Quantitative Multimodal Evaluation of Passaging Human Neural Crest Stem Cells for Peripheral Nerve Regeneration
Du J., Chen H., Zhou K., Jia X.
Clinical Trial, published in Stem Cell Rev Rep (2018) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
- 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
- Clinical Trial
- Journal
- Stem Cell Rev Rep (2018)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 28780695
- PMCID
- PMC5799043
- DOI
- 10.1007/s12015-017-9758-9
- Citations
- 17
Abstract (original English)
Peripheral nerve injury is a major burden to societies worldwide, however, current therapy options (e.g. autologous nerve grafts) are unable to produce satisfactory outcomes. Many studies have shown that stem cell transplantation holds great potential for peripheral nerve repair, and human neural crest stem cells (hNCSCs), which give rise to a variety of tissues in the peripheral nervous system, are particularly promising. NCSCs are one of the best candidates for clinical translation, however, to ensure the viability and quality of NCSCs for research and clinical use, the effect of in vitro cell passaging on therapeutic effects needs be evaluated given that passaging is required to expand NCSCs to meet the demands of transplantation in preclinical research and clinical trials. To date, no study has investigated the quality of NCSCs past the 5th passage in vivo. In this study, we employed a multimodal evaluation system to investigate changes in outcomes between transplantation with 5th (p5) and 6th passage (p6) NCSCs in a 15 mm rat sciatic nerve injury and repair model. Using CatWalk gait analysis, gastrocnemius muscle index, electrophysiology, immunohistochemistry, and histomorphometric analysis, we showed that p6 NCSCs demonstrated decreased cell survival, Schwann-cell differentiation, axonal growth, and functional outcomes compared to p5 NCSCs (all p < 0.05). In conclusion, p
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.