Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24158496›Full record

ReviewCellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS2014

Natural history of mesenchymal stem cells, from vessel walls to culture vessels.

Iain R Murray, Christopher C West, Winters R Hardy, Aaron W James, Tea Soon Park, Alan Nguyen, Tulyapruek Tawonsawatruk, Lorenza Lazzari, Chia Soo, Bruno Péault

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed
16.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

131 citing papers in PubMed, 283 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Iain R MurrayMRC Center for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Christopher C West
Winters R Hardy
Aaron W James
Tea Soon Park
Alan Nguyen
Tulyapruek Tawonsawatruk
Lorenza Lazzari
Chia Soo
Bruno Péault
University of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Edinburgh · GBBroad Center · USFondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico · ITJohns Hopkins University · USMRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CAF/11/13Medical Research Council G1000816
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) can regenerate tissues by direct differentiation or indirectly by stimulating angiogenesis, limiting inflammation, and recruiting tissue-specific progenitor cells. MSCs emerge and multiply in long-term cultures of total cells from the bone marrow or multiple other organs. Such a derivation in vitro is simple and convenient, hence popular, but has long precluded understanding of the native identity, tissue distribution, frequency, and natural role of MSCs, which have been defined and validated exclusively in terms of surface marker expression and developmental potential in culture into bone, cartilage, and fat. Such simple, widely accepted criteria uniformly typify MSCs, even though some differences in potential exist, depending on tissue sources. Combined immunohistochemistry, flow cytometry, and cell culture have allowed tracking the artifactual cultured mesenchymal stem/stromal cells back to perivascular anatomical regions. Presently, both pericytes enveloping microvessels and adventitial cells surrounding larger arteries and veins have been described as possible MSC forerunners. While such a vascular association would explain why MSCs have been isolated from virtually all tissues tested, the origin of the MSCs grown from umbilical cord blood remains unknown. In fact, most aspects of the biology of perivascular MSCs are still obscure, from the emergence of these cells in the embryo to the molecular control of their activity in adult tissues. Such dark areas have not compromised intents to use these cells in clinical settings though, in which purified perivascular cells already exhibit decisive advantages over conventional MSCs, including purity, thorough characterization and, principally, total independence from in vitro culture. A growing body of experimental data is currently paving the way to the medical usage of autologous sorted perivascular cells for indications in which MSCs have been previously contemplated or actually used, such as bone regeneration and cardiovascular tissue repair.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBlood VesselsCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyCell Culture TechniquesFlow CytometryHumansImmunohistochemistryImmunophenotypingMesenchymal Stem CellsPericytesBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID24158496
PMCPMC11113613
OpenAlexW2047740136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.