Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Similarities and differences between mesenchymal stem/progenitor cells derived from various human tissues.

Kozlowska U., Krawczenko A., Futoma K., Jurek T., Rorat M., Patrzalek D.

Laboratory Study, published in World J Stem Cells (2019) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
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
Laboratory Study
Journal
World J Stem Cells (2019)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
31293717
DOI
10.4252/wjsc.v11.i6.347

Abstract (original English)

Mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) constitute a promising tool in regenerative medicine and can be isolated from different human tissues. However, their biological properties are still not fully characterized. Whereas MSCs from different tissue exhibit many common characteristics, their biological activity and some markers are different and depend on their tissue of origin. Understanding the factors that underlie MSC biology should constitute important points for consideration for researchers interested in clinical MSC application. To characterize the biological activity of MSCs during longterm culture isolated from: bone marrow (BM-MSCs), adipose tissue (AT-MSCs), skeletal muscles (SM-MSCs), and skin (SK-MSCs). MSCs were isolated from the tissues, cultured for 10 passages, and assessed for: phenotype with immunofluorescence and flow cytometry, multipotency with differentiation capacity for osteo-, chondro-, and adipogenesis, stemness markers with qPCR for mRNA for Sox2 and Oct4, and genetic stability for p53 and c-Myc; 27 bioactive factors were screened using the multiplex ELISA array, and spontaneous fusion involving a co-culture of SM-MSCs with BM-MSCs or AT-MSCs stained with PKH26 (red) or PKH67 (green) was performed. All MSCs showed the basic MSC phenotype; however, their expression decreased during the follow-up period, as confirmed by fluorescence intensity. The exami

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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