A phenotypic comparison of osteoblast cell lines versus human primary osteoblasts for biomaterials testing

Immortalized cell lines are used more frequently in basic and applied biology research than primary bone‐derived cells because of their ease of access and repeatability of results in experiments. It is clear that these cell models do not fully resemble the behavior of primary osteoblast cells. Although the differences will affect the results of biomaterials testing, they are not clearly defined. Here, we focused on comparing proliferation and maturation potential of three osteoblast cell lines, SaOs2, MG‐63, and MC3T3‐E1 with primary human osteoblast (HOb) cells to assess their suitability as in vitro models for biomaterials testing. We report similarities in cell proliferation and mineralization between primary cells and MC3T3‐E1. Both, SaOs2 and MG‐63 cells demonstrated a higher proliferation rate than HOb cells. In addition, SaOs2, but not MG‐63, cells demonstrated similar ALP activity, mineralization potential and gene regulation to HOb's. Our results demonstrate that despite SaOs‐2, MG63, and MC3T3 cells being popular choices for emulating osteoblast behavior, none can be considered appropriate replacements for HOb's. Nevertheless, these cell lines all demonstrated some distinct similarities with HOb's, thus when applied in the correct context are a valuable in vitro pilot model of osteoblast functionality, but should not be used to replace primary cell studies. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 2636–2643, 2014.