Open access peer-reviewed chapter - ONLINE FIRST

Collagen in Orthopedics: From Molecules to Therapies

Written By

Samriti Balaji Mudaliar, Sitaram Chopperla, Alevoor Srinivas Bharath Prasad and Nirmal Mazumder

Submitted: 07 March 2024 Reviewed: 11 March 2024 Published: 18 June 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1005033

Cell and Molecular Biology - Annual Volume 2024 IntechOpen
Cell and Molecular Biology - Annual Volume 2024 Authored by Mary C. Maj

From the Annual Volume

Cell and Molecular Biology - Annual Volume 2024 [Working Title]

Prof. Mary C. Maj and Dr. Felicia Ikolo

Chapter metrics overview

9 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Collagen, the primary constituent of the extracellular matrix (ECM) in most living organisms, is a structurally unique protein that has been classified into seven categories based on its supramolecular structure. The abundance of collagen in the human musculoskeletal system implicates it in the pathogenesis of several orthopedic conditions. Consequently, its metabolic products are useful biomarkers for the prognosis, diagnosis, and monitoring of orthopedic ailments. Collagen also finds therapeutic applications in orthopedics because of its biocompatibility, biodegradability, and mechanical stability. Several collagen-based biomaterials (CBBs) including sponges and nanofibers are currently used in orthopedic therapy. This chapter begins with a concise description of the biosynthesis of collagen as well as its classification and distribution in the human body. Subsequently, the chapter discusses the potential of collagen in orthopedic diagnostics and therapeutics while also delineating the challenges posed by collagen-based biomarkers, the risks associated with collagen from different sources, and the drawbacks of the conventional methods used to fabricate CBBs. Finally, the chapter explores the use of modern techniques like 3D bioprinting for the synthesis of highly structured collagen matrices and emphasizes the need for future research into collagen-based diagnostics and therapeutics in orthopedic surgery.

Keywords

  • arthritis
  • biomaterial
  • biomarker
  • bone tissue regeneration
  • cartilage
  • collagen
  • orthopedics

1. Introduction

Collagen is a morphologically diverse biopolymer found extensively in the extracellular matrix (ECM), a structural network found in most eukaryotic cells that consists of non-fibrillar amorphous substances like glycoproteins and fibronectin as well as fibrillary components such as elastin and reticular fibers [1, 2]. Collagen is the most abundant human protein and is largely present in the ECM of multiple tissues including the skin, cartilage, bones, and blood vessels. Up to 35% of the total protein mass in mammals corresponds to collagen [3, 4]. Based on their structure, function, and composition, 29 different types of collagens have been elucidated, each designated by a Roman numeral. Type I collagen is the most common type found in most tissues, especially skin, bones, and tendons, followed by type II collagen, which is restricted to the cornea and the hyaline cartilage in joints, and type III collagen, which is mainly seen in blood vessels [5]. As diagrammatically represented in Figure 1, collagens can be classified into seven categories based on their supramolecular assembly, namely, fibril-forming collagens, fibril-associated collagens with interrupted triple helices (FACITs), network-forming collagen, transmembrane collagens, endostatin-producing collagens, anchoring fibrils, and beaded-filament forming collagens [6].

Figure 1.

Classification of collagens based on supramolecular assembly [6].

As shown in Figure 2, the biosynthesis of collagen begins in the nucleus with the transcription of specific COL genes encoding the pro-α1 and pro-α2 polypeptide chains. These genes are particular to each collagen type—for instance, COL1A1 and COL1A2 encode type I collagen, while COL2A1 encodes type II collagen [8]. The transcribed mRNA moves into the cytosol where the ribosomes translate it to produce pre-procollagen chains, which are then translocated into the lumen of the rough endoplasmic reticulum, where they are converted into procollagen chains by undergoing three major post-translational modifications—removal of the N-terminal signal peptide, hydroxylation of lysine and proline by hydroxylase with vitamin C as the co-factor, and glycosylation of lysine hydroxyl groups with glucose and galactose. Three procollagen chains then wind around each other to form a coiled-coil triple helical structure, which moves to the Golgi apparatus, where it is packaged into secretory vesicles and transported to the extracellular space. Procollagen is converted to mature tropocollagen via cleavage of the C-terminal and N-terminal pro-peptides by collagen peptidases. Finally, in the case of type I collagen, five tropocollagen molecules assemble into a cross-linked network via covalent bonding by the action of lysyl oxidase on the lysine and hydroxylysine residues to form a supramolecule known as the collagen microfibril. These microfibrils are organized into collagen fibrils and fibers that provide structural integrity to the body tissues [6, 7]. All collagens are characterized by the presence of the Gly-X-Y motif, a repeating amino acid sequence that comprises glycine and, generally, proline and hydroxyproline as X and Y, respectively. Fibrillar collagens consist of a high percentage of uninterrupted Gly-X-Y motifs, which contributes to the stability of their fibrillar structure. The intramolecular hydrogen bonds between glycine residues impart tightness to the triple helix while proline and hydroxyproline confer resistance against proteases, thus limiting hydrolysis and maintaining structural integrity by virtue of their acyclic nature [9, 10]. Thus, they display structural, mechanical, and tissue-building properties through the regulation of critical cellular processes like proliferation, differentiation, and migration [5].

Figure 2.

Schematic representation of collagen biosynthesis [7].

The bone is primarily a rigid, connective, osseous tissue that has two main parts—an inorganic component that constitutes 65% of the bone, comprising hydroxyapatite [Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2] crystals and mineral ions like sodium and potassium as well as an extracellular organic matrix known as the osteoid, 90% of which is made up of type I collagen while the non-collagenous organic molecules include proteoglycans, osteonectin, and osteocalcin. The four cell types in the osteoid are osteocytes, bone lining cells, osteoblasts, and osteoclasts. Osteoblasts are present on the bone surface and produce type I collagen. They also deposit hydroxyapatite (HA) crystals on collagen molecules to promote matrix calcification. HA provides rigidity, while collagen provides tensile strength to the bone. Type I collagen accumulates along mechanical stress lines in the osteoid to create a structural framework for mineralization [11, 12]. Errors in collagen metabolism can lead to a variety of orthopedic disorders like osteogenesis imperfecta, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), and certain types of skeletal dysplasia including spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita (SEDC) and otospondylomegaepiphyseal dysplasia (OSMED) [4]. Osteogenesis imperfecta is a genetic disorder characterized by bone embrittlement due to a mutation in type I collagen while EDS leads to heritable connective tissue disorders (HCTD) caused by mutations in specific types of collagens [13, 14]. For instance, EDS type IV is an autosomal dominant disorder caused by the mutated COL3A1 gene encoding type III procollagen [15]. Skeletal dysplasia, also known as osteochondrodysplasia, includes several genetic conditions that affect the bone and cartilage by different means. SEDC is a type II collagen disorder while OSMED is caused due to problems in type XI collagen [16].

The first reported collagen-based biomaterial (CBB) was the “catgut,” a collagen-rich suture material developed in 1881 by Joseph Lister, the father of modern surgery [17]. Given its biocompatibility, tensile strength, biodegradability, mechanical stability, and flexibility, collagen is an excellent therapeutic biomaterial. Currently, various CBBs like sponges, hydrogels, microspheres, nanofibers, and injectable solutions are commercially used for several applications including surgery, wound healing, oral therapy, tissue regeneration, and drug delivery [18]. Furthermore, collagen is a viable biomarker since it is abundantly present in most tissues and can be detected in blood plasma and tissue samples. The metabolic products of collagen are used to diagnose and monitor several conditions including cancer [19, 20].

This chapter focuses on the applications of collagen in orthopedic surgery. Orthopedics refers to the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of injuries and disorders affecting different components of the musculoskeletal system. Being a predominant protein in the bone and cartilage, collagen and its metabolic products are widely used as diagnostic biomarkers for the detection of orthopedic conditions that require more efficient monitoring methods including ankylosing spondylitis, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis. The orthopedic applications of collagen-based diagnostics have been delineated in the following section of the chapter. The next section discusses the use of collagen in orthopedic therapeutics such as sponges, hydrogels, and microspheres for the treatment of bone injuries, cartilage defects, athletic strain, and disorders like rheumatoid arthritis. The subsequent section concentrates on the challenges associated with the use of collagen in orthopedics including the drawbacks of different sources of collagen and the shortcomings of the techniques employed for its extraction, cross-linking, and sterilization. It also explores modern technologies such as plastic compression, electrospinning, and 3D bioprinting that have been introduced in recent years for fabricating highly structured CBBs. The chapter emphasizes the need for further research into the clinical applications of collagen-based diagnostics and therapeutics in the field of orthopedics.

Advertisement

2. Collagen-based orthopedic diagnostics

Due to its extensive presence throughout the ECM of the musculoskeletal system, the collagen network is affected during the pathogenesis of several orthopedic conditions. Thus, the levels of collagen degradation products serve as diagnostic indications of certain orthopedic disorders, especially those affecting the articular cartilage such as osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The hyaline articular cartilage is a connective tissue lacking nerves, blood vessels, and lymphatics that is present between joints. It is made up of chondrocytes and has a dense collagenous network in the ECM that is rich in collagen type II followed by types IX and XI, while types III, IV, V, VI, X, XII, XIV, XVI, XXII, and XXVII are present in minor quantities. Based on collagen arrangement and chondrocyte proximity, the articular matrix is divided into three zones—the pericellular matrix (PCM) surrounding the chondrocytes, the territorial matrix surrounding the PCM, and the interterritorial matrix, which forms the largest zone. Type I and type III collagens are predominant in the peri-articular soft tissues, while the PCM consists of type III–VI collagens [7, 21]. During disease conditions, the articular cartilage gets damaged, leading to collagen degradation in the ECM by collagenases like A disintegrins and metalloproteinases with thrombospondin motifs (ADAMTS), cathepsins, and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), mediated by inflammatory molecules. Several fragments are released into the systemic circulation and the synovial fluid due to collagen degradation. Thus, these fragments act as highly specific and sensitive biomarkers indicative of the underlying clinical conditions. Table 1 encapsulates the distribution of collagens in the articular cartilage and the proteinases that degrade them, especially during orthopedic conditions [22, 31].

Collagen typeDistribution in articular cartilageCollagen-degrading proteinasesReferences
Type IFibrocartilage, elastic cartilageMMP-2[23]
Type IIECM of all zonesMMP-1, 3, 13[24]
Type IIIPCMMMP-3[25]
Type IVPCMMMP-2, 9[23]
Type VPCMMMP-2, 9[26]
Type VIPCMMMP-2, 9[27]
Type IXGrowth-plate cartilageMMP-3, 13[28]
Type XCalcified zone and hypertrophic cartilageMMP-1, 3, 13[29]
Type XIArticular cartilageMMP-2[30]
Type XIICartilage with more organized fibril orientationNot available
Type XIVUniformly throughout the articular cartilageMMP-13[22]
Type XVITerritorial matrix of chondrocytesNot available
Type XXIIArticular surface of joint cartilage
Type XXVIIProliferative zone chondrocytes

Table 1.

Distribution and susceptibility of collagens in the articular cartilage [22].

2.1 Ankylosing spondylitis (AS)

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS), also known as axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), is a systemic, chronic, inflammatory autoimmune condition brought about by genetic and environmental factors that affects the spine, sacroiliac joints (SIJs), and adjacent soft tissues. It is characterized by joint inflammation, fibrosis, calcification, and ultimately, a progressive increase in spinal rigidity resulting in loss of flexibility and movement due to complete fusion of the spine [32]. While the pathophysiology of AS is yet to be elucidated, it is associated with the HLA B27 gene polymorphism [33]. The onset of AS begins with immune dysregulation leading to chronic inflammation, brought about by the interleukin-17/23 (IL-17/23) pathway and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) as well as other pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6, IL-10, IL-22, and interferon γ (IFNγ). This is followed by matrix erosion caused by MMP-1 and cathepsin K. Finally, bone fusion occurs during syndesmophyte formation by the action of the bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) and Wnt signaling pathway, the master regulator of bone remodeling [34]. Currently, C-reactive protein (CRP) is the only inflammatory marker that is clinically used to diagnose axSpA. There is an exigent need for sensitive biomarkers that facilitate effective diagnosis and monitoring of AS [35]. During AS, the cartilage intermediate layer protein 1 (CILP-1) produced by chondrocytes for the reduction of ECM proliferation is cleaved by MMP-1, MMP-8, and MMP-12 leading to increased levels of CILP-M, an MMP-generated neoepitope of CILP-1 [36]. Collagen fibril formation is disrupted in AS by the action of MMP-2 and MMP-9 which degrade type V collagen to produce C5M fragments. Thus, elevation of C5M levels also serves as an indicator of AS [26]. Further, due to extensive ECM remodeling, MMP-mediated fragments of collagen types I, III, IV, and VI, namely, C1M, C3M, C4M2, and C6M, respectively, are present in higher amounts in AS patients, thereby facilitating their use as blood-based biomarkers for tracking disease severity and progression [37].

2.2 Osteoarthritis (OA)

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic, degenerative joint disease associated with aging. It is characterized by cartilage degradation, bone remodeling via BMPs, synovial membrane inflammation, subchondral osteosclerosis, synovial angiogenesis, and osteophyte formation by the action of vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs). As OA progresses, chondrocytes display a senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) wherein they display mitochondrial dysfunction, leading to oxidative stress and ultimately undergo senescence. The cartilage breakdown products are phagocytosed by synovial cells which release pro-inflammatory and catabolic molecules including cytokines like TNFα and IL-6, chemokines, neuropeptides, bioactive lipids like prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and leukotriene B4 (LTB4), as well as adipokines like lipocalin, leptin, and adiponectin [22, 38, 39]. Though chondrocytes produce anti-inflammatory mediators like IL-3, IL-4, and IL-1Ra as well as tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs), they are outnumbered by pro-inflammatory molecules, thus allowing synovial inflammation to increase [40]. CILP is overproduced in early OA and inhibits tumor growth factor β (TGFβ), thereby hindering ECM proliferation [41]. The pathophysiology of OA has been diagrammatically elucidated in Figure 3. Oxidative stress and low-level inflammation lead to the breakdown of the collagen network in the ECM primarily via the degradation of type II collagen by MMP-13 (collagenase-3) along with MMP-1 (collagenase-1) and MMP-3, all three of which are upregulated by lipocalin and adiponectin while leptin upregulates MMP-1 and MMP-3 production [42]. Furthermore, collagen type II production is inhibited by IL-1β, due to which reduction in its levels is suggestive of OA. The MMP-mediated cleavage of type II collagen also results in the accumulation of COL2-3/4C (short) neoepitopes and urinary C-terminal telopeptide (uCTX-II), which act as highly informative biomarkers as their levels increase with disease progression [43, 44]. Due to the increased deposition of type III collagen on the joints, the COL3/ADAMTS neoepitope, an ADAMTS-generated type III collagen fragment, serves as a serum biomarker for early OA [45, 46]. On the other hand, the presence of MMP-mediated type 3 collagen metabolites (C3M) indicates the degradation of soft tissues. Lipocalin and adiponectin increase the levels of inducible nitric oxide synthase, leading to the production of nitric oxide (NO), which causes protein nitration. Thus, increased serum concentrations of Coll 2-1 and Coll 2-1 NO2 peptides are diagnostic OA markers [47, 48]. Leptin and lipocalin stimulate type X collagen (Col10) production, which contributes to the hypertrophy of chondrocytes, a characteristic of OA [49]. Thus, in addition to IL-1β, osteocalcin, osteopontin, and VEGF, type X collagen is also a major biomarker for chondrocyte hypertrophy [50]. Moreover, the blood serum levels of Col10neo, a cathepsin K-generated neo-epitope of Col10, signify hypertrophic chondrocytes and can be used to detect OA in the knee joints [51]. The presence of type I collagen in the articular cartilage denotes the potential onset of OA since it is a component of the fibrocartilage repair tissue that fills cartilage defects [52].

Figure 3.

Pathophysiology of osteoarthritis [40].

2.3 Rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic, chronic autoimmune disorder characterized by synovial joint damage, synovial inflammation, cartilage destruction, and matrix degradation [53]. As shown in Figure 4, there is an imbalance between the pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines in RA due to the overproduction of TNFα, IL-1β, and IL-6 by synovial tissue macrophages (STMs), leading to chronic inflammation. This stimulates the release of matrix-degrading enzymes by the chondrocytes, leading to ECM degradation. Another major characteristic of RA is the tumor-like transformation of activated synovial cells into fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS), highly proliferative cells that produce MMP-1, MMP-3, MMP-13, AMADTS4, ADAMTS5, and cathepsins. These collagenases cause tissue damage and promote the infiltration of immune cells like neutrophils and macrophages, which also release MMPs, ADAMTS, and pro-inflammatory cytokines, thereby exacerbating the inflammatory condition [55]. RA is characterized by several autoantigens including guanosine proteins, type II collagen, and circulating serum proteins. Autoantibodies like the rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) that are produced to counter these antigens serve as diagnostic markers of RA [22, 54, 56]. During disease progression, MMP-13 cleaves type II collagen, thus reducing its levels and leaving behind degradation products in the articular cartilage. The breakdown of soft tissues involves the MMP-mediated cleavage of type I and type III collagens, leading to the release of C1M and C3M, respectively—thus, their serum levels are used to track RA progression [57]. The metabolism of type IV collagen during destructive synovitis growth due to the tumor phenotype of FLS leads to elevated serum levels of C4M, another marker for disease prognosis [58].

Figure 4.

Pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis [54].

Advertisement

3. Collagen-based orthopedic therapeutics

As a major structural protein in the human body, collagen plays a vital role in the repair and regeneration of tissues. Therefore, collagen-based therapies have been widely studied for clinical applications in bone and soft tissue regeneration. The role of collagen in maintaining joint strength and bone health, in combination with its breakdown during orthopedic conditions, makes collagen-based biomaterials (CBBs) a viable choice for managing musculoskeletal injuries and diseases, especially those involving cartilage damage, which cannot be reversed. Generally, naturally occurring type I and type II collagen proteins are extracted from human, bovine, murine, equine, and porcine sources such as bones, tendons, and skin as well as marine sources like fish skin, scales, and bones, via ECM decellularization. The undenatured proteins are then subjected to protein hydrolysis to obtain hydrolyzed soluble bioactive peptides that have better digestibility, absorption, and distribution during oral administration. Collagen can also be produced synthetically as in the case of recombinant human collagen (rhCOL) obtained by transfecting COL genes into different prokaryotic and eukaryotic expression systems such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Pichia pastoris, Zea mays, and Trichoplusia ni, as well as transgenic animal models like mouse embryos and Chinese hamsters [59]. The composition, properties, and functionality of CBBs vary depending on the source of collagen and the hydrolysis process. While developing CBBs, the effect of the collagen source and extraction technique on properties such as biodegradability, immunogenicity, biocompatibility, and mechanical stability must be considered [60, 61]. CBBs are available in several forms including scaffolds, oral supplements, microspheres, and nanospheres, each of which lend themselves to specific therapeutic applications.

3.1 Collagen-based scaffolds

Collagen-based scaffolds are three-dimensional biomimetic matrices having porous, interconnected structures that facilitate the regeneration of damaged bone tissues. Two types of collagen scaffolds widely used in orthopedic therapy are sponges and hydrogels. Since the use of pure collagen does not facilitate control over scaffold properties like porosity and stability, most scaffolds use composites of collagen mixed with natural polymers like chitosan, silk fibroin, and hyaluronic acid, synthetic polymers such as polyethylene glycol (PEG), polyglycolide (PGA), and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), as well as ceramics including hydroxyapatite, β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP), and silicate [62, 63]. Collagen sponges are generally developed by the process of freeze-drying, also known as ice-segregation-induced self-assembly or lyophilization. In this process, the collagen-based solution is frozen to entrap collagen molecules within hexagonal ice crystals, followed by sublimation of the water molecules, leading to the formation of intermolecular cross-links between the collagen aggregates, thus creating a highly porous, sponge-like structure, as shown in Figure 5. The shape and pore size of the sponge can be altered by controlling the fabrication parameters including duration, freezing temperature, and mold morphology. The optimal pore size must allow cell migration and nutrient diffusion while also facilitating cell attachment [64, 65]. Collagen sponges are generally loaded with growth factors like BMPs and fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) for use in bone tissue regeneration and cartilage defect repair to promote fibrin network formation in the ECM, chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), as well as osteoblast proliferation and migration [66, 67]. An atelocollagen sponge loaded with recombinant human BMP-2 (rhBMP-2) and implanted into mice models was shown to promote bone formation via osteoconduction [68]. Highly porous collagen implants were successful in treating injured rotator cuffs via connective tissue repair in human subjects [69]. Collagen sponges are also used to deliver antibiotics and biomolecules in orthopedic conditions like acute septic arthritis [70]. They are preferred due to their ease of processing, sterilization, loading, and preservation as well as their optimal functionality in inducing tissue regrowth [64].

Figure 5.

Freeze-drying process of collagen sponge formation [64].

Collagen hydrogels are hydrophilic, versatile scaffolds that can adopt a range of structures and physical properties based on factors like collagen concentration, pH, temperature, and ionic strength. Injectable hydrogels and hydrogel implants synthesized using collagen in combination with substances like hydroxyapatite, chitosan, and alginate are used for in situ bone tissue repair as they display physiological bone-like surface properties, minimal invasion, and high biocompatibility [71]. Given their highly absorbent, water-rich micro-environment and suitability for cell encapsulation, they provide an efficient biomimetic substrate for carrying adult human bone marrow-derived stem cells (hBMSCs), thus promoting ECM development and bone regeneration. They are also viable carriers of growth factors like rhBMP-2 and therapeutic drugs like doxycycline in orthopedic conditions since they form a continuous, direct delivery system and ultimately promote osteogenesis [72, 73, 74].

3.2 Collagen-based oral supplements

Oral supplementation is a popular form of collagen-based therapy, given its biocompatibility, digestibility, and bio-accessibility. Upon oral administration in the hydrolyzed form, collagen gets digested in the gastrointestinal tract and releases amino acids and peptides in the small intestine, which then enter the bloodstream. The high percentage of proline and hydroxyproline in collagen protects the peptides from intestinal proteolytic enzymes, thereby preserving their bioactivity. The two forms of collagen in oral supplements are undenatured type II collagen (UC-II), which retains its biological activity, and partially hydrolyzed collagen, which is degraded enzymatically or physically using heat/pH. Hydrolyzed collagen extracted from eggshell membranes reduces the levels of CTX-II and other inflammatory biomarkers [75]. Oral supplementation of collagen has been widely used to treat the symptoms of OA and RA including inflammation and joint pain. While both forms of collagen are effective, the analgesic benefits conferred by hydrolyzed collagen supplements were seen to be stronger in the case of OA, potentially due to better absorption [76]. The administration of an oral preparation comprising hydrolyzed collagen type II in combination with bioactive oligopeptides of natural hydrolyzed keratin, chondroitin sulfate, and hyaluronic acid was shown to reduce synovial fluid levels of the inflammatory cytokines, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, and alleviate joint pain in patients with knee OA, thereby demonstrating its viability as an adjuvant orthopedic therapy [77]. Daily oral consumption of hydrolyzed type 1 collagen (hCol1) is another potential strategy to reduce pain and inflammation via chondrocyte protection during post-traumatic OA [78]. Collagen peptides are also viable analgesics in orthopedic treatments—they significantly reduce knee pain in OA patients through the chondroprotective effect brought about by reducing the expression of MMP-13, thereby inhibiting the degradation of type II collagen [79, 80]. The oral form of chicken type II collagen is effective in inducing oral tolerance and subsequently reducing inflammation, pain, joint swelling, and stiffness in RA patients [81, 82]. Type II collagen-mediated oral tolerance is also a viable treatment for collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) as it causes an anti-inflammatory effect by increasing the production of anti-inflammatory IL-10, ultimately decreasing joint swelling and pain levels [83]. Bovine type II collagen induces oral tolerance in CIA, leading to reduced levels of pro-inflammatory IL-17 and subsequent downregulation of the IL-17 stimulated expression of receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand (RANKL), an osteoclastogenic mediator, in CD4+ T-cells [82]. Bioactive collagen peptides (BCP) are also used as oral supplements for alleviating knee pain [84].

3.3 Collagen-based microspheres and nanospheres

Collagen-based microspheres are spherical microstructures ranging in diameter from 3 to 40 μm. They are produced by the emulsification of native collagen in organic solvents like paraffin followed by glutaraldehyde-based cross-linking [85]. Mesenchymal stem cells encapsulated in collagen microspheres are used in articular cartilage repair since they promote chondrogenic differentiation and hyaline cartilage-specific gene expression. Further, the condensed collagen meshwork in microspheres is more stable with higher cell density as compared to collagen gels, and its superior chondroconductive capacity facilitates remodeling of the type I collagen template into a biomimetic, ECM-like matrix comprising type II collagen, glycosaminoglycan (GAG), and aggrecan [86]. Collagen microspheres can also efficiently maintain a cellular network of human osteoarthritic chondrocytes (hOACs). As shown in Figure 6, hOACs were enzymatically isolated from cartilage tissue samples of OA patients and encapsulated into collagen microspheres. The 3D hOAC-collagen microsphere model was shown to recapitulate the OA phenotypes more efficiently than the traditional 2D monolayer cultures and 3D pellet cultures in terms of physiologically relevant cell density, ECM interactions, MMP-13 levels, and extracellular deposition of type II and type X collagen. Thus, collagen microspheres are useful three-dimensional in vitro models for studying OA and screening potential therapies [87]. Fibrillar collagen microspheres of different sizes and morphologies can be prepared using water-in-oil emulsions by controlling the hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) and promoting the fibrillogenesis and gelling of collagen molecules, thus negating the need for cross-linking. These injectable microstructures are highly stable and biocompatible, and they mimic the ECM micro-environment, which is why they find application in the treatment of bone injuries and cartilage defects, especially in drug delivery systems [88]. Collagen microspheres are widely used in bone tissue regeneration as carriers of antibacterial drugs, glucosteroids, and growth factors like BMP and VEGF since their degradation rate can be controlled via chemical modifications like cross-linking thus facilitating the time-controlled, systematic release of the encapsulated molecules [89].

Figure 6.

Synthesis and evaluation of a 3D hOAC-collagen microsphere model [87].

Collagen nanospheres are spherical structures with a diameter in the nano-range. They are generally synthesized using a high-voltage electrostatic field via self-assembly and fibrillogenesis. They can be used as drug delivery systems and as carriers of growth factors and other bioactive molecules. They also form a major component of scaffolds and implants used in bone tissue regeneration since they can effectively encapsulate stem cells and promote cell differentiation and proliferation [89, 90]. Factors like temperature and collagen type impact the size and structure of the nanospheres. Temperatures below 37°C are generally favored, and type II collagen is preferred for maintaining the spherical structure of microspheres. While type I collagen yields nanospheres of relatively smaller sizes, the sphericity of type II collagen nanospheres is better, due to which the latter is generally preferred for use in CBBs [91]. However, type I collagen nanospheres have been shown to promote the osteogenic differentiation and proliferation of bone marrow stromal cells in vitro, thus highlighting their application in orthopedic treatments for bone tissue formation [92].

Advertisement

4. Challenges and future perspectives

Despite the vast potential of collagen in orthopedic diagnostics and therapeutics, there are certain challenges that hinder its widespread use. Further research is necessary to elucidate reliable markers of collagen metabolism that are indicative of particular disease conditions in order to increase the accuracy of collagen-based diagnostics. Simple, non-invasive, rapid detection techniques must be developed for assessing the levels of collagen and its metabolic products with a high degree of sensitivity and specificity in order to facilitate the use of collagen-based biomarkers in detecting orthopedic disorders like OA and RA [22]. The source of collagen for use in CBBs poses a serious problem—while collagen is abundantly present in most living organisms, its extraction from animal sources presents several risks including allergy, disease transmission, degradability, and immunogenicity. Collagen derived from bovine and porcine sources was seen to cause allergic reactions such as anaphylaxis in up to 4% of the population [59]. Additionally, prion-contaminated collagen from terrestrial animals can transmit zoonotic diseases like foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE), and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) which leads to the variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) in humans [93]. While these issues may be negated by the use of marine-derived collagen, the lack of substantial clinical trials coupled with its comparatively low thermal stability, rapid degradation in vivo, and poor mechanical strength impedes its application in orthopedics [94, 95]. Furthermore, animal-derived collagen telopeptides are antigenic and may trigger immune responses, leading to hypersensitivity reactions and graft vs. host diseases [96]. The use of collagen derived from human placenta and skin, on the other hand, is hindered by the large batch-to-batch variation in the biophysical properties of collagen based on parameters such as age, environmental factors, genotype, and ethnicity, which cannot be standardized [97]. Moreover, human-derived collagen presents ethical concerns related to informed consent, religious beliefs, and data privacy. Despite ongoing research into artificially synthesized collagen-like peptides, they cannot substitute natural collagen due to high costs and absence of the natural tertiary structure, due to which they cannot reproduce several biophysical properties necessary for biomedical applications [98]. Though it is considered a viable alternative, recombinant human collagen (rhCOL) also has certain shortcomings including the deficit of high protein throughput models, poor yield in mammalian cell cultures, high production costs, increased susceptibility to proteolytic degradation, higher frequency of misfolding in prokaryotic systems, and instability due to the lack of post-translational modifications in collagen obtained from expression systems that lack prolyl 4-hydroxyprolin (P4H), a heterotetramer enzyme necessary for the folding of collagen polypeptide chains to form triple helical structures [99, 100]. PH4-transduced plant systems like Nicotiana tabacum and Zea mays are currently preferred since they produce good yields of type I collagen [101]. Thus, despite the abundance of collagen, each of its sources has certain disadvantages that need to be addressed to optimize the cost-effective, large-scale production of collagen for orthopedic use.

Furthermore, the techniques employed for the extraction and cross-linking of collagen as well as the sterilization of CBBs, also cause certain issues. Fibrillar collagen, in its native form, is insoluble and resistant to proteolysis, which is why only type I collagen can be extracted in its original form from adult tissues. Thus, collagen is generally extracted in the form of hydrolyzed, soluble molecules through denaturing treatments using acids, alkalis, and proteolytic enzymes. However, the fibril-forming capacity of these molecules is lower than that of native collagen, especially due to the protease-mediated cleavage of terminal telopeptides [102, 103]. Further, the cross-linking of hydrolyzed collagen using chemical agents like glutaraldehyde and poly-epoxy compounds may leave behind toxic residual compounds, thus rendering the CBB unfit for human use [104]. While physical cross-linking methods such as dehydrothermal treatment and UV irradiation do not pose the risk of toxicity, prolonged exposure could lead to the partial or even complete degradation of collagen [105]. Thus, non-conventional cross-linking methods using enzymes like transglutaminase and natural, biocompatible cross-linkers like genipin must be further developed [106]. The fragility and thermal sensitivity of CBBs prevent sterilization via several common methods like autoclaving and electron beam irradiation with gamma rays since these approaches cause molecular degradation and structural alteration of the collagen scaffolds. Even milder approaches like β-ray irradiation and ethylene oxide sterilization cause some level of damage, and their use is restricted to specific types of CBBs [103]. Currently, ethanol treatment is used for physically cross-linked collagen, while immersion in peracetic acid is employed in the case of acellular collagen ECM. However, no known method has left the molecular structure of collagen unaltered post-sterilization [107, 108].

Moreover, the inability of traditional CBBs to regenerate the fibrillar structure of natural collagen leads to issues such as poor tensile strength and loss of biophysical properties. In recent years, modern technologies such as plastic compression, electrospinning, and 3D bioprinting have been introduced for the synthesis of highly ordered collagen matrices [109]. Plastic compression involves the rapid expulsion of water from cell-seeded collagen gels in order to synthesize strong, tissue-like collagen matrices without the need for chemical cross-linking and cell activity. In order to improve the scalability and reproducibility of plastic compression, the technique has been modified using upward fluid flow, which facilitates the synthesis of multi-layered scaffolds [110, 111]. Electrospinning is widely used for CBB synthesis since it allows the fabrication of collagen nanofibers with different morphologies that mimic the structural properties of native collagen in the ECM. However, despite the architectural versatility and biocompatibility of electrospun collagen fibers, the solubilization and processing of collagen prior to electrospinning leads to undesirable properties such as low elasticity, increased hydrophilicity, low mechanical strength, and high degradability [109, 112]. Near-field electrospinning, also known as melt electrowriting, is a modified electrospinning process that involves the extrusion of collagen fibers by the force of the electrical field followed by their immediate collection to avoid bending instabilities, which is achieved by reducing the air gap. The process allows precise control over individual collagen fibers, thereby facilitating the fabrication of tailored collagen microstructures and nanofibers with precise geometries. However, parameters like air gap distance, applied voltage, spinneret needle geometry, melt composition, and flow rate must be standardized prior to the widespread use of melt electrowriting [113]. 3D bioprinting is another highly advanced technique that produces hierarchical constructs via layer-by-layer deposition using collagen solutions as the bioink. The major disadvantage of this technique is the poor mechanical strength and stability of the CBBs, which can be overcome by using hybrid collagen-based bioinks containing substances like thrombin, hydroxyapatite, alginate, agarose, silk, and gelatin. Mechanical stability can also be improved by printing within a pre-formed mold, using thermo-reversible supports like gelatin slurries, increasing the density of the collagen bioink, and cross-linking the collagen fibers [106, 114, 115]. However, despite the advantages of modern fabrication techniques, they must be optimized through further research in order to promote the clinical use of CBBs in orthopedic therapy.

Advertisement

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, collagen is a unique component of the ECM with several desirable properties such as biocompatibility, biodegradability, and mechanical stability that can be harnessed for use in orthopedics. Given the involvement of collagen in the pathogenesis of orthopedic conditions, its metabolic fragments serve as biomarkers for the detection of diseases like ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatoid arthritis. With the development of efficient detection strategies and a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying disease pathogenesis, the potential of collagen-based diagnostics can be translated into widespread clinical applications. Since the invention of the catgut in 1881, several advanced CBBs including scaffolds and microstructures have been developed for orthopedic use. Innovative approaches are required to overcome the drawbacks associated with the different sources of collagen as well as the currently used extraction, processing, and sterilization methods. Further research into modern fabrication techniques like melt electrowriting and 3D bioprinting is of utmost importance for the integration of CBBs into orthopedic therapy. Despite its shortcomings, the unique characteristics of collagen place it at the forefront of biomedical research in the field of orthopedics.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Manipal School of Life Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India, for providing the infrastructure required to complete this project. NM is grateful for the financial support received from the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Government of India, India (Project Number ITR/Ad-hoc/43/2020-21, ID No. 2020-3286) and the Global Innovation and Technology Alliance (GITA), Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India, India (Project Number GITA/DST/TWN/P-95/2021).

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. Kular JK, Basu S, Sharma RI. The extracellular matrix: Structure, composition, age-related differences, tools for analysis and applications for tissue engineering. Journal of Tissue Engineering. 2014;5:2041731414557112. DOI: 10.1177/2041731414557112
  2. 2. Chute M, Aujla P, Jana S, Kassiri Z. The non-fibrillar side of fibrosis: Contribution of the basement membrane, proteoglycans, and glycoproteins to myocardial fibrosis. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease. 2019;6(4):35. DOI: 10.3390/jcdd6040035
  3. 3. Jawad H, Brown RA. Mesoscale engineering of collagen as a functional biomaterial. In: Moo-Young M, editor. Comprehensive Biotechnology. 2nd ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2011. pp. 37-49. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-08-088504-9.00356-1
  4. 4. Wu M, Cronin K, Crane JS. Biochemistry, collagen synthesis. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island, St. Petersburg, Florida, United States: StatPearls Publishing; 2024
  5. 5. Bella J, Hulmes DJS. Fibrillar collagens. Sub-Cellular Biochemistry. 2017;82:457-490. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-49674-0_14
  6. 6. Onursal C, Dick E, Angelidis I, Schiller HB, Staab-Weijnitz CA. Collagen biosynthesis, processing, and maturation in lung ageing. Frontiers in Medicine (Lausanne). 2021;8:593874. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.593874
  7. 7. Alcaide-Ruggiero L, Molina-Hernández V, Granados MM, Domínguez JM. Main and minor types of collagens in the articular cartilage: The role of collagens in repair tissue evaluation in chondral defects. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(24):13329. DOI: 10.3390/ijms222413329
  8. 8. Canty EG, Kadler KE. Procollagen trafficking, processing and fibrillogenesis. Journal of Cell Science. 2005;118(7):1341-1353. DOI: 10.1242/jcs.01731
  9. 9. Shoulders MD, Raines RT. Collagen structure and stability. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 2009;78:929-958. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.77.032207.120833
  10. 10. Sorushanova A, Delgado LM, Wu Z, Shologu N, Kshirsagar A, Raghunath R, et al. The collagen suprafamily: From biosynthesis to advanced biomaterial development. Advanced Materials. 2019;31(1):e1801651. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201801651
  11. 11. Velasco MA, Narváez-Tovar CA, Garzón-Alvarado DA. Design, materials, and mechanobiology of biodegradable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. BioMed Research International. 2015;2015:729076. DOI: 10.1155/2015/729076
  12. 12. Mohamed AM. An overview of bone cells and their regulating factors of differentiation. Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2008;15(1):4-12
  13. 13. Ritelli M, Colombi M. Molecular genetics and pathogenesis of Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and related connective tissue disorders. Genes (Basel). 2020;11(5):547. DOI: 10.3390/genes11050547
  14. 14. Rauch F, Glorieux FH. Osteogenesis imperfecta. Lancet. 2004;363(9418):1377-1385. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16051-0
  15. 15. Germain DP. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type IV. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases. 2007;2(1):32. DOI: 10.1186/1750-1172-2-32
  16. 16. Krakow D. Skeletal dysplasias. Clinics in Perinatology. 2015;42(2):301-319. DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2015.03.003
  17. 17. Lister J. An Address on the Catgut Ligature. BMJ. 1881;1(1049):183-185
  18. 18. Zheng M, Wang X, Chen Y, Yue O, Bai Z, Cui B, et al. A review of recent progress on collagen-based biomaterials. Advanced Healthcare Materials. 2023;12(16):e2202042. DOI: 10.1002/adhm.202202042
  19. 19. Necula L, Matei L, Dragu D, Pitica I, Neagu A, Bleotu C, et al. Collagen family as promising biomarkers and therapeutic targets in cancer. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23(20):12415. DOI: 10.3390/ijms232012415
  20. 20. Wahyudi H, Reynolds AA, Li Y, Owen SC, Yu SM. Targeting collagen for diagnostic imaging and therapeutic delivery. Journal of Controlled Release. 2016;240:323-331. DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.01.007
  21. 21. Sophia Fox AJ, Bedi A, Rodeo SA. The basic science of articular cartilage: Structure, composition, and function. Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach. 2009;1(6):461-468. DOI: 10.1177/1941738109350438
  22. 22. Ouyang Z, Dong L, Yao F, Wang K, Chen Y, Li S, et al. Cartilage-related collagens in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: From pathogenesis to therapeutics. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023;24(12):9841. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24129841
  23. 23. Nikolov A, Popovski N. Role of gelatinases MMP-2 and MMP-9 in healthy and complicated pregnancy and their future potential as preeclampsia biomarkers. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(3):480. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11030480
  24. 24. Gao F, Zhang S. Salicin inhibits AGE-induced degradation of type II collagen and aggrecan in human SW1353 chondrocytes: Therapeutic potential in osteoarthritis. Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology. 2019;47(1):1043-1049. DOI: 10.1080/21691401.2019.1591427
  25. 25. Wu JJ, Weis MA, Kim LS, Eyre DR. Type III collagen, a fibril network modifier in articular cartilage. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2010;285(24):18537-18544. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M110.112904
  26. 26. Veidal SS, Larsen DV, Chen X, Sun S, Zheng Q , Bay-Jensen AC, et al. MMP mediated type V collagen degradation (C5M) is elevated in ankylosing spondylitis. Clinical Biochemistry. 2012;45(7-8):541-546. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.02.007
  27. 27. Ricard-Blum S. The collagen family. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. 2011;3(1):a004978. DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a004978
  28. 28. Lam NP, Li Y, Waldman AB, Brussiau J, Lee PL, Olsen BR, et al. Age-dependent increase of discoidin domain receptor 2 and matrix metalloproteinase 13 expression in temporomandibular joint cartilage of type IX and type XI collagen-deficient mice. Archives of Oral Biology. 2007;52(6):579-584. DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2006.10.014
  29. 29. Zhang Z, Liu X, Duan L, Li X, Zhang Y, Zhou Q. The effects of velvet antler polypeptides on the phenotype and related biological indicators of osteoarthritic rabbit chondrocytes. Acta Biochimica Polonica. 2011;58(3):297-302
  30. 30. Brown DJ, Bishop P, Hamdi H, Kenney MC. Cleavage of structural components of mammalian vitreous by endogenous matrix metalloproteinase-2. Current Eye Research. 1996;15(4):439-445. DOI: 10.3109/02713689608995835
  31. 31. Mobasheri A, Lambert C, Henrotin Y. Coll2-1 and Coll2-1NO2 as exemplars of collagen extracellular matrix turnover—Biomarkers to facilitate the treatment of osteoarthritis? Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics. 2019;19(9):803-812. DOI: 10.1080/14737159.2019.1646641
  32. 32. Zhu W, He X, Cheng K, Zhang L, Chen D, Wang X, et al. Ankylosing spondylitis: Etiology, pathogenesis, and treatments. Bone Research. 2019;7(1):22. DOI: 10.1038/s41413-019-0057-8
  33. 33. Alexander M. Ankylosing spondylitis pathogenesis and pathophysiology. In: Armas JB, editor. Ankylosing Spondylitis—Recent Concepts. London, UK: IntechOpen; 2023. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.109164
  34. 34. Tam LS, Gu J, Yu D. Pathogenesis of ankylosing spondylitis. Nature Reviews Rheumatology. 2010;6(7):399-405. DOI: 10.1038/nrrheum.2010.79
  35. 35. Maksymowych WP. Biomarkers for diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis, disease activity, prognosis, and prediction of response to therapy. Frontiers in Immunology. 2019;10:305. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00305
  36. 36. Port H, Hausgaard CM, He Y, Maksymowych WP, Wichuk S, Sinkeviciute D, et al. A novel biomarker of MMP-cleaved cartilage intermediate layer protein-1 is elevated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and osteoarthritis. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):21717. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-48787-x
  37. 37. Port H, Nielsen SH, Frederiksen P, Madsen SF, Bay-Jensen AC, Sørensen IJ, et al. Extracellular matrix turnover biomarkers reflect pharmacodynamic effects and treatment response of adalimumab in patients with axial spondyloarthritis—Results from two randomized controlled trials. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2023;25(1):157. DOI: 10.1186/s13075-023-03132-5
  38. 38. Honvo G, Lengelé L, Charles A, Reginster JY, Bruyère O. Role of collagen derivatives in osteoarthritis and cartilage repair: A systematic scoping review with evidence mapping. Rheumatology and Therapy. 2020;7(4):703-740. DOI: 10.1007/s40744-020-00240-5
  39. 39. Charlier E, Deroyer C, Ciregia F, Malaise O, Neuville S, Plener Z, et al. Chondrocyte dedifferentiation and osteoarthritis (OA). Biochemical Pharmacology. 2019;165:49-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2019.02.036
  40. 40. Zhang P, Li K, Kamali A, Ziadlou R, Ahmad P, Wang X, et al. Small molecules of herbal origin for osteoarthritis treatment: In vitro and in vivo evidence. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2022;24(1):105. DOI: 10.1186/s13075-022-02785-y
  41. 41. Bermudez-Lekerika P, Crump KB, Tseranidou S, Nüesch A, Kanelis E, Alminnawi A, et al. Immuno-modulatory effects of intervertebral disc cells. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2022;10:924692. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2022.924692
  42. 42. Li NG, Shi ZH, Tang YP, Wang ZJ, Song SL, Qian LH, et al. New Hope for the treatment of osteoarthritis through selective inhibition of MMP-13. Current Medicinal Chemistry. 2011;18(7):977-1001. DOI: 10.2174/092986711794940905
  43. 43. Billinghurst RC, Dahlberg L, Ionescu M, Reiner A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, et al. Enhanced cleavage of type II collagen by collagenases in osteoarthritic articular cartilage. The Journal of Clinical Investigation. 1997;99(7):1534-1545. DOI: 10.1172/JCI119316
  44. 44. Valdes AM, Meulenbelt I, Chassaing E, Arden NK, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Hart D, et al. Large scale meta-analysis of urinary C-terminal telopeptide, serum cartilage oligomeric protein and matrix metalloprotease degraded type II collagen and their role in prevalence, incidence and progression of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2014;22(5):683-689. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2014.02.007
  45. 45. Hosseininia S, Weis MA, Rai J, Kim L, Funk S, Dahlberg LE, et al. Evidence for enhanced collagen type III deposition focally in the territorial matrix of osteoarthritic hip articular cartilage. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2016;24(6):1029-1035. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2016.01.001
  46. 46. Bay-Jensen AC, Kjelgaard-Petersen CF, Petersen KK, Arendt-Nielsen L, Quasnichka HL, Mobasheri A, et al. Aggrecanase degradation of type III collagen is associated with clinical knee pain. Clinical Biochemistry. 2018;58:37-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2018.04.022
  47. 47. Kang EH, Lee YJ, Kim TK, Chang CB, Chung JH, Shin K, et al. Adiponectin is a potential catabolic mediator in osteoarthritis cartilage. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2010;12(6):R231. DOI: 10.1186/ar3218
  48. 48. Deberg M, Labasse A, Christgau S, Cloos P, Bang Henriksen D, Chapelle JP, et al. New serum biochemical markers (Coll 2-1 and Coll 2-1 NO2) for studying oxidative-related type II collagen network degradation in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2005;13(3):258-265. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2004.12.002
  49. 49. Scotece M, Mobasheri A. Leptin in osteoarthritis: Focus on articular cartilage and chondrocytes. Life Sciences. 2015;140:75-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2015.05.025
  50. 50. Rim YA, Nam Y, Ju JH. The role of chondrocyte hypertrophy and senescence in osteoarthritis initiation and progression. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21(7):2358. DOI: 10.3390/ijms21072358
  51. 51. He Y, Manon-Jensen T, Arendt-Nielsen L, Petersen KK, Christiansen T, Samuels J, et al. Potential diagnostic value of a type X collagen neo-epitope biomarker for knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2019;27(4):611-620. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2019.01.001
  52. 52. Huey DJ, Hu JC, Athanasiou KA. Unlike bone, cartilage regeneration remains elusive. Science. 2012;338(6109):917-921. DOI: 10.1126/science.1222454
  53. 53. Bullock J, Rizvi SAA, Saleh AM, Ahmed SS, Do DP, Ansari RA, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis: A brief overview of the treatment. Medical Principles and Practice. 2018;27(6):501-507. DOI: 10.1159/000493390
  54. 54. Szeremeta A, Jura-Półtorak A, Zoń-Giebel A, Olczyk K, Komosińska-Vassev K. Effects of etanercept and adalimumab on serum levels of cartilage remodeling markers in women with rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023;12(16):5185. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12165185
  55. 55. Nygaard G, Firestein GS. Restoring synovial homeostasis in rheumatoid arthritis by targeting fibroblast-like synoviocytes. Nature Reviews Rheumatology. 2020;16(6):316-333. DOI: 10.1038/s41584-020-0413-5
  56. 56. Lefèvre S, Schwarz M, Meier FMP, Zimmermann-Geller B, Tarner IH, Rickert M, et al. Disease-specific effects of matrix and growth factors on adhesion and migration of rheumatoid synovial fibroblasts. Journal of Immunology. 2017;198(12):4588-4595. DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1600989
  57. 57. Hušáková M, Bay-Jensen AC, Forejtová Š, Zegzulková K, Tomčík M, Gregová M, et al. Metabolites of type I, II, III, and IV collagen may serve as markers of disease activity in axial spondyloarthritis. Scientific Reports. 2019;9(1):11218. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-71093-9
  58. 58. Gudmann NS, Junker P, Juhl P, Thudium CS, Siebuhr AS, Byrjalsen I, et al. Type IV collagen metabolism is associated with disease activity, radiographic progression and response to tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology. 2018;36(5):829-835
  59. 59. Davison-Kotler E, Marshall WS, García-Gareta E. Sources of collagen for biomaterials in skin wound healing. Bioengineering (Basel). 2019;6(3):56. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering6030056
  60. 60. Abou Neel EA, Bozec L, Knowles JC, Syed O, Mudera V, Day R, et al. Collagen—Emerging collagen based therapies hit the patient. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2013;65(4):429-456. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.08.010
  61. 61. Xu L, Liu Y, Tang L, Xiao H, Yang Z, Wang S. Preparation of recombinant human collagen III protein hydrogels with sustained release of extracellular vesicles for skin wound healing. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23(11):6289. DOI: 10.3390/ijms23116289
  62. 62. Dong C, Lv Y. Application of collagen scaffold in tissue engineering: Recent advances and new perspectives. Polymers (Basel). 2016;8(2):42. DOI: 10.3390/polym8020042
  63. 63. Patil VA, Masters KS. Engineered collagen matrices. Bioengineering (Basel). 2020;7(4):163. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering7040163
  64. 64. Fan L, Ren Y, Emmert S, Vučković I, Stojanovic S, Najman S, et al. The use of collagen-based materials in bone tissue engineering. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023;24(4):3744. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24043744
  65. 65. Schoof H, Apel J, Heschel I, Rau G. Control of pore structure and size in freeze-dried collagen sponges. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 2001;58(4):352-357. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.1028
  66. 66. Kim B, Kim JS, Lee J. Improvements of osteoblast adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation in vitro via fibrin network formation in collagen sponge scaffold. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. Part A. 2013;101A(9):2661-2666. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.34567
  67. 67. Qi Y, Zhang W, Li G, Niu L, Zhang Y, Tang R, et al. An oriented-collagen scaffold including Wnt5a promotes osteochondral regeneration and cartilage interface integration in a rabbit model. The FASEB Journal. 2020;34(8):11115-11132. DOI: 10.1096/fj.202000280R
  68. 68. Borrego-González S, Rico-Llanos G, Becerra J, Díaz-Cuenca A, Visser R. Sponge-like processed D-periodic self-assembled atelocollagen supports bone formation in vivo. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2021;120:111679. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2020.111679
  69. 69. Arnoczky SP, Bishai SK, Schofield B, Sigman S, Bushnell BD, Hommen JP, et al. Histologic evaluation of biopsy specimens obtained after rotator cuff repair augmented with a highly porous collagen implant. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(2):278-283. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.06.047
  70. 70. Kim KJ, Jeong HS, Ahn BH, Chung DM. Clinical efficacy of the antibiotic-loaded collagen sponge during arthroscopic treatment of acute septic arthritis of the native knee. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2022;10(4):232596712210871. DOI: 10.1177/23259671221087189
  71. 71. Huang Z, Feng Q , Yu B, Li S. Biomimetic properties of an injectable chitosan/nano-hydroxyapatite/collagen composite. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2011;31(3):683-687. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2010.12.014
  72. 72. Nicodemus GD, Bryant SJ. Cell encapsulation in biodegradable hydrogels for tissue engineering applications. Tissue Engineering. Part B, Reviews. 2008;14(2):149-165. DOI: 10.1089/ten.teb.2007.0332
  73. 73. Patel A, Zaky SH, Schoedel K, Li H, Sant V, Beniash E, et al. Design and evaluation of collagen-inspired mineral-hydrogel nanocomposites for bone regeneration. Acta Biomaterialia. 2020;112:262-273. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.05.034
  74. 74. Pal P, Nguyen QC, Benton AH, Marquart ME, Janorkar AV. Drug-loaded elastin-like polypeptide–collagen hydrogels with high modulus for bone tissue engineering. Macromolecular Bioscience. 2019;19(9):e1900142. DOI: 10.1002/mabi.201900142
  75. 75. Ruff KJ, Morrison D, Duncan SA, Back M, Aydogan C, Theodosakis J. Beneficial effects of natural eggshell membrane versus placebo in exercise-induced joint pain, stiffness, and cartilage turnover in healthy, postmenopausal women. Clinical Interventions in Aging. 2018;13:285-295. DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S153782
  76. 76. García-Coronado JM, Martínez-Olvera L, Elizondo-Omaña RE, Acosta-Olivo CA, Vilchez-Cavazos F, Simental-Mendía LE, et al. Effect of collagen supplementation on osteoarthritis symptoms: A meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. International Orthopaedics. 2019;43(3):531-538. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-4211-5
  77. 77. Oliviero F, Ramonda R, Hoxha A, Scanu A, Galozzi P, Favero M, et al. Effect of an oral preparation containing hyaluronic acid, chondroitin sulfate, hydrolyzed collagen type II and hydrolyzed keratin on synovial fluid features and clinical indices in knee osteoarthritis. A pilot study. Reumatismo. 2020;72(3):125-130. DOI: 10.4081/reumatismo.2020.1272
  78. 78. Dar QA, Schott EM, Catheline SE, Maynard RD, Liu Z, Kamal F, et al. Daily oral consumption of hydrolyzed type 1 collagen is chondroprotective and anti-inflammatory in murine posttraumatic osteoarthritis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(4):e0174705. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174705
  79. 79. Isaka S, Someya A, Nakamura S, Naito K, Nozawa M, Inoue N, et al. Evaluation of the effect of oral administration of collagen peptides on an experimental rat osteoarthritis model. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine. 2017;13(6):2699-2706. DOI: 10.3892/etm.2017.4310
  80. 80. Lin CR, Tsai SHL, Huang KY, Tsai PA, Chou H, Chang SH. Analgesic efficacy of collagen peptide in knee osteoarthritis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2023;18(1):694. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04182-w
  81. 81. Wei W, Zhang LL, Xu JH, Xiao F, Bao CD, Ni LQ , et al. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled phase III clinical trial of chicken type II collagen in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2009;11(6):R180. DOI: 10.1186/ar2870
  82. 82. Ju JH, Cho ML, Jhun JY, Park MJ, Oh HJ, Min SY, et al. Oral administration of type-II collagen suppresses IL-17-associated RANKL expression of CD4+ T cells in collagen-induced arthritis. Immunology Letters. 2008;117(1):16-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.imlet.2007.09.011
  83. 83. Min SY, Hwang SY, Park KS, Lee JS, Lee KE, Kim KW, et al. Induction of IL-10-producing CD4+CD25+T cells in animal model of collagen-induced arthritis by oral administration of type II collagen. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2004;6(3):R213-R219. DOI: 10.1186/ar1169
  84. 84. Zdzieblik D, Oesser S, Gollhofer A, König D. Improvement of activity-related knee joint discomfort following supplementation of specific collagen peptides. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 2017;42(6):588-595. DOI: 10.1139/apnm-2016-0390
  85. 85. Berthold A, Cremer K, Kreuter J. Collagen microparticles: Carriers for glucocorticosteroids. European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics. 1998;45(1):23-29. DOI: 10.1016/S0939-6411(97)00119-7
  86. 86. Li YY, Cheng HW, Cheung KMC, Chan D, Chan BP. Mesenchymal stem cell-collagen microspheres for articular cartilage repair: Cell density and differentiation status. Acta Biomaterialia. 2014;10(5):1919-1929. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.01.002
  87. 87. Yeung P, Cheng KH, Yan CH, Chan BP. Collagen microsphere based 3D culture system for human osteoarthritis chondrocytes (hOACs). Scientific Reports. 2019;9(1):12453. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47946-3
  88. 88. Matsuhashi A, Nam K, Kimura T, Kishida A. Fabrication of fibrillized collagen microspheres with the microstructure resembling an extracellular matrix. Soft Matter. 2015;11(14):2844-2851. DOI: 10.1039/C4SM01982B
  89. 89. Ferreira AM, Gentile P, Chiono V, Ciardelli G. Collagen for bone tissue regeneration. Acta Biomaterialia. 2012;8(9):3191-3200. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2012.06.014
  90. 90. Lo S, Fauzi MB. Current update of collagen nanomaterials—Fabrication, characterisation and its applications: A review. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13(3):316. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics13030316
  91. 91. Chang SJ, Niu GCC, Kuo SM, Ho CC, Bair MS. Preparation of nano-sized particles from collagen II by a high-voltage electrostatic field system. IEE Proceedings. Nanobiotechnology. 2006;153(1):1-6. DOI: 10.1049/ip-nbt:20050037
  92. 92. Kuo-Yu C, Chia-Mei C, Shyh-Ming K, Yueh-Sheng C, Chun-Hsu Y. Influence of collagen I nanospheres on the growth and osteogenic difference of rat bone marrow stromal cells. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering. 2009;29(6):284-289
  93. 93. Gauza-Włodarczyk M, Kubisz L, Mielcarek S, Włodarczyk D. Comparison of thermal properties of fish collagen and bovine collagen in the temperature range 298-670 K. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2017;80:468-471. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2017.06.012
  94. 94. Maher M, Glattauer V, Onofrillo C, Duchi S, Yue Z, Hughes TC, et al. Suitability of marine- and porcine-derived collagen type I hydrogels for bioprinting and tissue engineering scaffolds. Marine Drugs. 2022;20(6):366. DOI: 10.3390/md20060366
  95. 95. Xu N, Peng XL, Li HR, Liu JX, Cheng JSY, Qi XY, et al. Marine-derived collagen as biomaterials for human health. Frontiers in Nutrition. 2021;8:702108. DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2021.702108
  96. 96. Velnar T, Bunc G, Klobucar R, Gradisnik L. Biomaterials and host versus graft response: A short review. Bosnian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences. 2016;16(2):82-90. DOI: 10.17305/bjbms.2016.525
  97. 97. Willard JJ, Drexler JW, Das A, Roy S, Shilo S, Shoseyov O, et al. Plant-derived human collagen scaffolds for skin tissue engineering. Tissue Engineering. Part A. 2013;19(13-14):1507-1518. DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2012.0338
  98. 98. Zhu J, Li Z, Zou Y, Lu G, Ronca A, D’Amora U, et al. Advanced application of collagen-based biomaterials in tissue repair and restoration. Journal of Leather Science and Engineering. 2022;4(1):30. DOI: 10.1186/s42825-022-00102-6
  99. 99. Wang T, Lew J, Premkumar J, Poh CL, Win Naing M. Production of recombinant collagen: State of the art and challenges. Engineering Biology. 2017;1(1):18-23. DOI: 10.1049/enb.2017.0003
  100. 100. Myllyharju J, Nokelainen M, Vuorela A, Kivirikko KI. Expression of recombinant human type I-III collagens in the yeast Pichia pastoris. Biochemical Society Transactions. 2000;28(4):353-357
  101. 101. Perret S, Merle C, Bernocco S, Berland P, Garrone R, Hulmes DJ, et al. Unhydroxylated triple helical collagen I produced in transgenic plants provides new clues on the role of hydroxyproline in collagen folding and fibril formation. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2001;276(47):43693-43698. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M105507200
  102. 102. Rubin AL, Pfahl D, Speakman PT, Davidson PF, Schmitt FO. Tropocollagen: Significance of protease-induced alterations. Science. 1963;139(3549):37-39. DOI: 10.1126/science.139.3549.37
  103. 103. Parenteau-Bareil R, Gauvin R, Berthod F. Collagen-based biomaterials for tissue engineering applications. Materials (Basel). 2010;3(3):1863-1887. DOI: 10.3390/ma3031863
  104. 104. Speer DP, Chvapil M, Eskelson CD, Ulreich J. Biological effects of residual glutaraldehyde in glutaraldehyde-tanned collagen biomaterials. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 1980;14(6):753-764. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.82014060
  105. 105. Weadock KS, Miller EJ, Bellincampi LD, Zawadsky JP, Dunn MG. Physical crosslinking of collagen fibers: Comparison of ultraviolet irradiation and dehydrothermal treatment. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 1995;29(11):1373-1379. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.820291108
  106. 106. Kim YB, Lee H, Kim GH. Strategy to achieve highly porous/biocompatible macroscale cell blocks, using a collagen/genipin-bioink and an optimal 3D printing process. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 2016;8(47):32230-32240. DOI: 10.1021/acsami.6b11669
  107. 107. Wilshaw SP, Kearney JN, Fisher J, Ingham E. Production of an acellular amniotic membrane matrix for use in tissue engineering. Tissue Engineering. 2006;12(8):2117-2129. DOI: 10.1089/ten.2006.12.2117
  108. 108. Ma L. Collagen/chitosan porous scaffolds with improved biostability for skin tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2003;24(26):4833-4841. DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(03)00374-0
  109. 109. Bazrafshan Z, Stylios GK. Spinnability of collagen as a biomimetic material: A review. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2019;129:693-705. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.02.024
  110. 110. Alekseeva T, Jawad H, Purser M, Brown RA. New improved technique of plastic compression of collagen using upward fluid flow. In: El Haj A, Bader D (editors). 8th International Conference on Cell and Stem Cell Engineering (ICCE). IFMBE Proceedings. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg; 2011; 30. p. 5-8. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-19044-5_2
  111. 111. Levis HJ, Brown RA, Daniels JT. Plastic compressed collagen as a biomimetic substrate for human limbal epithelial cell culture. Biomaterials. 2010;31(30):7726-7737. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.07.012
  112. 112. Blackstone BN, Gallentine SC, Powell HM. Collagen-based electrospun materials for tissue engineering: A systematic review. Bioengineering (Basel). 2021;8(3):39. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering8030039
  113. 113. King W, Bowlin G. Near-field electrospinning and melt electrowriting of biomedical polymers—Progress and limitations. Polymers (Basel). 2021;13(7):1097. DOI: 10.3390/polym13071097
  114. 114. D’Amora U, D’Este M, Eglin D, Safari F, Sprecher CM, Gloria A, et al. Collagen density gradient on three-dimensional printed poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds for interface tissue engineering. Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. 2018;12(2):321-329. DOI: 10.1002/term.2457
  115. 115. Włodarczyk-Biegun MK, del Campo A. 3D bioprinting of structural proteins. Biomaterials. 2017;134:180-201. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.04.019

Written By

Samriti Balaji Mudaliar, Sitaram Chopperla, Alevoor Srinivas Bharath Prasad and Nirmal Mazumder

Submitted: 07 March 2024 Reviewed: 11 March 2024 Published: 18 June 2024