4.7 Review

MSC Microvesicles for the Treatment of Lung Disease: A New Paradigm for Cell-Free Therapy

期刊

ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING
卷 21, 期 13, 页码 1905-1915

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ars.2013.5784

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [RO1 HL055454, RO1 HL085446]
  2. William Randolph Hearst Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Significance: Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), also known as chronic lung disease of infancy, is a major complication of preterm birth that, despite improvements in neonatal respiratory support and perinatal care, remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality, often with severe adverse neurodevelopmental sequelae. Even with major advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis of this disease, BPD remains essentially without adequate treatment. Recent Advances: Cell-based therapies arose as a promising treatment for acute and chronic lung injury in many experimental models of disease. Currently, more than 3000 human clinical trials employing cell therapy for the treatment of diverse diseases, including cardiac, neurologic, immune, and respiratory conditions, are ongoing or completed. Among the treatments, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are the most studied and have been extensively tested in experimental models of BPD, pulmonary hypertension, pulmonary fibrosis, and acute lung injury. Critical Issues: Despite the promising potential, MSC therapy for human lung disease still remains at an experimental stage and optimal transplantation conditions need to be determined. Although the mechanism of MSC action can be manifold, accumulating evidence suggests a predominant paracrine, immunomodulatory, and cytoprotective effect. Future Directions: The current review summarizes the effect of MSC treatment in models of lung injury, including BPD, and focuses on the MSC secretome and, specifically, MSC-derived microvesicles as potential key mediators of therapeutic action that can be the focus of future therapies. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 21, 1905-1915.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据