↓ Skip to main content

Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Donor Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Exhibit Comparable Potency to Healthy Controls In Vitro

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cells Translational Medicine, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Donor Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Exhibit Comparable Potency to Healthy Controls In Vitro
Published in
Stem Cells Translational Medicine, July 2016
DOI 10.5966/sctm.2015-0272
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lindsay C. Davies, Jessica J. Alm, Nina Heldring, Guido Moll, Caroline Gavin, Ioannis Batsis, Hong Qian, Mikael Sigvardsson, Bo Nilsson, Lauri E. Kyllonen, Kaija T. Salmela, Per-Ola Carlsson, Olle Korsgren, Katarina Le Blanc

Abstract

: Bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) have been characterized and used in many clinical studies based on their immunomodulatory and regenerative properties. We have recently reported the benefit of autologous MSC systemic therapy in the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). Compared with allogeneic cells, use of autologous products reduces the risk of eliciting undesired complications in the recipient, including rejection, immunization, and transmission of viruses and prions; however, comparable potency of autologous cells is required for this treatment approach to remain feasible. To date, no analysis has been reported that phenotypically and functionally characterizes MSCs derived from newly diagnosed and late-stage T1D donors in vitro with respect to their suitability for systemic immunotherapy. In this study, we used gene array in combination with functional in vitro assays to address these questions. MSCs from T1D donors and healthy controls were expanded from BM aspirates. BM mononuclear cell counts and growth kinetics were comparable between the groups, with equivalent colony-forming unit-fibroblast capacity. Gene microarrays demonstrated differential gene expression between healthy and late-stage T1D donors in relation to cytokine secretion, immunomodulatory activity, and wound healing potential. Despite transcriptional differences, T1D MSCs did not demonstrate a significant difference from healthy controls in immunosuppressive activity, migratory capacity, or hemocompatibility. We conclude that despite differential gene expression, expanded MSCs from T1D donors are phenotypically and functionally similar to healthy control MSCs with regard to their immunomodulatory and migratory potential, indicating their suitability for use in autologous systemic therapy. The potential for mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) as a cell-based therapy in the treatment of immunologic disorders has been well established. Recent studies reported the clinical potential for autologous MSCs as a systemic therapy in the treatment of type I diabetes mellitus (T1D). The current study compared the genotypic and phenotypic profiles of bone marrow-derived MSCs from T1D and healthy donors as autologous (compared with allogeneic) therapy provides distinct advantages, such as reduced risk of immune reaction and transmission of infectious agents. The findings of the current study demonstrate that despite moderate differences in T1D MSCs at the gene level, these cells can be expanded in culture to an extent corresponding to that of MSCs derived from healthy donors. No functional difference in terms of immunosuppressive activity, blood compatibility, or migratory capacity was evident between the groups. The study findings also show that autologous MSC therapy holds promise as a T1D treatment and should be evaluated further in clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 60 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 16 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 16%
Engineering 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 April 2022.
All research outputs
#6,280,763
of 23,570,677 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cells Translational Medicine
#686
of 1,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,437
of 356,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cells Translational Medicine
#36
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,570,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 356,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.