Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewPubMed

Concise reviews: can mesenchymal stromal cells differentiate into corneal cells? A systematic review of published data.

Harkin DG., Foyn L., Bray LJ., Sutherland AJ., Li FJ., Cronin BG.

Systematic Review, published in Stem Cells (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • 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
Systematic Review
Journal
Stem Cells (2015)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
25400018
DOI
10.1002/stem.1895

Abstract (original English)

The majority of stem cell therapies for corneal repair are based upon the use of progenitor cells isolated from corneal tissue, but a growing body of literature suggests a role for mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) isolated from noncorneal tissues. While the mechanism of MSC action seems likely to involve their immuno-modulatory properties, claims have emerged of MSC transdifferentiation into corneal cells. Substantial differences in methodology and experimental outcomes, however, have prompted us to perform a systematic review of the published data. Key questions used in our analysis included: the choice of markers used to assess corneal cell phenotype, the techniques used to detect these markers, adequate reporting of controls, and tracking of MSC when studied in vivo. Our search of the literature revealed 28 papers published since 2006, with half appearing since 2012. MSC cultures established from bone marrow and adipose tissue have been best studied (22 papers). Critically, only 11 studies used appropriate markers of corneal cell phenotype, along with necessary controls. Ten out of these eleven papers, however, contained positive evidence of corneal cell marker expression by MSC. The clearest evidence is observed with respect to expression of markers for corneal stromal cells by MSC. In comparison, the evidence for MSC conversion into either corneal epithelial cells or cornea

What this study does not prove

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

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsCell DifferentiationCell TransdifferentiationCorneaHumansMesenchymal Stem CellsStem Cell Transplantation

Browse all related research

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