT Wounds of the oral mucosa heal in an accelerated fashion with reduced scarring compared with cutaneous wounds. The differences in healing outcome between oral mucosa and skin could be because of phenotypic differences between the respective fibroblast populations. This study compared paired mucosal and dermal fibroblasts in terms of collagen gel contraction, α‐smooth muscle actin expression (α‐SMA), and production of the epithelial growth factors: keratinocyte growth factor (KGF) and hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor (HGF). The effects of transforming growth factor ‐β1 and ‐β3 on each parameter were also determined. Gel contraction in floating collagen lattices was determined over a 7‐day period. α‐SMA expression by fibroblasts was determined by Western blotting. KGF and HGF expression were determined by an enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay. Oral fibroblasts induced accelerated collagen gel contraction, yet surprisingly expressed lower levels of α‐SMA. Oral cells also produced significantly greater levels of both KGF and HGF than their dermal counterparts. Transforming growth factor‐β1 and ‐β3, over the concentration range of 0.1–10 ng/mL, had similar effects on cell function, stimulating both gel contraction and α‐SMA production, but inhibiting KGF and HGF production by both cell types. These data indicate phenotypic differences between oral and dermal fibroblasts that may well contribute to the differences in healing outcome between these two tissues.