Материалы на основе шелка паутины для регенеративной медицины

Шелк паутины представляет собой необычайно прочный, гибкий, биосовместимый природный биоматериал, который становится привлекательным для проведения научных исследований с возможностью трансляции в клиническую практику. Самки пауковкругопрядов рода Nephila clavipes производят до 7 типов шелка, используя различные шелковые железы и прядильные органы, расположенные на заднем конце брюшка паука. Основными белками являются спидроины главной ампулы MaSp1 и MaSp2, которые могут быть использованы для создания рекомбинантной паутины в связи с ограничением сбора паутины в естественных условиях. В обзоре освещаются исследования, изучающие применение материалов на основе паучьего шелка в области тканевой инженерии in vitro. В частности, суммируются данные по применению двухмерных и трехмерных моделей и каркасов для тканевой инженерии с возможностью использования современных технологий, таких как биопечать. 

1. Vincent J.F., Bogatyreva O.A., Bogatyrev N.R. et al. Biomimetics: its practice and theory. J R Soc Interface 2006;3(9):471–82. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2006.0127

2. Oladele I.O., Onuh L., Taiwo A.S. et al. Mechanical, wear and thermal conductivity characteristics of snail shell-derived hydroxyapatite reinforced epoxy bio-composites for adhesive biomaterials applications. Int J Sustain Eng 2022;15(1):122–35.

3. Li H., Hu C., Yu H., Chen C. Chitosan composite scaffolds for articular cartilage defect repair: a review. RSC Adv 2018;8(7):3736–49. DOI: 10.1039/c7ra11593h

4. Rogina A., Pušić M., Štefan L. et al. Characterization of chitosanbased scaffolds seeded with sheep nasal chondrocytes for cartilage tissue engineering. Ann Biomed Eng 2021;49(6):1572–86. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-020-02712-9

5. Che X., Zhao T., Hu J. et al. Application of chitosan-based hydrogel in promoting wound healing: a review. Polymers (Basel) 2024;16(3):344. DOI: 10.3390/polym16030344

6. Liu H., Lv P., Zhu Y. et al. Salidroside promotes peripheral nerve regeneration based on tissue engineering strategy using Schwann cells and PLGA: in vitro and in vivo. Sci Rep 2017;7:39869. DOI: 10.1038/srep39869

7. Allmeling C., Jokuszies A., Reimers K. et al. Spider silk fibres in artificial nerve constructs promote peripheral nerve regeneration. Cell Prolif 2008;41(3):408–20. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2184.2008.00534.x

8. Allmeling C., Jokuszies A., Reimers K. et al. Use of spider silk fibres as an innovative material in a biocompatible artificial nerve conduit. J Cell Mol Med 2006;10(3):770–7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2006.tb00436.x

9. Rising A., Johansson J. Toward spinning artificial spider silk. Nat Chem Biol 2015;11(5):309–15. DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.1789

10. Babb P.L., Lahens N.F., Correa-Garhwal S.M. et al. The Nephila clavipes genome highlights the diversity of spider silk genes and their complex expression. Nat Genet 2017;49(6):895–903. DOI: 10.1038/ng.3852

11. Kluge J.A., Rabotyagova O., Leisk G.G., Kaplan D.L. Spider silks and their applications. Trends Biotechnol 2008;26(5):244–51. DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2008.02.006

12. Shanafelt M., Larracas C., Dyrness S. et al. Egg case protein 3: a constituent of black widow spider tubuliform silk. Molecules 2021;26(16):5088. DOI: 10.3390/molecules26165088

13. Peakall D.B. Synthesis of silk, mechanism and location. Am Zool 1969;9(1):71–9.

14. Arndt T., Jaudzems K., Shilkova O. et al. Spidroin N-terminal domain forms amyloid-like fibril based hydrogels and provides a protein immobilization platform. Nat Commun 2022;13(1):4695. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-32093-7

15. Collin M.A., Clarke T.H. 3rd, Ayoub N.A., Hayashi C.Y. Genomic perspectives of spider silk genes through target capture sequencing: conservation of stabilization mechanisms and homology-based structural models of spidroin terminal regions. Int J Biol Macromol 2018;113:829–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.02.032

16. Garb J.E., Haney R.A., Schwager E.E. et al. The transcriptome of Darwin’s bark spider silk glands predicts proteins contributing to dragline silk toughness. Commun Biol 2019;2:275. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-019-0496-1

17. Saric M., Eisoldt L., Döring V., Scheibel T. Interplay of different major ampullate spidroins during assembly and implications for fiber mechanics. Adv Mater 2021;33(9). DOI: 10.1002/adma.202006499

18. Arakawa K., Kono N., Malay A.D. et al. 1000 spider silkomes: linking sequences to silk physical properties. Sci Adv 2022;8(41). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abo6043

19. Li J., Li S., Huang J. et al. Spider silk-inspired artificial fibers. Adv Sci (Weinh) 2022;9(5). DOI: 10.1002/advs.202103965

20. Ramezaniaghdam M., Nahdi N.D., Reski R. Recombinant spider silk: promises and bottlenecks. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022;10:835637. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.835637

21. Agnarsson I., Kuntner M., Blackledge T.A. Bioprospecting finds the toughest biological material: extraordinary silk from a giant riverine orb spider. PLoS One 2010;5(9):e11234. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011234

22. Liu R., Deng Q., Yang Z. et al. “Nano-fishnet” structure making silk fibers tougher. Adv Funct Mater 2016;26(33):5534–41. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201600813

23. Yazawa K., Malay A.D., Masunaga H., Numata K. Role of skin layers on mechanical properties and supercontraction of spider dragline silk fiber. Macromol Biosci 2019;19(3):e1800220. DOI: 10.1002/mabi.201800220

24. Du N., Yang Z., Liu X.Y. et al. Structural origin of the strainhardening of spider silk. Adv Funct Mater 2011;21(5):772–8. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201001397

25. Vollrath F., Madsen B., Shao Z. The effect of spinning conditions on the mechanics of a spider’s dragline silk. Proc Biol Sci 2001;268(1483):2339–46. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1590

26. Lefèvre T., Boudreault S., Cloutier C., Pézolet M. Diversity of molecular transformations involved in the formation of spider silks. J Mol Biol 2011;405(1):238–53. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2010.10.052

27. Liu Y., Shao Z., Vollrath F. Elasticity of spider silks. Biomacromolecules 2008;9(7):1782–6. DOI: 10.1021/bm7014174

28. Giesa T., Schuetz R., Fratzl P. et al. Unraveling the molecular requirements for macroscopic silk supercontraction. ACS Nano 2017;11(10):9750–8. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.7b01532

29. Lee S.M., Pippel E., Moutanabbir O. et al. In situ Raman spectroscopic study of Al-infiltrated spider dragline silk under tensile deformation. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2014;6(19): 16827–34. DOI: 10.1021/am5041797

30. Gobbi S.J., Gobbi V.J., Rocha Y. Requirements for selection/ development of a biomaterial. Biomed J Sci Tech Res 2019;14(3). DOI: 10.26717/BJSTR.2019.14.002554

31. Kiradzhiyska D.D., Mantcheva R.D. Overview of biocompatible materials and their use in medicine. Folia Med (Plovdiv) 2019;61(1):34–40. DOI: 10.2478/folmed-2018-0038

32. Zeplin P.H., Maksimovikj N.C., Jordan M.C. et al. Spider silk coatings as a bioshield to reduce periprosthetic fibrous capsule formation. Adv Funct Mater 2014;24(17):2658–66. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201302813

33. Kuhbier J.W., Coger V., Mueller J. et al. Influence of direct or indirect contact for the cytotoxicity and blood compatibility of spider silk. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2017;28(8):127. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-017-5936-1

34. Keiser C.N., DeMarco A.E., Shearer T.A. et al. Putative microbial defenses in a social spider: immune variation and antibacterial properties of colony silk. J Arachnol 2015;43(3):394–9. DOI: 10.1636/arac-43-03-394-399

35. Tahir H.M., Qamar S., Sattar A. et al. Evidence for the antimicrobial potential of silk of Cyclosa confraga (Thorell, 1892) (Araneae: Araneidae). Acta Zool Bulg 2017;69:593–5.

36. Esteves F.G., Dos Santos-Pinto J.R.A., Ferro M. et al. Revealing the venomous secrets of the spider’s web. J Proteome Res 2020;19(8):3044–59. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00086

37. Babczyńska A., Sułowicz S., Talik E. et al. Sterile capsule-egg cocoon covering constitutes an antibacterial barrier for spider parasteatoda tepidariorum embryos. Physiol Biochem Zool 2019;92(1):115–24. DOI: 10.1086/701390

38. Makover V., Ronen Z., Lubin Y., Khalaila I. Eggshell spheres protect brown widow spider (Latrodectus geometricus) eggs from bacterial infection. J R Soc Interface 2019;16(150):20180581. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2018.0581

39. Haq I.U., Qasim M., Rahim K. et al. Efficacy of the spider web metabolites activity against multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria. Appl Ecol Environ Res 2019;17(5):10899–908. DOI: 10.15666/aeer/1705_1089910908

40. Fruergaard S., Lund M.B., Schramm A. et al. The myth of antibiotic spider silk. iScience 2021;24(10):103125. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103125

41. Wright S., Goodacre S.L. Evidence for antimicrobial activity associated with common house spider silk. BMC Res Notes 2012;5:326. DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-326

42. Агапова О.И. Биоинженерные конструкции на основе фиброина шелка и спидроина для регенеративной медицины и тканевой инженерии (обзор). Современные технологии в медицине 2017;9(2):190–206. DOI: 10.17691/stm2017.9.2.24

43. Debabov V.G., Bogush V.G. Recombinant spidroins as the basis for new materials. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 2020;6(7):3745–61. DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00109

44. Кретов Е.И., Заполоцкий Е.Н., Таркова А.Р. и др. Электроспиннинг для дизайна материалов медицинского назначения. Бюллетень сибирской медицины 2020;(2):153–62. DOI: 10.20538/1682-0363-2020-2-153-162

45. Mikhailova M.M., Sydoruk K.V., Davydova L.I. et al. Nonwoven spidroin materials as scaffolds for ex vivo cultivation of aortic fragments and dorsal root ganglia. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 2022;33(13):1685–703. DOI: 10.1080/09205063.2022.2073426

46. Kuhbier J.W., Allmeling C., Reimers K. et al. Interactions between spider silk and cells – NIH/3T3 fibroblasts seeded on miniature weaving frames. PLoS One 2010;5(8):e12032. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012032

47. Kuhbier J.W., Reimers K., Kasper C. et al. First investigation of spider silk as a braided microsurgical suture. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2011;97(2):381–7. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31825

48. Strauß S., Diemer M., Bucan V. et al. Spider silk enhanced tissue engineering of cartilage tissue: approach of a novel bioreactor model using adipose derived stromal cells. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2024;22. DOI: 10.1177/22808000241226656

49. Steins A., Dik P., Müller W.H. et al. In vitro evaluation of spider silk meshes as a potential biomaterial for bladder reconstruction. PLoS One 2015;10(12):e0145240. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145240

50. Малюгин Б.Э., Борзенок С.А., Сабурина И.Н. и др. Разработка биоинженерной конструкции искусственной роговицы на основе пленочного матрикса из спидроина и культивированных клеток лимбальной зоны глазного яблока. Офтальмохиргия 2013;(4):89–97.

51. Малюгин Б.Э., Борзенок С.А., Комах Ю.А. и др. Современные возможности клеточных технологий в конструировании биологического эквивалента искусственной роговицы. ­Сибирский научный медицинский журнал 2014;(5).

52. Агапова О.И., Ефимов А.Е., Мойсенович М.М. и др. Сравнительный анализ трехмерной наноструктуры пористых биодеградируемых матриксов из рекомбинантного спидроина и фиброина шелка для регенеративной медицины. Вестник трансплантологии и искусственных органов 2015;17(2):37–44. DOI: 10.15825/1995-1191-2015-2-37-44

53. Агапова О.И., Дружинина Т.В., Трофимов К.В. и др. Биодеградируемые пористые матриксы для регенерации костной ткани. Перспективные материалы 2015;(8):17–26.

54. Mehta N., Hede S. Spider silk calcite composite. Hypothesis 2005;3(2):21.

55. Dmitrović S. Synthesis and characterization of spider silk calcite composite. Proces Appl Ceram 2016;10(1):37–40.

56. Cao B., Mao C. Oriented nucleation of hydroxylapatite crystals on spider dragline silks. Langmuir 2007;23(21):10701–5. DOI: 10.1021/la7014435

57. Sun Y., Jia X., Meng Q. Characteristic evaluation of recombinant MiSp/Poly(lactic-co-glycolic) Acid (PLGA) nanofiber scaffolds as potential scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci 2023;24(2):1219. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24021219

58. Tasiopoulos C.P., Petronis S., Sahlin H., Hedhammar M. Surface functionalization of PTFE membranes intended for guided bone regeneration using recombinant spider silk. ACS Appl Bio Mater 2020;3(1):577–83. DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.9b00972

59. Freeman S., Calabro S., Williams R. et al. Bioink formulation and machine learning-empowered bioprinting optimization. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022;10:913579. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.913579

60. Fu Z., Naghieh S., Xu C. et al. Printability in extrusion bioprinting. Biofabrication 2021;13(3). DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/abe7ab

61. Gao T., Gillispie G.J., Copus J.S. et al. Optimization of gelatinalginate composite bioink printability using rheological parameters: a systematic approach. Biofabrication 2018;10(3):034106. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/aacdc7

62. Contessi Negrini N., Celikkin N., Tarsini P. et al. Threedimensional printing of chemically crosslinked gelatin hydrogels for adipose tissue engineering. Biofabrication 2020;12(2):025001. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab56f9

63. Petta D., D’Amora U., Ambrosio L. et al. Hyaluronic acid as a bioink for extrusion-based 3D printing. Biofabrication 2020;12(3):032001. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab8752

64. Stepanovska J., Supova M., Hanzalek K. et al. Collagen bioinks for bioprinting: a systematic review of hydrogel properties, bioprinting parameters, protocols, and bioprinted structure characteristics. Biomedicines 2021;9(9):1137. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9091137

65. Magli S., Rossi G.B., Risi G. et al. Design and synthesis of chitosan-gelatin hybrid hydrogels for 3D Printable in vitro models. Front Chem 2020;8:524. DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2020.00524

66. Sun Y., Ku B.J., Moon M.J. Microstructure of the silk fibroin-based hydrogel scaffolds derived from the orb-web spider Trichonephila clavata. Appl Microsc 2024;54(3). DOI: 10.1186/s42649-024-00096-x

67. Lechner A., Trossmann V.T., Scheibel T. Impact of cell loading of recombinant spider silk based bioinks on gelation and printability. Macromol Biosci 2022;22(3). DOI: 10.1002/mabi.202100390