ArticleBMC veterinary research2025
Comparison of the chondrogenic potential of eBMSCs and eUCMSCs in response to selected peptides and compounds.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From microtissues to macro solutions - The future of scalable and automated cartilage tissue engineering.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- Advancements in Stem Cell Applications for Livestock Research: A Review.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCartilage injuries pose significant challenges in horses and often lead to post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). Despite the advances in surgical and regenerative techniques, the result in most cases is the formation of a fibrocartilage repair tissue. Cell-based cartilage therapies are mainly focused on equine bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (eBMSCs) as they are easily accessible, and multipotent. Nonetheless, alternative allogeneic sources, for example equine umbilical cord matrix mesenchymal stromal cells (eUCMSCs), hold promise given their non-invasive and readily accessible nature. Considerable research has been dedicated to exploring chondroinductive factors (e.g., peptides and small compounds), aiming to replace growth factors for inducing chondrogenesis. However, these factors have not yet translated to the equine community. Therefore, in the current study, we selected from the literature two promising peptides, CM10 and CK2.1, and two promising compounds, kartogenin and SM04690, and assessed their chondroinductive potential with both eBMSCs and eUCMSCs. In addition, the chondroinductive potential of eBMSCs was evaluated in monolayer and spheroid culture in both hypoxia and normoxia in response to dexamethasone and/or transforming growth factor beta 3 (TGF-β3).
resultsFollowing 21 days of culture, none of the evaluated chondrogenic factors resulted in a higher gene expression of chondrogenic markers compared to the positive or negative controls with eBMSCs or eUCMSCs. Interestingly, spheroid culture in hypoxia with dexamethasone treatment (without TGF-β or any compound or peptide) was sufficient to induce the chondrogenic differentiation of eBMSCs.
conclusionBased on cell response to the positive control, in the conditions employed in the current study, eBMSCs may be preferred over eUCMSCs for chondrogenesis. The current study supports the use of spheroid culture, and the use of dexamethasone over TGF-β or any of the compounds or peptides tested here from the prior literature to drive chondrogenesis with eBMSCs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.