Amniotic Fluid-Derived Stem Cells: An Overlooked Source of Stem Cells for Translational Research.
Jiang Y., Li Y., Duan L., Jiang B.
Narrative Review, published in DNA Cell Biol (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- DNA Cell Biol (2025)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 40096350
- DOI
- 10.1089/dna.2024.0254
Abstract (original English)
Amniotic fluid-derived stem cells (AFSCs) represent a promising yet underutilized resource for research and clinical applications. While AFSCs share phenotypic and functional characteristics with stem cells derived from somatic tissues such as bone marrow, adipose tissue, placenta, and umbilical cord, their unique developmental origin grants them several superior qualities. These include enhanced multipotency, tissue-specific genotypic profiles, and the ability to form single-cell colonies. Such features position AFSCs as highly valuable for translational research and tissue engineering. This review seeks to underscore the distinctive attributes of AFSCs, particularly their relevance in developmental research and engineering. By emphasizing these qualities, we aim to stimulate further exploration into their use in patient-specific induced pluripotent stem cells and organoid development, potentially unlocking their full therapeutic potential. The unique capabilities of AFSCs make them an exceptional candidate for advancing regenerative medicine, offering new avenues for treating a variety of conditions that currently have limited therapeutic options.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.