ArticleStem cell research & therapy2025
The therapeutic efficacy comparison of MSCs derived different tissues unveilings anti-apoptosis more crucial than angiogenesis in treating acute myocardial infarction.
Article in Stem cell research & therapy, 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.
- Immuno-instructive biomaterials for coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction repair.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Current status and new horizons in stem cell therapy in cardiovascular regenerative medicine (CaVaReM): an update.European journal of medical research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMyocardial infarction (MI) is a severe disease that often associated with impaired angiogenesis and increased myocardial apoptosis. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have been a promising candidate for treating myocardial infarction. However, functional heterogeneity of MSCs leads to inconsistent therapeutic efficiency and the current MSCs-based therapy lacks the concept and implementation of precision medicine. In this study, we compared the cardioprotective effect of UCMSCs and ADMSCs targeting the angiogenesis in a mouse MI model and screened out optimum MSCs candidate for precise clinical application.
methodsThe gene expression profiles of UCMSCs and ADMSCs were investigated through RNA sequencing analysis. To compare their angiogenic potential, we performed tube formation assay, Matrigel plug assays, and aortic ring assay, and analyzed pro-angiogenic genes via qPCR. Subsequently, UCMSCs and ADMSCs were respectively injected into myocardium after MI surgery in mice. On day 28 post-MI, echocardiography was performed to assess cardiac function. Histological analysis was performed to assess MSCs retention, angiogenesis, and myocardial apoptosis. Additionally, the anti-apoptosis effects mediated by MSCs were further evaluated using flow cytometry in hypoxia H9C2 and HL-1 cells.
resultsThe RNA sequencing analysis revealed differences in gene expression related to angiogenesis and apoptosis pathways between UCMSCs and ADMSCs. UCMSCs presented greater pro-angiogenesis activity than ADMSCs in vitro and in vivo. Both of UCMSCs and ADMSCs improved cardiac function, decreased infarction area and inhibited cardiomyocyte apoptosis while promoting angiogenesis post-MI in mice. Notably, ADMSCs exerted a better cardioprotective function than UCMSCs and stronger anti-apoptotic effect on residual cardiomyocytes.
conclusionsThe protection of residual cells survival played a more prominent role than angiogenesis in MSCs-based therapy for acute MI. Our study provides new insights into therapeutic strategies and suggests that the optimal type of MSCs can be screened based on their tissue heterogeneity for precise clinical applications in acute MI.
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.