Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyPubMed

Articular cartilage-derived cells hold a strong osteogenic differentiation potential in comparison to mesenchymal stem cells in vitro.

Salamon A., Jonitz-Heincke A., Adam S., Rychly J., Müller-Hilke B., Bader R.

Prospective Study on Osteoarthritis, Cartilage Damage, published in Exp Cell Res (2013) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • 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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Prospective Study
Journal
Exp Cell Res (2013)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
24055981
DOI
10.1016/j.yexcr.2013.09.008

Abstract (original English)

Cartilaginous matrix-degenerative diseases like osteoarthritis (OA) are characterized by gradual cartilage erosion, and also by increased presence of cells with mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) character within the affected tissues. Moreover, primary chondrocytes long since are known to de-differentiate in vitro and to be chondrogenically re-differentiable. Since both findings appear to conflict with each other, we quantitatively assessed the mesenchymal differentiation potential of OA patient cartilage-derived cells (CDC) towards the osteogenic and adipogenic lineage in vitro and compared it to that of MSC isolated from adipose tissue (adMSC) of healthy donors. We analyzed expression of MSC markers CD29, CD44, CD105, and CD166, and, following osteogenic and adipogenic induction in vitro, quantified their expression of osteogenic and adipogenic differentiation markers. Furthermore, CDC phenotype and proliferation were monitored. We found that CDC exhibit an MSC CD marker expression pattern similar to adMSC and a similar increase in proliferation rate during osteogenic differentiation. In contrast, the marked reduction of proliferation observed during adipogenic differentiation of adMSC was absent in CDC. Quantification of differentiation markers revealed a strong osteogenic differentiation potential for CDC, however almost no capacity for adipogenic differentiation. Since in the pat

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
Antigens, CDBiomarkersCartilage, ArticularCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCells, CulturedChondrocytesGene Expression RegulationHumansMesenchymal Stem Cells

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research