Genotoxic damage of human adipose-tissue derived mesenchymal stem cells triggers their terminal differentiation.
Altanerova V., Horvathova E., Matuskova M., Kucerova L., Altaner C.
Prospective Study, published in Neoplasma (2009) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Neoplasma (2009)
- Country
- Slovakia
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 19728764
- DOI
- 10.4149/neo_2009_06_542
Abstract (original English)
Human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal (stromal) stem cells (AT-MSCs) and genetically modified to express cytosine deaminase:uracil phosphoribosyltransferase (CDy-AT-MSCs) were treated with hydrogen peroxide in order to induce DNA damage and subsequently evaluate their genetic stability by single cell gel electrophoresis. Both cells types (parental and transgene modified) did not differ in the sensitivity to DNA breaks induction. Potential tumorigenicity of AT-MSCs and CDy-AT-MSCs was tested by subcutaneous inoculation of cell suspension into flank of immunocompromised mice. Dose of 15x10(6) cells was not found to be tumorigenic in given experimental setup. AT-MSCs, CDy-AT-MSCs and MSCs isolated from human lipoma were treated with chemical carcinogen 4-nitroquinoline-1-oxide (4NQO) in attempts to transform them. Surviving cells after genotoxic stress were not transformed but underwent replicative senescence. Irreparable DNA damage caused triggered adipogenic terminal differentiation, rather than apoptosis induction in all kinds of cells tested.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.