↓ Skip to main content

Generation of mesenchymal stromal cells from cord blood: evaluation of in vitro quality parameters prior to clinical use

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Generation of mesenchymal stromal cells from cord blood: evaluation of in vitro quality parameters prior to clinical use
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13287-016-0465-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eliana Amati, Sabrina Sella, Omar Perbellini, Alberta Alghisi, Martina Bernardi, Katia Chieregato, Chiara Lievore, Denise Peserico, Manuela Rigno, Anna Zilio, Marco Ruggeri, Francesco Rodeghiero, Giuseppe Astori

Abstract

Increasing evidence suggests the safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) as advanced therapy medicinal products because of their immunomodulatory properties and supportive role in hematopoiesis. Although bone marrow remains the most common source for obtaining off-the-shelf MSC, cord blood (CB) represents an alternative source, which can be collected noninvasively and without major ethical concerns. However, the low estimated frequency and inconsistency of successful isolation represent open challenges for the use of CB-derived MSC in clinical trials. This study explores whether CB may represent a suitable source of MSC for clinical use and analyzes several in vitro parameters useful to better define the quality of CB-derived MSC prior to clinical application. CB units (n = 50) selected according to quality criteria (CB volume ≥ 20 ml, time from collection ≤ 24 h) were cultured using a standardized procedure for CB-MSC generation. MSC were analyzed for their growth potential and secondary colony-forming capacity. Immunophenotype and multilineage differentiation potential of culture-expanded CB-MSC were assessed to verify MSC identity. The immunomodulatory activity at resting conditions and after inflammatory priming (IFN-γ-1b and TNF-α for 48 hours) was explored to assess the in vitro potency of CB-MSC prior to clinical application. Molecular karyotyping was used to assess the genetic stability after prolonged MSC expansion. We were able to isolate MSC colonies from 44% of the processed units. Our results do not support a role of CB volume in determining the outcome of the cultures, in terms of both isolation and proliferative capacity of CB-MSC. Particularly, we have confirmed the existence of two different CB-MSC populations named short- and long-living (SL- and LL-) CBMSC, clearly diverging in their growth capacity and secondary colony-forming efficiency. Only LL-CBMSC were able to expand consistently and to survive for longer periods in vitro, while preserving genetic stability. Therefore, they may represent interesting candidates for therapeutic applications. We have also observed that LL-CBMSC were not equally immunosuppressive, particularly after inflammatory priming and despite upregulating priming-inducible markers. This work supports the use of CB as a potential MSC source for clinical applications, remaining more readily available compared to conventional sources. We have provided evidence that not all LL-CBMSC are equally immunosuppressive in an inflammatory environment, suggesting the need to include the assessment of potency among the release criteria for each CB-MSC batch intended for clinical use, at least for the treatment of immune disorders as GvHD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 64 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Postgraduate 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 15%
Engineering 3 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 14 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,397,576
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#2,054
of 2,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#354,823
of 419,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#34
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.