Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41233824›Full record

ArticleBiology direct2025

Comparative analysis of human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells from Adipose Tissue and Dental Pulp: phenotypic characterization and secretome profiling.

Alessia Ventura, Antonio Libonati, Serena Marcozzi, Maria Assunta Ucci, Giulia Salvatore, Andrea Galgani, Stefano Pirrò, Micol Massimiani, Mario Picozza, Rosita Russo and 8 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biology direct, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

18 authors.

Alessia Ventura *Section of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Antonio Libonati *Catholic University of Our Lady of Good Counsel, Tirane, Albania.
Serena Marcozzi *Section of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Maria Assunta Ucci *Section of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Giulia SalvatoreSection of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Andrea GalganiCIMETA Interdepartmental Center for Comparative Medicine, Alternative Techniques and Aquaculture, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Stefano PirròCIMETA Interdepartmental Center for Comparative Medicine, Alternative Techniques and Aquaculture, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Micol MassimianiSaint Camillus International University of Health Sciences, Rome, Italy.
Mario PicozzaNeuroimmunology Unit, Santa Lucia Foundation I.R.C.C.S, Rome, Italy.
Rosita RussoDepartment of Environmental, Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Technologies, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy.
Simone VumbacaDepartment of Biology, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Donatella FariniSection of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Angela ChamberyDepartment of Environmental, Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Technologies, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy.
Giovanna BorsellinoNeuroimmunology Unit, Santa Lucia Foundation I.R.C.C.S, Rome, Italy.
Massimo De FeliciSection of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Francesca Gioia KlingerSaint Camillus International University of Health Sciences, Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo CampanellaDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Antonella CamaioniSection of Histology and Embryology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy. camaioni@uniroma2.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7059-2617

Funding

Italian Ministry of University and Research PRIN 20209L8BN4Italian Ministry of University and Research PRIN 2022A24YYY
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn tissue regeneration, as well as in post-traumatic recovery or in treating pathological alterations, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) and their products for cell-free treatments are increasingly attractive and applicable. For this reason, there is an urgent need to thoroughly investigate MSCs of different origins, especially those readily available and with no ethical concerns obtained from healthy donors.

methodsHuman MSCs were derived from discarded adipose tissue of four donors (ADSCs; 8 cell populations isolated by enzymatic digestion and mechanical fragmentation) and dental pulp of two donors (DPSCs; 4 cell populations from radicular and coronal compartments by mechanical fragmentation). Cells were characterized by differentiation, proliferation, and morphological features. Conditioned media (CM) were collected, and the secretome profile analyzed.

resultsThe trilineage differentiation assay and CD immunophenotyping showed that all primary cell lines possessed typical MSC characteristics, apart from the inability of DPSCs to perform adipogenesis. Significant CD differences were found mainly due to tissue source and regional compartments regarding coronal vs. radicular dental pulp. Notably, DPSCs were consistently smaller, Nestin-positive, and had a higher proliferation rate than ADSCs. Secretome analysis regarding anti-inflammatory and pro-inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors accumulating in the CM throughout the culture showed significant variations among MSC lines from the two tissues and within ADSCs obtained with different extraction methods. All MSC populations release a comparable number of extracellular vesicles (EVs), although ADSCs appeared to produce a significantly higher number of smaller exosomes than DPSCs. Depending on the tissue of origin, MSCs released specific sets of microRNAs, either free or enclosed in EVs, impacting many cellular processes. The microRNAs more expressed from DPSCs are mainly involved in oxidative stress and apoptosis pathways, while those of ADSCs play a regulatory role in cell cycle and proliferation.

conclusionsThe results support the notion that, despite their common characteristics, MSCs can differ in many aspects related to their ontogeny, extraction method, and, to a lesser extent, regionalization and donor heterogeneity. These findings pose challenges for the clinical translation of MSCs, their CMs, and derivatives and underline the importance of standardizing protocols to obtain MSC products from their secretome.

Indexed as

Adipose TissueDental PulpMesenchymal Stem CellsSecretomeAdultCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCells, CulturedHumansPhenotypeAdipose tissueConditioned mediumDental pulpExtracellular vesiclesHuman mesenchymal stromal cellsmiRNAsSecretome

Identifiers

PMID41233824
PMCPMC12616983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.