51
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Stromal cells and stem cells in clinical bone regeneration

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Stem-cell-mediated bone repair has been used in clinical trials for the regeneration of large craniomaxillofacial defects, to slow the process of bone degeneration in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head and for prophylactic treatment of distal tibial fractures. Successful regenerative outcomes in these investigations have provided a solid foundation for wider use of stromal cells in skeletal repair therapy. However, employing stromal cells to facilitate or enhance bone repair is far from being adopted into clinical practice. Scientific, technical, practical and regulatory obstacles prevent the widespread therapeutic use of stromal cells. Ironically, one of the major challenges lies in the limited understanding of the mechanisms via which transplanted cells mediate regeneration. Animal models have been used to provide insight, but these models largely fail to reproduce the nuances of human diseases and bone defects. Consequently, the development of targeted approaches to optimize cell-mediated outcomes is difficult. In this Review, we highlight the successes and challenges reported in several clinical trials that involved the use of bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal or adipose-tissue-derived stromal cells. We identify several obstacles blocking the mainstream use of stromal cells to enhance skeletal repair and highlight technological innovations or areas in which novel techniques might be particularly fruitful in continuing to advance the field of skeletal regenerative medicine.

          Related collections

          Most cited references99

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Recent advances in bone tissue engineering scaffolds.

          Bone disorders are of significant concern due to increase in the median age of our population. Traditionally, bone grafts have been used to restore damaged bone. Synthetic biomaterials are now being used as bone graft substitutes. These biomaterials were initially selected for structural restoration based on their biomechanical properties. Later scaffolds were engineered to be bioactive or bioresorbable to enhance tissue growth. Now scaffolds are designed to induce bone formation and vascularization. These scaffolds are often porous, made of biodegradable materials that harbor different growth factors, drugs, genes, or stem cells. In this review, we highlight recent advances in bone scaffolds and discuss aspects that still need to be improved. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Mesenchymal progenitor cells in human umbilical cord blood.

            Haemopoiesis is sustained by two main cellular components, the haematopoietic cells (HSCs) and the mesenchymal progenitor cells (MPCs). MPCs are multipotent and are the precursors for marrow stroma, bone, cartilage, muscle and connective tissues. Although the presence of HSCs in umbilical cord blood (UCB) is well known, that of MPCs has been not fully evaluated. In this study, we examined the ability of UCB harvests to generate in culture cells with characteristics of MPCs. Results showed that UCB-derived mononuclear cells, when set in culture, gave rise to adherent cells, which exhibited either an osteoclast- or a mesenchymal-like phenotype. Cells with the osteoclast phenotype were multinucleated, expressed TRAP activity and antigens CD45 and CD51/CD61. In turn, cells with the mesenchymal phenotype displayed a fibroblast-like morphology and expressed several MPC-related antigens (SH2, SH3, SH4, ASMA, MAB 1470, CD13, CD29 and CD49e). Our results suggest that preterm, as compared with term, cord blood is richer in mesenchymal progenitors, similar to haematopoietic progenitors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Wharton's jelly-derived cells are a primitive stromal cell population.

              Here, the literature was reviewed to evaluate whether a population of mesenchymal stromal cells derived from Wharton's jelly cells (WJCs) is a primitive stromal population. A clear case can be made for WJCs as a stromal population since they display the characteristics of MSCs as defined by the International Society for Cellular Therapy; for example, they grow as adherent cells with mesenchymal morphology, they are self-renewing, they express cell surface markers displayed by MSCs, and they may be differentiated into bone, cartilage, adipose, muscle, and neural cells. Like other stromal cells, WJCs support the expansion of other stem cells, such as hematopoietic stem cells, are well-tolerated by the immune system, and they have the ability to home to tumors. In contrast to bone marrow MSCs, WJCs have greater expansion capability, faster growth in vitro, and may synthesize different cytokines. WJCs are therapeutic in several different pre-clinical animal models of human disease such as neurodegenerative disease, cancer, heart disease, etc. The preclinical work suggests that the WJCs are therapeutic via trophic rescue and immune modulation. In summary, WJCs meet the definition of MSCs. Since WJCs expand faster and to a greater extent than adult-derived MSCs, these findings suggest that WJCs are a primitive stromal cell population with therapeutic potential. Further work is needed to determine whether WJCs engraft long-term and display self-renewal and multipotency in vivo and, as such, demonstrate whether Wharton's jelly cells are a true stem cell population.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nature Reviews Endocrinology
                Nat Rev Endocrinol
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1759-5029
                1759-5037
                March 2015
                January 6 2015
                March 2015
                : 11
                : 3
                : 140-150
                Article
                10.1038/nrendo.2014.234
                25560703
                bdba279f-2b4e-466e-b82e-1c7b2d0874c7
                © 2015

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article