4.3 Article

Cytogenetic evaluation of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells from patients with myelodysplastic syndromes at different time-points during ex vivo expansion

Journal

LEUKEMIA RESEARCH
Volume 43, Issue -, Pages 24-32

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.leukres.2016.02.007

Keywords

Myelodysplastic syndromes; Mesenchymal stem cells; Cytogenetic abnormalities; G-banding; FISH

Funding

  1. FP7 Regional Potential programme Translational Potential (TransPOT, EC) [285948]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mounting evidence suggests that in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs) bone marrow (BM) mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) possess abnormal characteristics and are actively involved in disease pathogenesis. Nevertheless, it is controversial whether these cells harbor clonal cytogenetic aberrations. To probe more deeply into this issue, in the present study we used conventional G-banding and FISH analysis to assess the clonal chromosomal abnormalities of hematopoietic cells (HCs) and cultured MSCs, from 29 MDS patients and 25 healthy individuals, at early, intermediate and late passage. Variable clonal cytogenetic aberrations were detected in HCs from 31% and in MSCs from 34% of MDS patients. Clonal chromosomal abnormalities in MSCs were detected even in patients without aberrations in HCs. They were mostly numerical and always differed from those in HCs from the same individual. Clonal chromosomal abnormalities did not seem to confer a proliferative and/or survival advantage to MSCs. HCs from normal donors harbored no cytogenetic abnormalities, whereas trisomy of chromosome 5 was detected in MSCs from 16% of healthy individuals, in line with other studies. Our results suggest that MDS-derived BM-MSCs are genetically unstable. The significance of this observation in the biology of MSCs and MDS pathogenesis is still unknown and warrants further evaluation. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available