Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T20:26:46.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Nonspecific Cell/Surface Interactions on Cell Affinity Chromatographic Separations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Daniel A. Hammer  and
Douglas A. Lauffenburger
Daniel A. Hammer
Affiliation:
School of Chemical Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853.
Douglas A. Lauffenburger
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
Get access

Abstract

Exploitation of specific cell membrane receptor molecules is a promising avenue for the separation and purification of particular cell populations for biomedical and biotechnological purposes. Cell affinity chromatography is a technique which uses this principle to separate cells. In it, ligand molecules with a high binding affinity for specific receptors on targeted cell populations are immobilized on surfaces over which mixed cell populations are passed. These targeted populations are preferential retained, affecting a separation.

Often, the resulting separation is not as selective or efficient as the receptor/ligand biochemistry would promise. We present a theoretical analysis which elucidates the role of physical factors, such as van der Waals, electrostatic, and fluid mechanical forces, in affecting cell adhesiveness and hence selectivity. We demonstrate that only fairly narrow ranges of parameters characterizing these forces permit the selectivity inherent in the receptor/ligand biochemistry.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 110: Symposium M – Biomedical Materials and Devices , 1987 , 739
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Wigzell, H. and Andersson, B., J. Exp. Med., 68, 2153 (1969).Google Scholar
2. Hertz, C.M., Graves, D.J., Lauffenburger, D.A., and Serota, F.T., Biotech Bioeng 27, 603 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Hertz, C.M., MS Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, (1982).Google Scholar
4. Braun, R., Teute, H., Kirchner, H., and Munk, K., J. Immunol. Meth. 54, 251 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Reisner, Y., Pahwa, S., Chiao, J.W., Sharon, N., Evans, R.L., and Good, R.A., PNAS USA, 77, 6778 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Sharma, S.K. and Mahendroo, P.P., J. Chromatography 184, 471 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Happel, J., AIChE J. 4, 198 (1958).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Spielman, L.A. and FitzPatrick, J.A., J. Colloid Int. Sci. 42, 607 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Spielman, L.A. and Cukor, P.M., J. Colloid Int. Sci. 43, 51 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Spielman, L.A. and FitzPatrick, J.A., J. Colloid Int. Sci. 49, 328 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Yao, K.-M., Habibian, M.T. and O'Melia, C.R., Env. Sci. Tech. 5, 1105 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Hammer, D.A., Linderman, J.J., Graves, D.J. and Lauffenburger, D.A., Biotech. Prog. 3, 189 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Bongrand, P. and Bell, G.I., in Cell Surface Dynamics, Concepts and Models, edited by Perelson, A.S., DeLisi, C. and Wiegel, F.W. (Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1984), pp. 459–494.Google Scholar
14. Dimitrov, D.S. and Ivanov, I.B., J. Colloid Int. Sci. 64, 97 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Dimitrov, D.S., Dimitrov, N. and Stefanova, D., J. Colloid Int. Sci. 98, 269 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Dimitrov, D.S., Progress in Surface Science 14, 295 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Brenner, H., Chem. Eng. Sci. 16, 242 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Hammer, D.A. and Lauffenburger, D.A., Biophys. J. 52, 475 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Hammer, D.A., PhD Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 1987.Google Scholar