Abstract
Human Microphysiological Systems (hMPS), otherwise known as organ- and tissue-on-a-chip models, are an emerging technology with the potential to replace in vivo animal studies with in vitro models that emulate human physiology at basic levels. hMPS platforms are designed to overcome limitations of two-dimensional (2D) cell culture systems by mimicking 3D tissue organization and microenvironmental cues that are physiologically and clinically relevant. Unlike animal studies, hMPS models can be configured for high content or high throughput screening in preclinical drug development. Applications in modeling acute and chronic injuries in the musculoskeletal system are slowly developing. However, the complexity and load bearing nature of musculoskeletal tissues and joints present unique challenges related to our limited understanding of disease mechanisms and the lack of consensus biomarkers to guide biological therapy development. With emphasis on examples of modeling musculoskeletal tissues, joints on chips, and organoids, this review highlights current trends of microphysiological systems technology. The review surveys state-of-the-art design and fabrication considerations inspired by lessons from bioreactors and biological variables emphasizing the role of induced pluripotent stem cells and genetic engineering in creating isogenic, patient-specific multicellular hMPS. The major challenges in modeling musculoskeletal tissues using hMPS chips are identified, including incorporating biological barriers, simulating joint compartments and heterogenous tissue interfaces, simulating immune interactions and inflammatory factors, simulating effects of in vivo loading, recording nociceptors responses as surrogates for pain outcomes, modeling the dynamic injury and healing responses by monitoring secreted proteins in real time, and creating arrayed formats for robotic high throughput screens. Overcoming these barriers will revolutionize musculoskeletal research by enabling physiologically relevant, predictive models of human tissues and joint diseases to accelerate and de-risk therapeutic discovery and translation to the clinic.
1 Introduction
Musculoskeletal conditions encompass a wide spectrum of pain or damage associated with muscle, bone, cartilage, tendon, ligament, joints, and nerves. Injuries to musculoskeletal tissues are the leading cause of disability worldwide and often limit mobility and restrict the patients’ ability to work or participate in recreational activities. As the mean age of the population increases, it is expected that the prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions and the associated socioeconomic burden will increase drastically in the coming decades (). The most frequently reported musculoskeletal conditions in the US include arthritis, chronic joint pain, and back pain. Treatments typically prioritize pain-relief, including benzodiazepines, muscle relaxants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or combinations of those and other pain-relieving drugs (). While effective as palliative treatments, these are not disease-modifying or reparative drugs that address the molecular basis of the pathology. Therefore, there is a critical need for an improved understanding of the mechanisms of musculoskeletal pathologies to guide the development of drugs that resolve the underlying causes.
The process for drug and therapeutic discovery, development, and approval is arduous and costly. Discovery typically starts in academic or pharmaceutical laboratories. Unfortunately, many discoveries in academic laboratories fail to be reproducible or scaled up in pharmaceutical research and development laboratories. Leading drug candidates may be abandoned in the developmental “valley of death” because they are too slow or too costly to develop. And even well-funded efforts can fail in clinical trials despite promising preclinical findings. As a result, only ∼10% of the therapeutic development pipelines entering phase I clinical trials typically proceed to FDA approval. Without a technological breakthrough that reduces risk and front-end investments required for drug development, these significant barriers will continue to hamper development and translation efforts ().
Less than 8% of active interventional clinical trials of musculoskeletal diseases in the United States involve disease-modifying biological therapies, including stem cell therapy, growth factors and platelet-rich-plasma trials. The shortage of biological therapies for musculoskeletal conditions, excluding arthritis, highlights several issues for the field to recognize and tackle. The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) Symposium in 2015 identified the root cause as the incomplete knowledge of musculoskeletal disease mechanisms and a lack of reliable biomarkers to inform clinical trials (). In addition to frequent findings of poor efficacy, late-stage clinical trials fail from flawed study designs, inappropriate statistical endpoints, drug safety, or underpowered clinical trials resulting from patient dropouts and insufficient enrollment (). Although not all these factors can be controlled, there is an opportunity to address efficacy and safety assessment of therapeutic candidates earlier in the preclinical stages with better models of human musculoskeletal disease.
The level of evidence obtained from preclinical studies using animal models and in vitro culture systems is constrained by the limitations of these models. Animal models have been the cornerstone of translatable biomedical research over the past century. Despite their undeniable value in biomedical research, animal models have numerous limitations that unfortunately have contributed to the arduous and costly new therapy development process. Animal studies are intrinsically low throughput and do not accurately predict the drug’s effects and bioavailability in humans due to differences in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) responses. In addition, animal models used for biomedical studies are almost always inbred for research purposes and thus lack the genetic diversity of the human population. Lastly, studies of experimentally-induced acute or chronic musculoskeletal conditions do not use consensus models to allow uniformity in outcomes and valid interpretations of different experiments. Current in vitro culture models represent artificial, non-physiological conditions, mostly consisting of a single cell type or at best co-cultures of two cell types, to simulate the paracrine signaling between immune cells (e.g., macrophages) and mesenchymal cells (e.g., myocytes, fibroblasts, osteoblasts, osteocytes, and chondrocytes). Three dimensional (3D) scaffolds such as collagen are often used, but they are typically monocellular and not readily amenable to modeling the heterogeneity in a tissue. These systems are, therefore, inadequate to faithfully model treatment effects on acute or chronic musculoskeletal conditions or predict clinical outcomes.
Biomedical innovations such as induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) from adult somatic cells (), CRISPR/CAS for gene editing (), and organ-on-a-chip (OoaC), also known as microphysiological systems (MPS), are ushering in an era where in vitro systems provide relevant, accessible, and flexible models of tissues and organs. MPS typically use microfluidic channels or compartments that model micro-scale units of multicellular tissues or organs (), tissue interfaces (), and multi-organ systems (). Ideally, MPS are allometrically scaled models of human tissues in their anatomical and physiological contexts. These technologies have various applications including disease modeling, drug discovery, toxicology screening, and personalized medicine (). The integration of major tissues and organs in the human body in a single chip or connected chips to predict safety, efficacy and PK/PD of drug candidates in humans is one of the most exciting recent advances in the biomedical sciences (Figure 1). Therefore, MPS are a disruptive technology platform for evaluating safety and efficacy during the early stages of drug and therapeutic development and informing the planning and execution of clinical trials. This was recently demonstrated by a breakthrough study that used MPS of vascularized human kidney spheroids with integrated tissue-embedded microsensors for oxygen, glucose, lactate, and glutamine to provide real-time assessment of nephrotoxicity of immunosuppressive (cyclosporine) and anticancer (cisplatin) drugs. Importantly, the kidney-on-a-chip uncovered a previously unknown mechanism of injury involving glucose transport and predicted the protective effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor (empagliflozin) against the nephrotoxicity induced by the immunosuppressive and anticancer drugs. The sensor-enabled kidney-on-a-chip prediction of safety and efficacy of the combination therapy was validated through retrospective analysis of a clinical study involving 247 patients receiving cyclosporine or cisplatin alone or in combination with the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin (). Such works are paving the way for MPS technology to transform drug development and patient healthcare.
FIGURE 1
Despite the proliferation of these sophisticated chips to model various tissue and organ systems, scientists in the musculoskeletal field have been slow to develop and adopt them. For example, there has been significant progress in developing and validating MPS for major diseases associated with high mortality rates such as the heart (), lung (), intestines (), and liver (). Many of these systems are reported in the Microphysiology Systems Database (MPS-Db) developed by the University of Pittsburgh Drug Discovery Institute to aggregate and manage data from different laboratories and to provide reference and clinical data to evaluate and validate experimental MPS results (). Currently, musculoskeletal models of bone, joint, and skeletal muscle account for <10% of the entries in the MPS-Db. Arguably, the slow adoption of MPS in studies of musculoskeletal diseases can be attributed to conceptual and practical challenges in modeling cell and extracellular matrix (ECM) interactions in the dynamic injury and healing processes, in vivo mechanical loading, incorporating vascularization and innervation, and recreating joints and sophisticated soft-to-hard tissue interfaces.
Therefore, this review outlines current tools and trends in the MPS field, citing examples of early applications to model musculoskeletal diseases. In addition to providing an overview of critical issues in MPS, the review discusses specific challenges that should be prioritized in future MPS models of musculoskeletal diseases to accelerate their adoption into the drug and therapeutic discovery pipeline and in virtual clinical trials.
2 From Bioreactors to Microphysiological Systems
Bioreactors are closed cell and tissue culture systems in which the biochemical and biophysical environments of the culture are tightly regulated and monitored (Figure 2A). Traditionally bioreactors have been used as cell expansion systems for cell therapy, 3D engineered tissue training and maturation systems, and extracorporeal organ support devices (). MPS adopt many of the traditional bioreactor design principles, including perfusion, shear stimulation, or mechanical actuation (stretch or compression) on a much smaller scale with most applications focused on human disease research and drug screening (Figure 2B). Bioreactors and MPS manufacturing approaches are typically decoupled, where the tissue constructs and device components are manufactured separately and then assembled. This approach offers high flexibility in design through simulations and iterative prototypes before final manufacturing. For example, the design of a scaffold-free and perfused bioreactor can be optimized using computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations, allowing for tissue-specific designs to be optimized in silico. When tissue constructs with built-in microchannels are cultured in CFD-optimized bioreactors, effective nutrient perfusion and tissue maturation could be achieved over weeks of culture (). This approach was utilized in the fabrication of autologous cartilage-bone grafts engineered for temporomandibular joint regeneration (TMJ). Both patient-specific geometry and scale were utilized to produce dual-perfusion bioreactors to match the patient’s geometry and cultivate mature constructs seeded with chondrogenic and osteogenic progenitors for weeks in vitro before demonstrating efficacy in TMJ reconstruction studies in large animals (). The combination of computational simulation and experimental validation is commonplace in studies involving MPS as well (). In addition, bioreactors are commonly instrumented with sensors to monitor oxygen, glucose, lactate, and glutamine to provide real-time cell metabolism. The recent study from suggested that tissue-embedded microsensors for oxygen, glucose, lactate, and glutamine in a kidney-on-a-chip MPS provide real-time assessment of cellular metabolism that led to the discovery of glucose transport as a nephrotoxicity mechanism associated with immunosuppressants and anti-cancer drugs (). Therefore, bioreactor design principles and technologies can be quite useful in informing design criteria and scaling down integrated sensors for MPS towards the goals of disease modeling and drug testing in clinically relevant contexts.
FIGURE 2
3 From Organoids to Organ-on-a-Chip
Organoids are defined as 3D multicellular in vitro tissue constructs that mimic corresponding in vivo organs, such that they can be used to study aspects of that organ in the tissue culture system (). In general, they lack preconceived structure and architecture provided through intentional design of the micro tissue. Despite this, organoids can acquire the native organ’s 3D complexity and functionality in vivo based on cell-cell communication, spatial cues and gradients (). Organoids can be used in MPS applications involving disease models, drug discovery and testing, and regenerative medicine. For example, human iPSCs derived from ALS patients were used to create functional sensorimotor organoids (neuromuscular junctions (NMJs)) to probe how distinct ALS variants may impair skeletal muscles and motor neurons at the level of the NMJ (Figures 3A–E) (). Other examples include trabecular bone organoids, formed by seeding primary osteoblasts and osteoclasts onto femoral head micro-trabeculae, which are then encapsulated in fibrin spheroids and cultured to model a pathological bone mass loss due to simulated microgravity (Figures 3F–J) (). Additional examples of organoid based MPS of musculoskeletal tissues are listed in Table 1. These examples provide a strong case for organoid-based microphysiological disease models for therapeutic screening. Advantages of using organoids as MPS include the close mimicry to embryonic cell assembly and tissue growth in vivo and the small size of spherical organoids that represent fully functioning microphysiological units. Disadvantages include the high variability in self-assembling cell clusters and difficulty in controlling the culture conditions, including those required for reproducible differentiation.
FIGURE 3
TABLE 1
| Organ/tissue represented | Disease/disorder or application | Treatment tested | Cell type used | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skeletal cartilage | Pharmacological and environmental toxicity and Shwachman-diamond syndrome (SDS) | Adult human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells (hBM-MPCs) | ||
| Cartilage and bone | Osteoarthritis | Scaffold-mediated lentiviral gene delivery of dox-inducible cytokine inhibitors and growth factors | Human MSCs | |
| Trabecular Bone | Degenerative effects induced by low-shear mechanical stimulation | — | Primary human osteoblasts and Primary human osteoclast precursors | |
| Trabecular Bone | Regulation of bone remodeling | — | Murine osteogenic cells | |
| Neuromuscular Junction | Amyotropic lateral sclerosis (ALS) | — | iPSCs and ALS mutated isogenic iPSC lines | |
| Neuromuscular Trunk | Neuromuscular degenerative diseases | — | Human pluripotent stem cells and iPSCs |
Examples of organoid models of musculoskeletal tissues and organs.
MPS are most commonly synonymous with organ-on-a-chip (OoaC), microdevices engineered to contain patterned cells and ECM to model tissue and organ structure and function at the micro-scale. The defining characteristics of OoaC include recreating the 3D arrangement of tissues on the platform, patterning multiple organotypic cells in a physiologically relevant context, and simulating biochemical (signals) and biophysical (forces) cues relevant to the modeled tissue or organ. For example, the effectiveness of co-culturing 3D human skeletal muscle fiber tissues with human iPSC-derived motor neurons to study the NMJ depends on whether the model is 2D or 3D. When 3D NMJ-on-chip models were compared to 2D culture conditions, they demonstrated functional superiority in fiber maturation and Acetylcholine receptors (AChR) clustering that affected the electrophysiological responses, strongly suggesting that 3D NMJ-on-chip is a powerful model to study adult human sensorimotor synaptogenesis and NMJ disease in vitro (Figures 3K–O) (
In addition, the periarterial, perisinusoidal, mesenchymal, and osteoblastic hematopoietic niches in the bone marrow (BM) in vivo have been modeled in a two-channel vascularized BM-on-chip platform. The BM channel was simulated using a fibrin hydrogel in which CD34+ cells and marrow-derived stromal cells were co-cultured, whereas the vascular channel, separated from the channel using a porous elastic membrane, was lined with endothelial cells cultured under media flow (Figures 3P–U). The BM-on-chip device reproduced key features in the BM hematopoietic stem cell niche and simulated expected pathologies in hematopoiesis when constructed using cells from SDS (Shwachman–Diamond syndrome) patients (
TABLE 2
| Organ/tissue represented | Disease/disorder or application | Treatment tested | Cell type used | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neuromuscular Junction | Motor neuron disease (MND) | — | Human embryonic stem cells (hESC), human iPSC-derived MNs (ESCs and iPSCs as healthy control), or human iPSC-derived MNs from patients with NMD, in combination with human iPSC derived skeletal muscle cells | |
| Neuromuscular Junction | Myasthenia gravis | — | Human primary fibroblasts, human PSC motor neurons | |
| Muscle | Acute oxidative injury and cancer cahexia | — | Human MSCs (Lonza), human skeletal myoblasts (hSKMB; Lonza) A549 lung adenocarcinoma spheroids, human lung fibroblasts, THP-1-derived macrophages | |
| Skeletal muscle | Oxygen deficits in skeletal muscle during exercise | — | Primary human myoblasts | |
| Skeletal muscle | Hypertrophy | — | Primary human myoblasts | |
| Skeletal and smooth muscle | Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) | — | Healthy & DMD derived human muscle myoblasts | |
| Skeletal muscle | — | Biohybrid valveless pump-bot powered by “living” engineered skeletal muscle | C2C12 mouse skeletal myoblasts | |
| Skeletal muscle | Screening platform and in vitro muscle injury model | Cardiotoxin | C2C12 mouse murine myoblast cell line | |
| Cartilage and bone junction | Osteoarthritis | Celecoxib | iPSC-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells (iMPCs) | |
| Articular cartilage | Osteoarthritis | Triamcinolone steroid treatment | Primary equine chondrocytes | |
| Articular cartilage | Osteoarthritis | Interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) and rapamycin | Primary human articular chondrocytes (hACs) | |
| Articular joint | Osteoarthritis | RS-504393 (CCR2 antagonist) and Cenicriviroc (CCR2/CCR5 antagonist) | Primary synovial fibroblasts, articular chondrocytes, GFP-HUVECs, PBMC derived monocytes, patient synovial fluid | |
| Bone marrow niche | Interaction of infused HSPC, lymphoma and leukemic cells | — | Bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMNC), Stro-1+ MSC | |
| Hematopoietic microenvironment | — | — | HUVECs, Stromal fibroblast cell lines (HS5-GFP & HS27a-GFP), Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) | |
| Bone perivascular niche | Breast cancer cell colonization into bone | Endothelial cells, bone marrow MSCs and MDA-MB-231/GFP or MDA-MB-231/Luc cells | ||
| Bone marrow | Model of hematopoietic response to drug exposure, ionizing radiation, and genetic mutation | — | Human CD34 cells, patient derived Bone marrow stromal cells, primary human-derived bone marrow mononuclear cells | |
| Bone | Breast cancer | — | Murine calvaria preosteoblasts (MC3T3-E1) and human breast cancer cell lines MDA-MB-231GFP and its metastatic suppressed variant MDA-MB-231 GFP |
Examples of tissue-on-a-chip models of musculoskeletal tissues and organs.
4 Considerations for Building Musculoskeletal Microphysiological Systems
4.1 Cell Sources
There are various cell sources for MPS, which include primary cells, cell lines, stem cells, and iPSCs. Each source has advantages and disadvantages, which must be factored in their utilization in MPS applications. Arguably, these cells must be derived from human sources for the MPS to have their highest impact.
4.1.1 Primary Cells
Primary or somatic cells are directly isolated from living tissue and ideally suited to model the tissue from which they are extracted. In many tissues, primary cell isolation retrieves heterogeneous populations, including tissue-resident stem cells (
4.1.2 Immortalized Cell Lines
Human primary cells undergo a limited number of cell divisions (40–60) in culture before they reach senescence and lose their ability to divide. This loss of proliferative ability is attributed to reduced telomerase activity at high passage numbers (
4.1.3 Stem Cells
Stem cells are perhaps the single most important discovery in regenerative medicine. They possess properties that can theoretically correct pathological changes caused by disease or injury. However, stem cells and their progenies can also be used as primary components of personalized (patient specific) MPS models of human disease. By definition, stem cells are characterized by the ability to self-renew indefinitely by symmetric or asymmetric cell division while maintaining an undifferentiated state and the ability to differentiate into the various fates of specialized cell types under the right chemical and biological cues. This latter property refers to the regenerative potency of stem cells. While the nomenclature is generally not uniformly used, pluripotent stem cells can differentiate into cells from any of the three embryonic germ layers: the ectoderm, the mesoderm, and the endoderm. First successfully isolated from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst by James Thompson in 1998 (
Alternative sources of stem cells include extraembryonic fetal tissues such as the placenta and the umbilical cord (Wharton’s jelly). In addition, stem cells have been identified in specialized compartments or niches in numerous tissues that retain a moderate level of regenerative abilities throughout postnatal and adult life. These adult stem cells are multipotent, such that they can differentiate into different cell types that make the tissue or related tissues from the same embryonic germ layers. As with primary cells, the invasive isolation of human adult stem cells is associated with tissue injury and donor site morbidity that constrain their applications in MPS models.
However, bone marrow, which harbors hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) and mesenchymal stromal (also called stem) cells (MSC), is a replenishable, readily accessible source of adult stem cells with minimal morbidity. HSC give rise to myeloid and lymphoid progenies of blood and immune cells through well-characterized steps of differentiation, which can be replicated in vitro (
4.1.4 Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells
The Noble prize discovery that somatic cells can be reprogrammed to turn back the clock and induce a pluripotent stem cell-like state opens limitless possibilities for applications in MPS models. iPSCs were originally derived from murine embryonic and adult fibroblasts through viral transfection with Oct3/4, Klf4, Sox2, and c-Myc pluripotency factors (
In particular, the use of human iPSC-derived cells from an autologous donor overcomes the previously intractable problem of creating interconnected, isogenic MPS models of multiple tissues or organ, paving the way towards clinically relevant human-on-chip models (Figure 1). Therefore, human iPSC technology is highly valuable in MPS models of musculoskeletal conditions, especially for composite tissues that require incorporating different cell types such as muscle-tendon (myotendinous junctions) and tendon/ligament-bone interface (entheses), osteochondral tissues, vascularized and innervated muscle and bone tissues or composites thereof.
Despite their undeniable potential for MPS applications, the use of human iPSC in modeling human diseases has limitations. The relationship between the genome and epigenome has broadened the understanding of the types of molecular events that cause human disease. Current strategies for iPSC generation/regeneration of isogenic tissues eliminates this epigenetic memory from donor cells while maintaining the patient’s intact genome. Although human iPSC are effective for modeling purely genetic disease (e.g., Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or Duchenne muscular dystrophy), they have limitations in modeling diseases stemming from both genetic and epigenetic factors. They also have other challenges in modeling important biological variables that maybe systemic rather than purely cellular, including sex and age.
As with stem cells, the utility of human iPSCs in MPS models of musculoskeletal diseases requires efficient and reproducible multilineage differentiation protocols. Strategies to generate human iPSC musculoskeletal derivatives have been described in numerous publications, including osteoblasts (
FIGURE 4

Strategies to derive musculoskeletal cells from human iPSCs through stepwise differentiation.
4.2 Extracellular Matrix Biomaterials
Polymeric hydrogels are widely used in MPS platforms as they resemble the macromolecular ECM of many tissues and organs, providing proper cellular architecture, support, and function. The three main categories of hydrogels include natural, synthetic, and hybrid materials. Animal sourced natural hydrogels such as collagen and fibrin are biocompatible and provide native cell-binding ligands and biochemical properties present in native tissues. On the other hand, the process of deriving natural hydrogels from animals results in limited mechanical strengths, long-term storage instabilities, and batch differences, reviewed in (
Aside from hydrogels, ECM derived biomaterials also include decellularized scaffolds which provide a native environment for tissue engineering, electrospun fibrous scaffolds providing nano-microscale fibrous structures with interconnecting pores, and 3D-printed materials fabricated to fit the desired geometry. Materials for these approaches can be native (tissue-derived), synthetic, or hybrid. The primary advantages of these approaches are the controlled architecture acquired through scaffolding and high-definition fabrication techniques achieved with electrospinning and 3D-printing. Limitations of these approaches include the difficulty in recreating cell-ECM interactions in vivo and biomechanically matching the tissue of interest with a biomaterial scaffold. Although not thoroughly covered here, others have extensively reviewed the biomaterials and fabrication methods which are key components in successful representation of musculoskeletal disease models (
4.3 Fabrication Materials in MPS Devices
Beyond the conceptual design of the MPS, practical considerations influence the choice of materials used in device fabrication. The most commonly used fabrication materials for MPS devices are elastomers and rigid polymers. The choice of the fabrication materials affects manufacturability, assembly flexibility, maintaining sterility, incorporating precise physical stimuli (e.g., stretch and flow-induced shear), molecular adsorption and absorption, and longitudinal monitoring of outcomes through live microscopy or integrated sensors.
4.3.1 Elastomers
Elastomers are cross-linked polymers with weakly entangled chains. Due to their low elastic moduli and weak intermolecular forces, they easily deform (stretch or compress) and experience high strains without failure when an external force is exerted but return to their undeformed state when the force is withdrawn. Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) is an elastomer that has been widely adopted in the microfluidics community for its versatility, biocompatibility, permeability, and low cost. PDMS has been crucial in the early work of MPS and remains a prodigious material, with most devices still utilizing PDMS as their primary structural component. Despite its popularity, some limitations of PDMS include incompatibility with inorganic solvents, absorption of small hydrophobic molecules, adsorption of biomolecules, and gas permeability that lead to changes in concentrations of solutions over time (
4.3.2 Rigid Polymers
Rigid thermoplastic polymers such as Polystyrene (PS), Poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), Polyurethane, Teflon, and PEGDA are high strength, relatively inflexible, low cost, light weight, optically transparent, and biocompatible (low monomer leaching) materials widely used in fabricating MPS devices. These rigid thermoplastics can be reshaped multiple times by reheating, which is advantageous for molding and bonding. These materials can be fabricated through silicon master molds, reactive ion etching (REI), injection molding and hot embossing. Therefore, thermoplastic components of MPS devices can have high upfront production and development costs not feasible for prototyping but suitable for large batch manufacturing. As an alternative, rapid prototyping methods include CNC micromilling techniques and 3D printing to allow for quick, low-cost fabrication at the benchtop.
Generally, rigid polymers show improved solvent compatibility compared to PDMS including some resistance to alcohols. However, they are incompatible with organic solvents such as ketones and hydrocarbons. Their low gas permeability makes them unsuitable for long-term and static cell studies in sealed microchannels and microchambers. These environments limit gas permeance which can be lethal to cells, particularly in incubators where CO2 exchange is necessary for buffering the cell media and can accumulate in impermeable, static platforms. Yet, it can be optimal when using media with premixed gases to monitor dissolved oxygen consumption and pH levels in the MPS environment for example (
5 Challenges for Musculoskeletal MPS
The implementation of intentional design strategy is key to successful MPS application. This requires that MPS platforms are designed to: 1) model the disease within the context of the tissue’s physiological and functional parameters, 2) enable longitudinal and endpoint assays, and 3) accommodate the skills, resources, and objectives of the end user. Physiological and functional parameters include gradients, heterogenous interfaces, biological barriers, mechanical or electrical stimulation, fluid flow, and interconnectivity with different tissue or organ chips. Longitudinal assays include brightfield and fluorescent microscopy, multiplex sensing of secreted proteins, while destructive endpoint assays include histology, immunohistochemistry, and q-PCR. End users could be trainees in academic laboratories pursuing high content data to uncover mechanisms of disease, drug discovery scientists in a pharmaceutical R&D facility pursuing high throughput data to identify hits that could be developed as drugs or biologics, or clinical trial technicians seeking proof of safety or efficacy of a drug candidate.
In addition to the challenges of creating clinically-faithful disease models with biomarkers that capture the dynamic nature of acute or chronic pathologies, tissues and joints in the musculoskeletal system, there are various specialized features that require engineering innovations to model them on MPS. For example, the migration of innate and adaptive immune cells from the bone marrow into the vasculature, the infiltration of platelets, neutrophils, macrophages, and various immune cells to sites of tissue injury, and cancer metastases growth underscore the importance of engineering permeable vascular barriers. Biological interfaces and ECM gradients, such as the myotendinous junction and the enthesis are critical not only for mechanical function but also for cellular functions and signaling, and there are several engineering approaches to engineer gradients that would need to be scaled down for MPS. Directed motor neuron terminal attachment to highly organized muscle fibers is another example of the intricate microarchitectural engineering that would be required to model innervated tissues (
The following sections discuss seven challenges that should be prioritized in future musculoskeletal MPS platforms to increase the predictive power of these models in disease research and drug discovery areas. These challenges include engineering biological barriers, engineering heterogenous tissue interfaces, incorporation of immune cells and inflammatory factors, biomechanical actuation and loading, incorporating surrogate measurements for pain, integrating inline sensors for real-time monitoring of dynamic processes, and creating arrayed formats for high throughput screening.
5.1 Engineered Biological Barriers
The following section describes compartmentalized approaches used to engineer biological and vascular barriers in MPS with application examples in musculoskeletal disease models (Figure 5).
FIGURE 5

Approaches for engineering barriers and interfaces in musculoskeletal tissues, including porous membrane-based vascular barriers, microchannels, hydrogel-liquid interface, and perfusable microvascular channels network within through an ECM hydrogel barrier [Inspired from (
5.1.1 Semipermeable Membranes
Early strategies to polarize apical and basal epithelial or endothelial cell surfaces were accomplished with permeable substrates. Membrane filters were used to culture epithelial cells and form polarized monolayers with transport and permeability qualities of in vivo transporting epithelium (
As an example, a recently published joint-on-chip model includes vascularized synovium and articular cartilage PDMS compartments separated by lined trapezoidal posts 90 µm apart creating micropores for cellular transmigration (
5.1.2 Hydrogel-Liquid Interface
Hydrogels physically support cells in MPS while enabling direct interaction with surrounding fluid and/or other tissues. When incorporating hydrogels into MPS, a vital property to consider in addition to cytocompatibility and mechanical properties are molecular diffusion rates. Liquid interfaces with optimized hydrogels are powerful instruments to mimic native joints, simulate local inflammation, and administer therapeutics for drug screening assays. Additionally, such hydrogels can be patterned, and 3D printed to create musculoskeletal models with precisely controlled architectures. As an example, an osteochondral-tissue chip using human iPSCs was developed to model the pathology of OA by embedding induced mesenchymal progenitor cells (iMPC) in a methacrylated gelatin hydrogel. The cell-laden construct was placed in a bioreactor with two separated fluidic channels accessing the top and bottom of the construct respectively. A chondrogenic medium was perfused in the top channel and an osteogenic medium was supplied through the bottom conduit over 28 days to induce chondrogenic/osteogenic differentiation of the iMPCs. The construct was shown to effectively model OA in the cartilage compartment through the introduction of IL-1β, and responds by reducing inflammatory cytokines when treated with Celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor commonly used as a first-line treatment for OA (
5.1.3 Microchannels
Directly patterning microchannels into the MPS substrate is an effective approach to control the cellular architecture and organization. Microchannels link two adjacent chambers and can be lined with monolayer forming cells such as endothelial or epithelial cells to completely cover the inner surfaces or they can be used to guide axonal growth. Microchannels have been used to model the human neuromuscular junction (NMJ) transmission upon exposure to inhibitors, where motoneurons (MNs) can communicate with skeletal muscle cells in two separate compartments connected by microchannels embedded in a PDMS BioMEM construct. Physiological behavior was evidenced in the system as high frequency excitation of the MNs drove the myotubes to contract into tetanus while pharmacological NMJ inhibitors added to the muscle compartment demonstrated that MN-induced muscle contraction could be attenuated (
5.1.4 Vascular Networks Embedded in ECM
Perfusable channels are often designed to be embedded in hydrogel constructs within MPS, usually to form vascular networks. Vascular networks are critical to many diseases such as metastatic cancer, inflammation, and fibrosis. Incorporating vasculature into musculoskeletal MPS also permits immune cell components to be introduced and drug studies to be tested through vascularized models which can provide estimates of PK/PD. Vascular networks for MPS have been successfully incorporated into various tissues and organs and showed improved outcomes for disease modeling and physiological function (
Another approach to address this challenge is the self-assembled formation of vasculature from endothelial lined microchannels through a gel-liquid interface with angiogenic gradients driving vascular growth in the hydrogel (
5.2 Engineered Heterogenous Tissue Interfaces
In musculoskeletal tissues, the integration of soft-to-hard interfaces in vitro such as the cartilage-bone junction, neuromuscular junctions, myotendinous (muscle-to-bone) junction, and entheses (tendon-to-bone junction) into MPS are significant unmet needs. Modeling injury to biological junctions in a humanized model requires the integration of multiple tissues and phases into one MPS. This can be a particularly challenging process in vitro where cell matrix needs differ widely.
FIGURE 6

Strategies for creating gradients that could be implemented in microphysiological systems. (A) Engineered signaling centers for the spatially controlled patterning of human pluripotent stem cells, showing schematic of the microfluidic device a single unit of the device, a picture of the PDMS microfluidic device filled with colored ink in the distinct compartments, and computational simulation of the diffusion of a reference molecule from the source side of the cell chamber after 48 h of perfusion. [Reproduced from (
5.3 Incorporation of Immune Cells and Inflammatory Factors
Inflammation represents the body’s response to cell and tissue damage from harmful agents or injury. The initiation, progression, and resolution phases of inflammation in musculoskeletal tissues and disease are important considerations in developing effective treatments. Acute injury to musculoskeletal tissues initiates the recruitment of inflammatory cells (neutrophils, monocytes, lymphocytes, and mast cells) to the injury site. Neutrophils, the first phagosomes recruited, set the stage to the activation of monocytes and lymphocytes to attack and eliminate foreign organisms and agents. The functional consequences of activation of circulating monocytes to macrophages, which represent the innate immune response, depend on their polarization, with M1 macrophages effecting phagocytosis and proinflammatory cytokines secretion and M2 macrophages typically credited with anti-inflammatory cytokine and growth factor secretion to initiate tissue repair (
The need to incorporate immune system function on MPS is not unique to those interested in musculoskeletal research. However, efforts to create “immune-system-on-a-chip” and similar platforms have largely been limited to three types of systems. These include systems with immune cells in tumors, systems investigating the interaction between endothelium and immune cells, and systems modeling the inflammatory process as a whole (
5.4 Biomechanical Actuation and Loading
When considering the application of MPS to the musculoskeletal system, much of the utility of MPS relies on the ability to integrate mechanical stimulation through various actuation strategies. The functions of mechanical stimulation during development are well established, including in the musculoskeletal system (
There are numerous strategies of mechanical actuation applied in tissue-on-a-chip research platforms. However, implementation in musculoskeletal MPS models is still in development. One of the most common ways to mechanically stimulate MPS models is to deform the substrate upon which cells or tissues are cultured. Often, this is accomplished through the use of vacuum chambers to stretch a flexible PDMS membrane, as has been reported in a model alveolar-capillary membrane (
FIGURE 7

Strategies for simulating different modalities of biomechanical loading and stimuli in microphysiological systems. Reproduced from (
As most MPS models rely heavily on microfluidics for proper function, many have utilized controlled fluid flow to provide mechanical stimulation in their devices (
Beyond these two main categories of modeling in vivo forces and deformations, other, less common, techniques are also described in the literature (
5.5 Afferent Nociceptive Signaling (Pain) Outcomes
Peripheral sensory neurons known as nociceptors are responsible for relaying pain perception to specialized centers in the brain. Many acute and chronic musculoskeletal pathologies are painful. In fact, pain is often times linked to musculoskeletal functional impairments, and as such represents a key patient reported outcome in clinical trials, which is very challenging to replicate in MPS-based virtual clinical trials. Several MPS are being developed to model efferent nociceptive signaling in an effort to screen experimental compounds for analgesic effect that could alleviate the need for using opioids. A recent study modeled spinal cord dorsal horn, a common target for analgesic intervention, by coculturing peripheral and dorsal spinal cord nerve cells in a MPS, which led to autonomous emergence of native nerve tissue macrostructure and distinct synaptic transmission in response to different analgesics, including morphine, lidocaine, and clonidine (Figure 8) (
FIGURE 8

Morphine-sensitive synaptic transmission in a microphysiological model of afferent nociceptive signaling. (A) Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) (green) and spinal cord dorsal horn (SCDH) (red) nerve tissues are harvested from E15 rat embryos. (B) Tissue is pooled by type, dissociated into a single-cell suspension, and aggregated in spheroid microplates to generate a batch of spheroids identical in size and composition. (C) A growth-restrictive outer-gel polyethylene glycol mold is fabricated to shape the cultures; spheroids are seeded in the mold, and the mold is filled with growth-permissive Matrigel. Over 3 weeks of culture, microphysiological tissue emerges (D) from which system-level functional data are obtained. (E) Differential desensitization of the afferent DRG input through treatments with lidocaine (left), clonidine (middle), and morphine (right) traces. [Reproduced from (
5.6 Integration of Sensors
In addition to close recapitulation of tissue physiology and disease biomarkers in vitro, it is highly desirable for tissue chip models to be able to sense various parameters of the system to understand the dynamics of healthy tissue physiology, as well as in disease or injury states. Current MPS employ numerous sensing modalities, including fluorescence microscopy (
In addition, protein secretion by damaged or otherwise stimulated cells is an important aspect of musculoskeletal disease and injury. While the sensing mechanisms mentioned above are effective at yielding information about many different physical parameters of the system, the ability to sense proteins secreted by altered cells in real time would increase the value of the information obtained from such a model considerably. Current tissue chip models utilize sensors of primarily imaging outcomes or off-chip measurements of secreted proteins via standard assays. This leaves a great need in the field of musculoskeletal research for tissue chip models that incorporate sensitive, real-time protein sensors for the elucidation of disease and injury mechanisms. Some models include immunosensing modules for secreted analytes (
Real-time sensing for specific proteins secreted by an MPS will require integrating sensors able to achieve the sensitivity threshold required to observe relevant quantities of analytes secreted in musculoskeletal injury and disease. Current research indicates the detection of cytokines, as well as other proteins, at levels as low as pg/mL in serum or in macroscale in vitro models. However, some microfluidic in vitro models have shown single-cell secretion of cytokines from T-cells at levels in the ng/mL range at close proximity to the cells (
To improve the quality of information obtained from in vitro tissue models, it is important to consider certain design parameters as the field progresses. Disease and injury sequelae can occur on short timescales, including in musculoskeletal injuries. Therefore, it is critical that in vitro models of these conditions are able to measure tissue responses in real time and should preferably incorporate inline antibody-functionalized sensors in close physical proximity to the tissue construct. Another important consideration is sensor regeneration, or the restoration of saturated antibody-functionalized surfaces. Many antibody regeneration protocols exist, usually consisting of harsh chemical treatments (
5.7 Arrayed Formats for High Throughput Screening
While MPS enable gathering high content biochemical, functional, and histological data from each device, their value can be increased when the platform is composed of an array of chips that can be assayed quickly and accurately for high throughput screens. Multiplexing has become common practice for researchers to analyze multiple factors at once, improving data consistency by allowing multiple targets to be investigated within the environment. The physical footprint of MPS must be amenable to high-throughput tests including access to culture media and tissues, visualization of tissue cultures, and simple assembly and operation. For example, a 96-well plate platform for bulk production of human muscle microtissues (hMMTs) for phenotypic drug testing has been developed (
6 Conclusion
The poor translation from preclinical animal studies to human clinical applications and incomplete understanding of the mechanisms of action and the lack of biomarkers to define biological efficacy represent significant barriers that impede the development of disease modifying therapies for musculoskeletal conditions. The emerging technology of hMPS might offer transformative opportunities to cost-effectively address the aforementioned barriers. MPS is a wide-encompassing term for sophisticated in vitro human models, also known as tissue- and organ-on-a-chip, carefully designed to offer standardized predictive models by mimicking physiologically relevant aspects of living tissues and organ systems. Applications in modeling musculoskeletal acute and chronic injury are slowly developing. Keys to translational implementation MPS models of musculoskeletal pathologies include developing strategies to: engineer vascular and biological barriers and heterogenous tissue interfaces; incorporate immune cells and inflammatory factors; enable biomechanical actuation to simulate in vivo loading; incorporate sensory neurons (nociceptors) to record surrogate measurements for pain; integrate inline sensors for real-time monitoring of secreted proteins critical to modulating these dynamic processes; and develop arrayed formats for high throughput screening. Furthermore, issues of scalability, reproducibility, and validation, which are not discussed in this review, are also of paramount importance and have been addressed in other reviews (
Statements
Author contributions
REA drafted the article. REA and HA prepared the figures. RGA, VZ, JC, BM, JM, HA made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and got involved in the process of preparation, correction, and modification of the manuscript. All of them approved it for publication.
Funding
This manuscript was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) of the National Institutes of Health under award number UG3TR003281. REA is funded by a Graduate Research Fellwoship Award from the National Science Foundation. RGA is funded by NIAMS training award T32AR076950. VZZ is funded by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) training award T32GM007356. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the National Science Foundation.
Acknowledgments
Graphics included in Figures 1, 2, 4, 5 were created with BioRender.com.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The reviewer GP declared a past co-authorship with one of the authors HA to the handling Editor.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
Afshar BakooshliM.LippmannE. S.MulcahyB.IyerN.NguyenC. T.TungK.et al (2019). A 3D Culture Model of Innervated Human Skeletal Muscle Enables Studies of the Adult Neuromuscular junction. Elife8, e44530. 10.7554/eLife.44530
2
AfsharM. E.AbrahaH. Y.BakooshliM. A.DavoudiS.ThavandiranN.TungK.et al (2020). A 96-well Culture Platform Enables Longitudinal Analyses of Engineered Human Skeletal Muscle Microtissue Strength. Sci. Rep.10, 6918. 10.1038/s41598-020-62837-8
3
AgrawalG.AungA.VargheseS. (2017). Skeletal Muscle-On-A-Chip: An In Vitro Model to Evaluate Tissue Formation and Injury. Lab. Chip17, 3447–3461. 10.1039/c7lc00512a
4
AlbertsB.JohnsonA.LewisJ. (2002). Molecular Biology of the Cell. 4th ed. New York: Garlan Science.
5
AlemanJ.GeorgeS. K.HerbergS.DevarasettyM.PoradaC. D.SkardalA.et al (2019). Deconstructed Microfluidic Bone Marrow On-A-Chip to Study Normal and Malignant Hemopoietic Cell-Niche Interactions. Small15, e1902971. 10.1002/smll.201902971
6
AndrzejewskaA.LukomskaB.JanowskiM. (2019). Concise Review: Mesenchymal Stem Cells: From Roots to Boost. Stem Cells37, 855–864. 10.1002/stem.3016
7
AungA.BhullarI. S.TheprungsirikulJ.DaveyS. K.LimH. L.ChiuY.-J.et al (2016). 3D Cardiac μtissues within a Microfluidic Device with Real-Time Contractile Stress Readout. Lab. Chip16, 153–162. 10.1039/c5lc00820d
8
BavliD.PrillS.EzraE.LevyG.CohenM.VinkenM.et al (2016). Real-time Monitoring of Metabolic Function in Liver-On-Chip Microdevices Tracks the Dynamics of Mitochondrial Dysfunction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA113, E2231–E2240. 10.1073/pnas.1522556113
9
BeinA.ShinW.Jalili-FiroozinezhadS.ParkM. H.Sontheimer-PhelpsA.TovaglieriA.et al (2018). Microfluidic Organ-On-A-Chip Models of Human Intestine. Cell Mol. Gastroenterol. Hepatol.5, 659–668. 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2017.12.010
10
BellinM.MarchettoM. C.GageF. H.MummeryC. L. (2012). Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: the New Patient?Nat. Rev. Mol. Cel. Biol.13, 713–726. 10.1038/nrm3448
11
BhatiaS. N.IngberD. E. (2014). Microfluidic Organs-On-Chips. Nat. Biotechnol.32, 760–772. 10.1038/nbt.2989
12
BianchiF.MalboubiM.LiY.GeorgeJ. H.JerusalemA.SzeleF.et al (2018). Rapid and Efficient Differentiation of Functional Motor Neurons from Human iPSC for Neural Injury Modelling. Stem Cel Res.32, 126–134. 10.1016/j.scr.2018.09.006
13
BoccellatoF.WoelfflingS.Imai-MatsushimaA.SanchezG.GoosmannC.SchmidM.et al (2019). Polarised Epithelial Monolayers of the Gastric Mucosa Reveal Insights into Mucosal Homeostasis and Defence against Infection. Gut68, 400–413. 10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314540
14
CaoX.YakalaG. K.Van Den HilF. E.CochraneA.MummeryC. L.OrlovaV. V. (2019). Differentiation and Functional Comparison of Monocytes and Macrophages from hiPSCs with Peripheral Blood Derivatives. Stem Cel Rep.12, 1282–1297. 10.1016/j.stemcr.2019.05.003
15
CaplanA. I. (1994). The Mesengenic Process. Clin. Plast. Surg.21, 429–435. 10.1016/s0094-1298(20)31020-8
16
CaplanA. I. (2017). New MSC: MSCs as Pericytes Are Sentinels and Gatekeepers. J. Orthop. Res.35, 1151–1159. 10.1002/jor.23560
17
CereijidoM.RobbinsE.DolanW.RotunnoC.SabatiniD. (1978). Polarized Monolayers Formed by Epithelial Cells on a Permeable and Translucent Support. J. Cel. Biol.77, 853–880. 10.1083/jcb.77.3.853
18
ChenM. B.WhislerJ. A.FröseJ.YuC.ShinY.KammR. D. (2017). On-chip Human Microvasculature Assay for Visualization and Quantification of Tumor Cell Extravasation Dynamics. Nat. Protoc.12, 865–880. 10.1038/nprot.2017.018
19
ChenD.WuJ. Y.KennedyK. M.YeagerK.BernhardJ. C.NgJ. J.et al (2020). Tissue Engineered Autologous Cartilage-Bone Grafts for Temporomandibular Joint Regeneration. Sci. Transl. Med.12 (565), eabb6683. 10.1126/scitranslmed.abb6683
20
ChouD. B.FrismantasV.MiltonY.DavidR.Pop-DamkovP.FergusonD.et al (2020). On-chip Recapitulation of Clinical Bone Marrow Toxicities and Patient-specific Pathophysiology. Nat. Biomed. Eng.4, 394–406. 10.1038/s41551-019-0495-z
21
ChungH. H.MirelesM.KwartaB. J.GaborskiT. R. (2018). Use of Porous Membranes in Tissue Barrier and Co-Culture Models. Lab. Chip18, 1671–1689. 10.1039/c7lc01248a
22
CohenA.IoannidisK.EhrlichA.RegenbaumS.CohenM.AyyashM.et al (2021). Mechanism and Reversal of Drug-Induced Nephrotoxicity on a Chip. Sci. Transl. Med.13, eabd6299. 10.1126/scitranslmed.abd6299
23
CrisanM.YapS.CasteillaL.ChenC.-W.CorselliM.ParkT. S.et al (2008). A Perivascular Origin for Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Multiple Human Organs. Cell Stem Cell3, 301–313. 10.1016/j.stem.2008.07.003
24
Cruz-AcuñaR.GarcíaA. J. (2017). Synthetic Hydrogels Mimicking Basement Membrane Matrices to Promote Cell-Matrix Interactions. Matrix Biol.57-58, 324–333. 10.1016/j.matbio.2016.06.002
25
CulemannS.GrüneboomA.Nicolás-ÁvilaJ. Á.WeidnerD.LämmleK. F.RotheT.et al (2019). Locally Renewing Resident Synovial Macrophages Provide a Protective Barrier for the Joint. Nature572, 670–675. 10.1038/s41586-019-1471-1
26
CunniffeG. M.Díaz-PaynoP. J.SheehyE. J.CritchleyS. E.AlmeidaH. V.PitaccoP.et al (2019). Tissue-specific Extracellular Matrix Scaffolds for the Regeneration of Spatially Complex Musculoskeletal Tissues. Biomaterials188, 63–73. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.09.044
27
DavisB. N.YenR.PrasadV.TruskeyG. A. (2019). Oxygen Consumption in Human, Tissue-Engineered Myobundles during Basal and Electrical Stimulation Conditions. APL Bioeng.3, 026103. 10.1063/1.5093417
28
De PieriA.RochevY.ZeugolisD. I. (2021). Scaffold-free Cell-Based Tissue Engineering Therapies: Advances, Shortfalls and Forecast. Npj Regen. Med.6, 18. 10.1038/s41536-021-00133-3
29
De SouzaN. (2018). Organoids. Nat. Methods15, 23. 10.1038/nmeth.4576
30
DellaquilaA.Le BaoC.LetourneurD.Simon-YarzaT. (2021). Vitro Strategies to Vascularize 3D Physiologically Relevant Models. Adv. Sci. (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)8, e2100798. 10.1002/advs.202100798
31
EllisM.Jarman-SmithM.ChaudhuriJ. B. (2005). “Bioreactor Systems for Tissue Engineering: A Four-Dimensional Challenge,” in Bioreactors for Tissue Engineering: Principles, Design and Operation. Editors ChaudhuriJ.Al-RubeaiM. (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 1–18.
32
ErgirE.BachmannB.RedlH.ForteG.ErtlP. (2018). Small Force, Big Impact: Next Generation Organ-On-A-Chip Systems Incorporating Biomechanical Cues. Front. Physiol.9, 1417. 10.3389/fphys.2018.01417
33
EschE. W.BahinskiA.HuhD. (2015). Organs-on-chips at the Frontiers of Drug Discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.14, 248–260. 10.1038/nrd4539
34
EwaldM. L.ChenY.-H.LeeA. P.HughesC. C. W. (2021). The Vascular Niche in Next Generation Microphysiological Systems. Lab. Chip21, 3244–3262. 10.1039/d1lc00530h
35
EzraE.MaorI.BavliD.ShalomI.LevyG.PrillS.et al (2015). Microprocessor-based Integration of Microfluidic Control for the Implementation of Automated Sensor Monitoring and Multithreaded Optimization Algorithms. Biomed. Microdevices17, 82. 10.1007/s10544-015-9989-y
36
Faustino MartinsJ.-M.FischerC.UrziA.VidalR.KunzS.RuffaultP.-L.et al (2020). Self-Organizing 3D Human Trunk Neuromuscular Organoids. Cell Stem Cell26, 172–186.e6. 10.1016/j.stem.2019.12.007
37
FogelD. B. (2018). Factors Associated with Clinical Trials that Fail and Opportunities for Improving the Likelihood of success: A Review. Contemp. Clin. trials Commun.11, 156–164. 10.1016/j.conctc.2018.08.001
38
FriedensteinA. J.ChailakhyanR. K.GerasimovU. V. (1987). Bone Marrow Osteogenic Stem Cells: In Vitro Cultivation and Transplantation in Diffusion chambers. Cell Prolif.20, 263–272. 10.1111/j.1365-2184.1987.tb01309.x
39
GoodeJ. A.RushworthJ. V. H.MillnerP. A. (2015). Biosensor Regeneration: A Review of Common Techniques and Outcomes. Langmuir31, 6267–6276. 10.1021/la503533g
40
GoughA.VernettiL.BergenthalL.ShunT. Y.TaylorD. L. (2016). The Microphysiology Systems Database for Analyzing and Modeling Compound Interactions with Human and Animal Organ Models. Appl. Vitro Toxicol.2, 103–117. 10.1089/aivt.2016.0011
41
GriepL. M.WolbersF.De WagenaarB.Ter BraakP. M.WekslerB. B.RomeroI. A.et al (2013). BBB on Chip: Microfluidic Platform to Mechanically and Biochemically Modulate Blood-Brain Barrier Function. Biomed. Microdevices15, 145–150. 10.1007/s10544-012-9699-7
42
HannemannN.ApparaillyF.CourtiesG. (2021). Synovial Macrophages: from Ordinary Eaters to Extraordinary Multitaskers. Trends Immunol.42, 368–371. 10.1016/j.it.2021.03.002
43
HaoS.HaL.ChengG.WanY.XiaY.SosnoskiD. M.et al (2018). A Spontaneous 3D Bone-On-A-Chip for Bone Metastasis Study of Breast Cancer Cells. Small14, e1702787. 10.1002/smll.201702787
44
Hargrove-GrimesP.LowL. A.TagleD. A. (2021). Microphysiological Systems: What it Takes for Community Adoption. Exp. Biol. Med. (Maywood)246, 1435–1446. 10.1177/15353702211008872
45
HayM.ThomasD. W.CraigheadJ. L.EconomidesC.RosenthalJ. (2014). Clinical Development success Rates for Investigational Drugs. Nat. Biotechnol.32, 40–51. 10.1038/nbt.2786
46
HayflickL.MoorheadP. S. (1961). The Serial Cultivation of Human Diploid Cell Strains. Exp. Cel. Res.25, 585–621. 10.1016/0014-4827(61)90192-6
47
HenryO. Y. F.VillenaveR.CronceM. J.LeineweberW. D.BenzM. A.IngberD. E. (2017). Organs-on-Chips with Integrated Electrodes for Trans-epithelial Electrical Resistance (TEER) Measurements of Human Epithelial Barrier Function. Lab. Chip17, 2264–2271. 10.1039/c7lc00155j
48
HsuJ. R.MirH.WallyM. K.SeymourR. B. (2019). Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pain Management in Acute Musculoskeletal Injury. J. Orthop. Trauma33, e158–e182. 10.1097/bot.0000000000001430
49
HuhD.MatthewsB. D.MammotoA.Montoya-ZavalaM.HsinH. Y.IngberD. E. (2010). Reconstituting Organ-Level Lung Functions on a Chip. Science328, 1662–1668. 10.1126/science.1188302
50
IordachescuA.HughesE. A. B.JosephS.HillE. J.GroverL. M.MetcalfeA. D. (2021). Trabecular Bone Organoids: a Micron-Scale 'humanised' Prototype Designed to Study the Effects of Microgravity and Degeneration. NPJ Microgravity7, 17. 10.1038/s41526-021-00146-8
51
JeonJ. S.BersiniS.GilardiM.DubiniG.CharestJ. L.MorettiM.et al (2015). Human 3D Vascularized Organotypic Microfluidic Assays to Study Breast Cancer Cell Extravasation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA112, 214–219. 10.1073/pnas.1417115112
52
JeongS.KimS.BuonocoreJ.ParkJ.WelshC. J.LiJ.et al (2018). A Three-Dimensional Arrayed Microfluidic Blood-Brain Barrier Model with Integrated Electrical Sensor Array. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.65, 431–439. 10.1109/tbme.2017.2773463
53
JiangY.YangY.ZhengX.YiY.ChenX.LiY.et al (2020). Multifunctional Load-Bearing Hybrid Hydrogel with Combined Drug Release and Photothermal Conversion Functions. NPG Asia Mater.12, 18. 10.1038/s41427-020-0199-6
54
JinekM.ChylinskiK.FonfaraI.HauerM.DoudnaJ. A.CharpentierE. (2012). A Programmable Dual-RNA-Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity. Science337, 816–821. 10.1126/science.1225829
55
KambleH.BartonM. J.JunM.ParkS.NguyenN.-T. (2016). Cell Stretching Devices as Research Tools: Engineering and Biological Considerations. Lab. Chip16, 3193–3203. 10.1039/c6lc00607h
56
KhodabukusA.MaddenL.PrabhuN. K.KovesT. R.JackmanC. P.MuoioD. M.et al (2019). Electrical Stimulation Increases Hypertrophy and Metabolic Flux in Tissue-Engineered Human Skeletal Muscle. Biomaterials198, 259–269. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.08.058
57
KimS.LeeH.ChungM.JeonN. L. (2013). Engineering of Functional, Perfusable 3D Microvascular Networks on a Chip. Lab. Chip13, 1489–1500. 10.1039/c3lc41320a
58
KnudsenA. B.LarsenM.MackeyA. L.HjortM.HansenK. K.QvortrupK.et al (2015). The Human Myotendinous junction: an Ultrastructural and 3D Analysis Study. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports25, e116–e123. 10.1111/sms.12221
59
KothaS. S.HayesB. J.PhongK. T.ReddM. A.BomsztykK.RamakrishnanA.et al (2018). Engineering a Multicellular Vascular Niche to Model Hematopoietic Cell Trafficking. Stem Cel. Res. Ther.9, 77–14. 10.1186/s13287-018-0808-2
60
LaPradeR. F.DragooJ. L.KohJ. L.MurrayI. R.GeeslinA. G.ChuC. R. (2016). AAOS Research Symposium Updates and Consensus: Biologic Treatment of Orthopaedic Injuries. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg.24, e62–e78. 10.5435/jaaos-d-16-00086
61
LeeD.EricksonA.YouT.DudleyA. T.RyuS. (2018). Pneumatic Microfluidic Cell Compression Device for High-Throughput Study of Chondrocyte Mechanobiology. Lab. Chip18, 2077–2086. 10.1039/c8lc00320c
62
LiX.XieJ.LipnerJ.YuanX.ThomopoulosS.XiaY. (2009). Nanofiber Scaffolds with Gradations in mineral Content for Mimicking the Tendon-To-Bone Insertion Site. Nano Lett.9, 2763–2768. 10.1021/nl901582f
63
LiX.SolerM.SzydzikC.KhoshmaneshK.SchmidtJ.CoukosG.et al (2018). Label-Free Optofluidic Nanobiosensor Enables Real-Time Analysis of Single-Cell Cytokine Secretion. Small14, e1800698. 10.1002/smll.201800698
64
LiZ.SeoY.AydinO.ElhebearyM.KammR. D.KongH.et al (2019). Biohybrid Valveless Pump-Bot Powered by Engineered Skeletal Muscle. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA116, 1543–1548. 10.1073/pnas.1817682116
65
LiZ.XiangS.LiE. N.FritchM. R.AlexanderP. G.LinH.et al (2021). Tissue Engineering for Musculoskeletal Regeneration and Disease Modeling. Handbook Exp. Pharmacol.265, 235–268. 10.1007/164_2020_377
66
LinZ.LiZ.LiE. N.LiX.Del DukeC. J.ShenH.et al (2019). Osteochondral Tissue Chip Derived from iPSCs: Modeling OA Pathologies and Testing Drugs. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.7, 411. 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00411
67
LorschJ. R.CollinsF. S.Lippincott-SchwartzJ. (2014). Fixing Problems with Cell Lines. Science346, 1452–1453. 10.1126/science.1259110
68
MännikJ.TeshimaT. F.WolfrumB.YangD. (2021). Lab-on-a-chip Based Mechanical Actuators and Sensors for Single-Cell and Organoid Culture Studies. J. Appl. Phys.129, 210905. 10.1063/5.0051875
69
MammotoT.MammotoA.IngberD. E. (2013). Mechanobiology and Developmental Control. Annu. Rev. Cel Dev. Biol.29, 27–61. 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-101512-122340
70
ManfrinA.TabataY.PaquetE. R.VuaridelA. R.RivestF. R.NaefF.et al (2019). Engineered Signaling Centers for the Spatially Controlled Patterning of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells. Nat. Methods16, 640–648. 10.1038/s41592-019-0455-2
71
MarsanoA.ConficconiC.LemmeM.OcchettaP.GaudielloE.VottaE.et al (2016). Beating Heart on a Chip: a Novel Microfluidic Platform to Generate Functional 3D Cardiac Microtissues. Lab. Chip16, 599–610. 10.1039/c5lc01356a
72
Marturano-KruikA.NavaM. M.YeagerK.ChramiecA.HaoL.RobinsonS.et al (2018). Human Bone Perivascular Niche-On-A-Chip for Studying Metastatic Colonization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA115, 1256–1261. 10.1073/pnas.1714282115
73
MichielinF.SerenaE.PavanP.ElvassoreN. (2015). Microfluidic-assisted Cyclic Mechanical Stimulation Affects Cellular Membrane Integrity in a Human Muscular Dystrophy In Vitro Model. RSC Adv.5, 98429–98439. 10.1039/c5ra16957g
74
MiddletonK.Al-DujailiS.MeiX.GüntherA.YouL. (2017). Microfluidic Co-culture Platform for Investigating Osteocyte-Osteoclast Signalling during Fluid Shear Stress Mechanostimulation. J. Biomech.59, 35–42. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.05.012
75
MondadoriC.PalombellaS.SalehiS.TalòG.VisoneR.RasponiM.et al (2021). Recapitulating Monocyte Extravasation to the Synovium in an Organotypic Microfluidic Model of the Articular Joint. Biofabrication13, 045001. 10.1088/1758-5090/ac0c5e
76
MondrinosM. J.AlisafaeiF.YiA. Y.AhmadzadehH.LeeI.BlundellC.et al (2021). Surface-directed Engineering of Tissue Anisotropy in Microphysiological Models of Musculoskeletal Tissue. Sci. Adv.7, eabe9446. 10.1126/sciadv.abe9446
77
Mousavi ShaeghS. A.De FerrariF.ZhangY. S.NabaviniaM.Binth MohammadN.RyanJ.et al (2016). A Microfluidic Optical Platform for Real-Time Monitoring of pH and Oxygen in Microfluidic Bioreactors and Organ-On-Chip Devices. Biomicrofluidics10, 044111. 10.1063/1.4955155
78
MoyJ.LiZ.LiuF.-W.Loeza-AlcocerE.HartungJ.NagarajanV.et al (2021). Modeling Joint Pain on a Chip: Integrating Sensory Neurons in the microJoint to Model Osteoarthritis. The J. Pain22, 583. 10.1016/j.jpain.2021.03.025
79
MüllerB.SulzerP.WalchM.ZirathH.BuryškaT.RothbauerM.et al (2021). Measurement of Respiration and Acidification Rates of Mammalian Cells in Thermoplastic Microfluidic Devices. Sensors Actuators B: Chem.334, 129664. 10.1016/j.snb.2021.129664
80
MurphyK. M.WeaverC. (2016). Janeway's Immunobiology: Ninth International Student Edition. (Florida, NY: Garland Science, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC).
81
NakajimaT.NakahataA.YamadaN.YoshizawaK.KatoT. M.IwasakiM.et al (2021). Grafting of iPS Cell-Derived Tenocytes Promotes Motor Function Recovery after Achilles Tendon Rupture. Nat. Commun.12, 5012. 10.1038/s41467-021-25328-6
82
NesmithA. P.WagnerM. A.PasqualiniF. S.O’ConnorB. B.PincusM. J.AugustP. R.et al (2016). A Human In Vitro Model of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Muscle Formation and Contractility. J. Cel. Biol.215, 47–56. 10.1083/jcb.201603111
83
NguyenT.JungS. H.LeeM. S.ParkT.-E.AhnS.-K.KangJ. H. (2019). Robust Chemical Bonding of PMMA Microfluidic Devices to Porous PETE Membranes for Reliable Cytotoxicity Testing of Drugs. Lab. Chip19, 3706–3713. 10.1039/c9lc00338j
84
OcchettaP.MainardiA.VottaE.Vallmajo-MartinQ.EhrbarM.MartinI.et al (2019). Hyperphysiological Compression of Articular Cartilage Induces an Osteoarthritic Phenotype in a Cartilage-On-A-Chip Model. Nat. Biomed. Eng.3, 545–557. 10.1038/s41551-019-0406-3
85
OrkinS. H.ZonL. I. (2008). Hematopoiesis: An Evolving Paradigm for Stem Cell Biology. Cell132, 631–644. 10.1016/j.cell.2008.01.025
86
OsakiT.SivathanuV.KammR. D. (2018). Crosstalk between Developing Vasculature and Optogenetically Engineered Skeletal Muscle Improves Muscle Contraction and Angiogenesis. Biomaterials156, 65–76. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.11.041
87
OsakiT.UzelS. G. M.KammR. D. (2020). On-chip 3D Neuromuscular Model for Drug Screening and Precision Medicine in Neuromuscular Disease. Nat. Protoc.15, 421–449. 10.1038/s41596-019-0248-1
88
PaggiC. A.VenzacB.KarperienM.LeijtenJ. C. H.Le GacS. (2020). Monolithic Microfluidic Platform for Exerting Gradients of Compression on Cell-Laden Hydrogels, and Application to a Model of the Articular Cartilage. Sens. Actuators B: Chem.315, 127917. 10.1016/j.snb.2020.127917
89
ParkS.-H.SimW. Y.MinB.-H.YangS. S.KhademhosseiniA.KaplanD. L. (2012). Chip-Based Comparison of the Osteogenesis of Human Bone Marrow- and Adipose Tissue-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells under Mechanical Stimulation. PLoS ONE7, e46689. 10.1371/journal.pone.0046689
90
ParkY.CheongE.KwakJ.-G.CarpenterR.ShimJ.-H.LeeJ. (2021). Trabecular Bone Organoid Model for Studying the Regulation of Localized Bone Remodeling. Sci. Adv.7, eabd6495. 10.1126/sciadv.abd6495
91
PatelS.CaldwellJ. M.DotyS. B.LevineW. N.RodeoS.SoslowskyL. J.et al (2018). Integrating Soft and Hard Tissues via Interface Tissue Engineering. J. Orthop. Res.36, 1069–1077. 10.1002/jor.23810
92
PatschC.Challet-MeylanL.ThomaE. C.UrichE.HeckelT.O’SullivanJ. F.et al (2015). Generation of Vascular Endothelial and Smooth Muscle Cells from Human Pluripotent Stem Cells. Nat. Cel Biol17, 994–1003. 10.1038/ncb3205
93
PereiraJ. D.DubreuilD. M.DevlinA.-C.HeldA.SapirY.BerezovskiE.et al (2021). Human Sensorimotor Organoids Derived from Healthy and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Stem Cells Form Neuromuscular Junctions. Nat. Commun.12, 4744. 10.1038/s41467-021-24776-4
94
PhillipsJ. E.BurnsK. L.Le DouxJ. M.GuldbergR. E.GarciaA. J. (2008). Engineering Graded Tissue Interfaces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.105, 12170–12175. 10.1073/pnas.0801988105
95
PirosaA.ClarkK. L.TanJ.YuS.YangY.TuanR. S.et al (2019). Modeling Appendicular Skeletal Cartilage Development with Modified High-Density Micromass Cultures of Adult Human Bone Marrow-Derived Mesenchymal Progenitor Cells. Stem Cel. Res. Ther.10, 388. 10.1186/s13287-019-1505-5
96
PittengerM. F.MackayA. M.BeckS. C.JaiswalR. K.DouglasR.MoscaJ. D.et al (1999). Multilineage Potential of Adult Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells. Science284, 143–147. 10.1126/science.284.5411.143
97
PoliniA.Del MercatoL. L.BarraA.ZhangY. S.CalabiF.GigliG. (2019). Towards the Development of Human Immune-System-On-A-Chip Platforms. Drug Discov. Today24, 517–525. 10.1016/j.drudis.2018.10.003
98
PollardK. J.BowserD. A.AndersonW. A.MeselheM.MooreM. J. (2021). Morphine-sensitive Synaptic Transmission Emerges in Embryonic Rat Microphysiological Model of Lower Afferent Nociceptive Signaling. Sci. Adv.7, eabj2899. 10.1126/sciadv.abj2899
99
PrillS.BavliD.LevyG.EzraE.SchmälzlinE.JaegerM. S.et al (2016). Real-time Monitoring of Oxygen Uptake in Hepatic Bioreactor Shows CYP450-independent Mitochondrial Toxicity of Acetaminophen and Amiodarone. Arch. Toxicol.90, 1181–1191. 10.1007/s00204-015-1537-2
100
RaaschM.FritscheE.KurtzA.BauerM.MosigA. S. (2019). Microphysiological Systems Meet hiPSC Technology - New Tools for Disease Modeling of Liver Infections in Basic Research and Drug Development. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.140, 51–67. 10.1016/j.addr.2018.06.008
101
RaoL.QianY.KhodabukusA.RibarT.BursacN. (2018). Engineering Human Pluripotent Stem Cells into a Functional Skeletal Muscle Tissue. Nat. Commun.9, 126. 10.1038/s41467-017-02636-4
102
RenK.ZhouJ.WuH. (2013). Materials for Microfluidic Chip Fabrication. Acc. Chem. Res.46, 2396–2406. 10.1021/ar300314s
103
Rodríguez CruzP. M.CossinsJ.BeesonD.VincentA. (2020). The Neuromuscular Junction in Health and Disease: Molecular Mechanisms Governing Synaptic Formation and Homeostasis. Front. Mol. Neurosci.13, 610964. 10.3389/fnmol.2020.610964
104
RosserJ.BachmannB.JordanC.RibitschI.HaltmayerE.GueltekinS.et al (2019). Microfluidic Nutrient Gradient-Based Three-Dimensional Chondrocyte Culture-On-A-Chip as an In Vitro Equine Arthritis Model. Mater. Today Bio4, 100023. 10.1016/j.mtbio.2019.100023
105
RossiG.ManfrinA.LutolfM. P. (2018). Progress and Potential in Organoid Research. Nat. Rev. Genet.19, 671–687. 10.1038/s41576-018-0051-9
106
RowlandC. R.GlassK. A.EttyreddyA. R.GlossC. C.MatthewsJ. R. L.HuynhN. P. T.et al (2018). Regulation of Decellularized Tissue Remodeling via Scaffold-Mediated Lentiviral Delivery in Anatomically-Shaped Osteochondral Constructs. Biomaterials177, 161–175. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.04.049
107
SanoE.MoriC.MatsuokaN.OzakiY.YagiK.WadaA.et al (2019). Tetrafluoroethylene-Propylene Elastomer for Fabrication of Microfluidic Organs-On-Chips Resistant to Drug Absorption. Micromachines10, 793. 10.3390/mi10110793
108
SanthanamN.KumanchikL.GuoX.SommerhageF.CaiY.JacksonM.et al (2018). Stem Cell Derived Phenotypic Human Neuromuscular junction Model for Dose Response Evaluation of Therapeutics. Biomaterials166, 64–78. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.02.047
109
SasserathT.RumseyJ. W.McaleerC. W.BridgesL. R.LongC. J.ElbrechtD.et al (2020). Differential Monocyte Actuation in a Three‐Organ Functional Innate Immune System‐on‐a‐Chip. Adv. Sci.7, 2000323. 10.1002/advs.202000323
110
SebbagE.FeltenR.SagezF.SibiliaJ.DevilliersH.ArnaudL. (2019). The World-wide burden of Musculoskeletal Diseases: a Systematic Analysis of the World Health Organization Burden of Diseases Database. Ann. Rheum. Dis.78, 844–848. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-215142
111
SegoT. J.PrideauxM.SternerJ.MccarthyB. P.LiP.BonewaldL. F.et al (2020). Computational Fluid Dynamic Analysis of Bioprinted Self‐supporting Perfused Tissue Models. Biotechnol. Bioeng.117, 798–815. 10.1002/bit.27238
112
SherrC. J.DePinhoR. A. (2000). Cellular Senescence: Minireview Mitotic Clock or Culture Shock?Cell102, 407–410. 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)00046-5
113
SheynD.Cohn-YakubovichD.Ben-DavidS.De MelS.ChanV.HinojosaC.et al (2019). Bone-chip System to Monitor Osteogenic Differentiation Using Optical Imaging. Microfluid Nanofluidics23, 99. 10.1007/s10404-019-2261-7
114
ShoshaniO.ZiporiD. (2015). Stress as a Fundamental Theme in Cell Plasticity. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (Bba) - Gene Regul. Mech.1849, 371–377. 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2014.07.006
115
ShwartzY.BlitzE.ZelzerE. (2013). One Load to Rule Them All: Mechanical Control of the Musculoskeletal System in Development and Aging. Differentiation86, 104–111. 10.1016/j.diff.2013.07.003
116
SungJ. H.EschM. B.ProtJ.-M.LongC. J.SmithA.HickmanJ. J.et al (2013). Microfabricated Mammalian Organ Systems and Their Integration into Models of Whole Animals and Humans. Lab. Chip13, 1201–1212. 10.1039/c3lc41017j
117
SunwooJ. Y.EliasbergC. D.CarballoC. B.RodeoS. A. (2020). The Role of the Macrophage in Tendinopathy and Tendon Healing. J. Orthop. Res.38, 1666–1675. 10.1002/jor.24667
118
TakahashiK.YamanakaS. (2006). Induction of Pluripotent Stem Cells from Mouse Embryonic and Adult Fibroblast Cultures by Defined Factors. Cell126, 663–676. 10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024
119
TerrellJ. A.JonesC. G.KabandanaG. K. M.ChenC. (2020). From Cells-On-A-Chip to Organs-On-A-Chip: Scaffolding Materials for 3D Cell Culture in Microfluidics. J. Mater. Chem. B8, 6667–6685. 10.1039/d0tb00718h
120
ThompsonC. L.FuS.KnightM. M.ThorpeS. D.ThorpeS. D. (2020). Mechanical Stimulation: A Crucial Element of Organ-On-Chip Models. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.8, 602646. 10.3389/fbioe.2020.602646
121
ThomsonJ. A.Itskovitz-EldorJ.ShapiroS. S.WaknitzM. A.SwiergielJ. J.MarshallV. S.et al (1998). Embryonic Stem Cell Lines Derived from Human Blastocysts. Science282, 1145–1147. 10.1126/science.282.5391.1145
122
WalkerM.GodinM.PellingA. E. (2018). A Vacuum-Actuated Microtissue Stretcher for Long-Term Exposure to Oscillatory Strain within a 3D Matrix. Biomed. Microdevices20, 43. 10.1007/s10544-018-0286-4
123
WheelerE. C.VuA. Q.EinsteinJ. M.DisalvoM.AhmedN.Van NostrandE. L.et al (2020). Pooled CRISPR Screens with Imaging on Microraft Arrays Reveals Stress Granule-Regulatory Factors. Nat. Methods17, 636–642. 10.1038/s41592-020-0826-8
124
WuC.-L.DicksA.StewardN.TangR.KatzD. B.ChoiY.-R.et al (2021). Single Cell Transcriptomic Analysis of Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Chondrogenesis. Nat. Commun.12, 362. 10.1038/s41467-020-20598-y
125
YesteJ.IllaX.AlvarezM.VillaR. (2018). Engineering and Monitoring Cellular Barrier Models. J. Biol. Eng.12, 18. 10.1186/s13036-018-0108-5
126
YuJ.VodyanikM. A.Smuga-OttoK.Antosiewicz-BourgetJ.FraneJ. L.TianS.et al (2007). Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Lines Derived from Human Somatic Cells. Science318, 1917–1920. 10.1126/science.1151526
127
ZahaviE. E.IonescuA.GluskaS.GradusT.Ben-YaakovK.PerlsonE. (2015). A Compartmentalized Microfluidic Neuromuscular Co-culture System Reveals Spatial Aspects of GDNF Functions. J. Cel. Sci.128, 1241–1252. 10.1242/jcs.167544
128
ZhangY. S.AlemanJ.ShinS. R.KilicT.KimD.Mousavi ShaeghS. A.et al (2017). Multisensor-integrated Organs-On-Chips Platform for Automated and Continual In Situ Monitoring of Organoid Behaviors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA114, E2293–E2302. 10.1073/pnas.1612906114
129
ZhaoY.RafatianN.FericN. T.CoxB. J.Aschar-SobbiR.WangE. Y.et al (2019). A Platform for Generation of Chamber-Specific Cardiac Tissues and Disease Modeling. Cell176, 913–927.e18. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.11.042
130
ZujurD.KankeK.OnoderaS.TaniS.LaiJ.AzumaT.et al (2020). Stepwise Strategy for Generating Osteoblasts from Human Pluripotent Stem Cells under Fully Defined Xeno-free Conditions with Small-Molecule Inducers. Regener. Ther.14, 19–31. 10.1016/j.reth.2019.12.010
Summary
Keywords
organ-on-chip, tissue-on-chip, microphysiologic systems, musculoskeletal, muscle, bone, cartilage, tendon and ligament
Citation
Ajalik RE, Alenchery RG, Cognetti JS, Zhang VZ, McGrath JL, Miller BL and Awad HA (2022) Human Organ-on-a-Chip Microphysiological Systems to Model Musculoskeletal Pathologies and Accelerate Therapeutic Discovery. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 10:846230. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.846230
Received
30 December 2021
Accepted
21 February 2022
Published
14 March 2022
Volume
10 - 2022
Edited by
Dmitriy Sheyn, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, United States
Reviewed by
Gadi Pelled, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, United States
Mario Rothbauer, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2022 Ajalik, Alenchery, Cognetti, Zhang, McGrath, Miller and Awad.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Hani A. Awad, hani_awad@urmc.rochester.edu
This article was submitted to Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, a section of the journal Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.