Mesenchymal Stem Cells: Sources, Mechanisms, and Clinical Applications

Mesenchymal stem cell lineage is the set of connective tissue cells that a mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) can become: bone-forming osteoblasts, cartilage-forming chondrocytes and fat-storing adipocytes, plus stromal, tendon and muscle-type cells. The International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT, 2006) requires a cell to differentiate into bone, cartilage and fat in the lab before it can be called an MSC, which is why these three are known as the trilineage. MSCs, also called mesenchymal stromal cells or multipotent stromal cells, are found in bone marrow, adipose (fat) tissue and umbilical cord tissue. In treatment their value comes mostly from paracrine signaling and immunomodulation, not from turning into new tissue.

What Are Mesenchymal Stem Cells?

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are a type of adult stem cell first identified by Alexander Friedenstein in the 1960s when he discovered that bone marrow contained a population of plastic-adherent, fibroblast-like cells capable of forming bone and cartilage [1]. The term “mesenchymal stem cell” was popularized by Arnold Caplan in 1991, though Caplan himself later advocated renaming them “medicinal signaling cells” to better reflect their primary mechanism of action [2].

MSCs are defined by the International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT) based on three minimum criteria: they must adhere to plastic under standard culture conditions; they must express surface markers CD73, CD90, and CD105 while lacking expression of CD34, CD45, and other hematopoietic markers; and they must be capable of differentiating into osteoblasts (bone cells), adipocytes (fat cells), and chondroblasts (cartilage cells) under appropriate in vitro conditions [3].

While the term “stem cell” implies unlimited self-renewal and pluripotency, MSCs are technically multipotent, meaning they can differentiate into a limited range of cell types within the mesenchymal lineage. This distinction is scientifically precise but often lost in popular discussion, where MSCs are sometimes portrayed as having the broad regenerative capacity of embryonic stem cells. Understanding their actual capabilities is essential for setting realistic expectations about what MSC therapies can and cannot accomplish.

The names vary, and they matter. In 2019 the ISCT recommended “mesenchymal stromal cells” for the mixed cell populations used in labs and clinics, and reserved “mesenchymal stem cells” for cells shown to self-renew and differentiate in a living body [17]. Other names in the literature include multipotent stromal cells, marrow stromal cells, skeletal stem cells and medicinal signaling cells; all of them shorten to MSCs.

What Is Mesenchymal Stem Cell Lineage?

Mesenchymal stem cell lineage is the family tree of cell types that descend from an MSC. The core of that tree is the trilineage: osteoblasts that build bone, chondrocytes that build cartilage and adipocytes that store fat. MSCs can also give rise to fibroblasts and stromal cells that support blood formation in the marrow, to tendon cells (tenocytes) and, under specific lab conditions, to smooth and skeletal muscle-type cells.

All of these belong to the mesodermal, or connective tissue, branch of development. An MSC is multipotent: it can choose among these related fates but cannot make every cell in the body the way an embryonic stem cell can [3].

Which cell types do MSCs differentiate into?

The table below lists the main lineages, the master regulators that switch each one on and the cues researchers use to trigger them in culture. The induction cues are standard laboratory protocols, not treatments.

How does an MSC commit to one lineage?

Lineage commitment happens in steps. Each step narrows the cell’s options until it is locked into one fate.

1. Uncommitted MSC: the cell self-renews and keeps all mesenchymal fates open.
2. Lineage-committed progenitor: signals such as Wnt, BMP or TGF-beta push the cell toward an osteoprogenitor, chondroprogenitor or preadipocyte state.
3. Precursor: the master transcription factor (for example RUNX2 for bone) switches on and the cell begins making tissue-specific proteins.
4. Mature, specialized cell: the osteoblast mineralizes matrix and becomes an osteocyte, the chondrocyte lays down collagen II and proteoglycans, and the adipocyte fills with lipid.

Bone and fat are a reciprocal pair. RUNX2 and Wnt signaling favor bone while suppressing fat, and PPAR-gamma favors fat while suppressing bone, which helps explain why marrow fat rises as bone density falls with age. Physical cues matter too: Engler and colleagues (2006) showed that MSCs grown on soft matrices expressed neural markers, stiffer matrices pushed them toward muscle and rigid matrices pushed them toward bone [16].

Can MSCs become neurons, heart cells or liver cells?

Claims that MSCs “transdifferentiate” into neurons, heart muscle or liver cells come mainly from lab studies in which cells began to express a few marker proteins. Those cells generally did not acquire stable, working function, and later tracking studies found that most infused MSCs do not survive long in tissue [8]. The mainstream view is that MSC lineage stays within connective tissue, and that benefits seen in nerve, heart or liver studies come from signaling rather than new cells.

How is MSC lineage tested in the lab?

Researchers confirm trilineage potential with three stains after induction: Alizarin Red for mineralized bone matrix, Oil Red O for fat droplets and Alcian blue or safranin O for cartilage proteoglycans [3]. A positive result shows what a cell population can do in a dish. It does not predict what the same cells will do after injection into a knee or a vein.

Where do MSCs sit in the living body?

In tissue, many MSCs appear to live around blood vessels. Crisan and colleagues (2008) found that pericytes from many human organs share MSC markers and lineage potential [18], and Sacchetti and colleagues (2007) identified CD146-positive cells in human marrow that rebuilt bone and marrow stroma after transplantation [19]. In mice, Zhou and colleagues (2014) traced most new bone and marrow fat in adults back to leptin receptor-positive marrow stromal cells [20].

Sources of Mesenchymal Stem Cells

The source of MSCs changes how many cells are available, how they behave and how they are regulated. The table compares the three main clinical sources.

Bone Marrow

Bone marrow was the first identified source of MSCs and remains the most extensively studied. MSCs are harvested from bone marrow via aspiration, typically from the iliac crest (hip bone). The procedure is performed under local anesthesia and takes approximately 30 to 60 minutes. Bone marrow aspirate contains a heterogeneous mixture of cells, including hematopoietic stem cells, and MSCs represent only about 0.001% to 0.01% of the total nucleated cell population [4].

Bone marrow-derived MSCs (BM-MSCs) have the most extensive clinical track record and are often considered the “gold standard” for comparison. Their concentration in bone marrow declines with age, and the harvesting procedure, while generally safe, can be uncomfortable and carries a small risk of infection or bleeding at the aspiration site. Bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), a common orthopedic preparation, is spun down rather than grown in culture, so it contains far fewer MSCs than an expanded product.

Adipose Tissue

Fat tissue contains a rich population of MSCs that can be isolated through lipoaspiration (a procedure similar to liposuction). Adipose-derived MSCs (AD-MSCs) are present at concentrations roughly 100 to 500 times greater than in bone marrow, making adipose tissue an attractive source for clinical applications [5]. The stromal vascular fraction (SVF) obtained from enzymatic digestion of lipoaspirate contains MSCs along with endothelial progenitor cells, pericytes, immune cells, and other stromal components.

AD-MSCs share most biological properties with BM-MSCs but may differ in certain differentiation capacities and cytokine secretion profiles. Some research suggests AD-MSCs have superior angiogenic properties, while BM-MSCs may have advantages in osteogenic (bone-forming) differentiation [6]. The relative ease of harvesting and the abundance of cells make adipose tissue an increasingly popular source in clinical practice.

Umbilical Cord Tissue

Wharton’s jelly, the gelatinous connective tissue within the umbilical cord, is a rich source of MSCs that can be collected non-invasively at the time of birth. Umbilical cord MSCs (UC-MSCs) are younger and more proliferative than adult-derived MSCs, with longer telomeres and higher expansion potential in culture [7]. They also appear to have stronger immunomodulatory properties, making them particularly attractive for allogeneic (donor-to-recipient) applications.

Because UC-MSCs are collected from tissue that would otherwise be discarded, their use avoids the ethical concerns associated with embryonic stem cells and the procedural burden of bone marrow or adipose harvesting. UC-MSCs are the most commonly used cell type in the growing market of allogeneic “off-the-shelf” stem cell products, and the quality and cell viability of commercially available products vary widely.

Other Sources

MSCs have also been isolated from dental pulp, synovial fluid, peripheral blood, placental tissue, and amniotic fluid. While these sources are subjects of active research, bone marrow, adipose, and umbilical cord remain the dominant clinical sources.

How MSCs Work: The Paracrine Paradigm

Early enthusiasm for MSCs centered on the idea that transplanted cells would engraft in damaged tissue and directly differentiate into the cell types needed for repair. Decades of research have revealed a more nuanced picture. The vast majority of transplanted MSCs do not survive long-term in the recipient tissue. Tracking studies using labeled cells have shown that most MSCs disappear from the transplant site within days to weeks [8].

Despite their poor engraftment and survival, MSCs consistently produce measurable biological effects. This apparent paradox is explained by the paracrine hypothesis: MSCs exert their primary therapeutic effects by secreting a complex array of bioactive molecules, including growth factors, cytokines, chemokines, and extracellular vesicles (exosomes), that influence the behavior of surrounding cells and tissues [2].

This is why lineage and treatment are two different questions. An MSC’s lineage describes what it can become in a dish; its clinical effect depends mostly on what it releases in the hours and days it survives in the body. The same reasoning drives interest in cell-free products, covered in the exosome therapy guide.

Key Paracrine Mechanisms

• Anti-inflammatory signaling: MSCs secrete anti-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-10, TGF-beta, and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) that suppress excessive inflammatory responses and promote tissue homeostasis
• Angiogenesis promotion: MSCs release vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and other angiogenic factors that stimulate new blood vessel formation in ischemic or damaged tissue
• Anti-apoptotic effects: MSC-derived factors can reduce cell death in stressed tissues, helping to preserve viable cells during injury or disease
• Tissue remodeling: MSCs secrete matrix metalloproteinases and other factors that help remodel scar tissue and promote organized tissue repair
• Recruitment of endogenous progenitors: The signaling molecules released by MSCs can attract the body’s own stem and progenitor cells to the site of injury, amplifying the regenerative response

Immunomodulation

MSCs possess notable immunomodulatory properties that have made them attractive candidates for treating autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. They can suppress T cell proliferation, inhibit B cell function, modulate dendritic cell maturation, and promote the generation of regulatory T cells (Tregs) [9]. These effects are mediated by both direct cell-to-cell contact and paracrine signaling.

MSCs appear to be “immune privileged” to some degree, meaning they express low levels of MHC class II molecules and co-stimulatory molecules, which reduces the likelihood of immune rejection when used in allogeneic (donor) applications. This property is not absolute: Ankrum and colleagues (2014) described MSCs as “immune evasive, not immune privileged,” and it is one reason why allogeneic MSC products have been feasible in clinical settings without the need for immunosuppressive drugs in many cases [10].

Clinical Applications

Orthopedic Conditions

Orthopedic applications are the most common clinical use of MSCs. Research and clinical practice have explored MSC therapy for osteoarthritis, cartilage defects, tendon injuries, bone fractures, and avascular necrosis. Orthopedic surgeons, sports medicine physicians and physiatrists (physical medicine and rehabilitation doctors) deliver most of these injections, often under ultrasound or fluoroscopic guidance.

In osteoarthritis, intra-articular injection of MSCs has shown promise in reducing pain, improving function, and potentially slowing cartilage degeneration. A systematic review of clinical trials found that MSC injections for knee osteoarthritis produced significant improvements in pain scores and functional outcomes compared to baseline, with some studies showing evidence of cartilage preservation on MRI [11]. Well-controlled trials comparing MSCs to placebo (saline injection) have produced mixed results, and the optimal cell source, dose, and preparation method remain active areas of investigation.

The largest head-to-head study to date points the same way. In a randomized phase 3 trial of 480 people with knee osteoarthritis, Mautner and colleagues (2023) compared bone marrow aspirate concentrate, adipose SVF and umbilical cord MSCs with a corticosteroid injection, and reported in Nature Medicine that none of the cell injections was superior to the steroid at one year [21]. Patients weighing a knee injection can compare options in the osteoarthritis treatment guide and in PRP vs stem cell therapy.

Autoimmune Conditions

The immunomodulatory properties of MSCs have led to clinical trials in graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, and type 1 diabetes.

The most advanced application is in GVHD, a life-threatening complication of bone marrow transplantation. An MSC product (Remestemcel-L, marketed as Ryoncil) first received conditional approval in certain countries for steroid-refractory acute GVHD in pediatric patients. Clinical data showed meaningful response rates in patients who had failed standard immunosuppressive therapy [12].

On December 18, 2024, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved remestemcel-L (Ryoncil), an allogeneic bone marrow-derived product, for steroid-refractory acute GVHD in children 2 months and older, making it the first MSC therapy approved in the United States [22]. In the single-arm study behind the approval, 16 of 54 children (30%) had a complete response and 22 (41%) a partial response at day 28. The approval covers that one indication only, and it is given in transplant centers by hematologist-oncologists, not in outpatient wellness clinics.

For Crohn’s disease, Darvadstrocel (Alofisel) received European Medicines Agency approval in 2018 for the treatment of complex perianal fistulas, which made it one of the few regulatory-approved MSC products globally. The product uses expanded allogeneic adipose-derived MSCs injected locally around the fistula tract [13]. Its larger confirmatory trial, ADMIRE-CD II with 568 patients, did not meet its primary endpoint, and the EU marketing authorization was withdrawn at the holder’s request in December 2024 [23]. Background on the condition itself is in the Crohn’s disease guide.

For multiple sclerosis, lupus and type 1 diabetes, MSC infusions remain investigational, with small safety trials but no controlled evidence that supports routine use.

Neurological Conditions

MSC therapy for neurological conditions, including stroke, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, and neurodegenerative diseases, is in earlier stages of development. Preclinical data is extensive, showing that MSCs can reduce neuroinflammation, promote axonal regeneration, and support neuronal survival through paracrine mechanisms. Clinical trials in stroke and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have generally shown safety and some signals of benefit, but definitive efficacy data from large randomized trials is still awaited [14].

Allogeneic vs. Autologous MSCs

One of the most significant practical questions in MSC therapy is whether to use autologous cells (from the patient’s own body) or allogeneic cells (from a donor).

Autologous Approach

Autologous MSCs eliminate the risk of immune rejection and disease transmission from a donor. They do require a harvesting procedure (bone marrow aspiration or liposuction), and the quality and quantity of cells obtained may be compromised by the patient’s age, health status, and underlying disease. Autologous cells also typically require culture expansion to reach therapeutic doses, which adds time, cost, and regulatory complexity.

Allogeneic Approach

Allogeneic MSCs, particularly those derived from umbilical cord tissue, offer the advantage of “off-the-shelf” availability. Young donor cells tend to be more proliferative and potent than those from older patients. The relative immune privilege of MSCs makes allogeneic use feasible without immunosuppression in many cases. The main concerns with allogeneic MSCs include variability in donor cell quality, the potential for immune sensitization with repeated dosing, and questions about long-term safety that have not been fully resolved by existing clinical data [10].

Culture Expansion: Benefits and Concerns

Because MSCs represent a small fraction of the cells in bone marrow or adipose tissue, culture expansion in a laboratory is often used to increase cell numbers to therapeutic doses (typically tens of millions to hundreds of millions of cells). This process involves growing the cells on plastic surfaces in specialized culture media for several weeks.

Culture expansion raises several concerns. Extended passage in culture can lead to changes in cell surface marker expression, reduced differentiation capacity, and cellular senescence. In lineage terms, heavily passaged MSCs often lose chondrogenic and osteogenic potential before they lose the ability to grow, so a product can pass a cell count and still fall short of the trilineage standard. There have also been theoretical concerns about chromosomal instability during prolonged culture, though clinical data has not shown increased malignancy risk in patients receiving culture-expanded MSCs [15]. Regulatory agencies consider culture expansion to constitute “more than minimal manipulation,” which triggers the requirement for an Investigational New Drug (IND) application or Biologics License Application (BLA) for clinical use in the United States.

FDA Regulation

The FDA’s regulatory framework for cell-based therapies distinguishes between minimally manipulated and more-than-minimally-manipulated cell products. Under 21 CFR Part 1271, a cell product is exempt from premarket review if it meets all of the following criteria: it is minimally manipulated; it is intended for homologous use; it is not combined with another article; and (for autologous cells) it does not have a systemic effect or depend on metabolic activity for its primary function.

Most MSC applications do not meet all of these criteria. Culture expansion is considered more than minimal manipulation, and many proposed uses (such as treating autoimmune disease with cells injected intravenously) are arguably non-homologous. This means that the vast majority of MSC therapies in the United States legally require FDA premarket approval, and clinics offering expanded MSC products outside of clinical trials may be operating in violation of federal regulations [15].

The regulatory landscape is complex, and patients should be aware that a product being marketed commercially does not mean it has been FDA-approved. Only a small number of MSC products have received regulatory approval anywhere in the world. In the United States, remestemcel-L (Ryoncil) became the first approved MSC product in December 2024, for one pediatric GVHD indication [22]; no MSC product is approved for orthopedic, anti-aging or wellness uses. The FDA has published a consumer alert on regenerative medicine products, including stem cells and exosomes, and the regulatory history is covered in more depth in which stem cell products are FDA approved.

What Are the Risks and Side Effects of MSC Treatment?

The most commonly reported side effects of MSC injections are short-lived: pain, swelling or stiffness at the injection site, and fever or fatigue after an intravenous infusion. The harvest step adds its own risks for autologous products, such as soreness, bruising, bleeding or infection at the hip or the liposuction site.

Serious harms have been reported when cells are prepared or given outside regulated settings. Kuriyan and colleagues (2017) described three women who suffered severe vision loss after a clinic injected adipose-derived “stem cells” into their eyes for macular degeneration, a case series in the New England Journal of Medicine [24]. The FDA’s consumer alert lists infections and blinding eye injuries among reported harms from unapproved products.

Trials commonly exclude people with active cancer, active infection or pregnancy. Long-term safety data for repeated donor-cell infusions is still limited, so anyone considering one should ask how the product was tested and what follow-up is planned.

Who Offers MSC Therapy and How to Evaluate a Clinic

MSC procedures in the United States fall into two groups. Regulated uses, such as remestemcel-L for pediatric GVHD and MSC clinical trials, run through academic medical centers and transplant programs under hematologist-oncologists, rheumatologists, gastroenterologists and neurologists. Elective orthopedic and pain injections are offered by orthopedic surgeons, sports medicine physicians, physiatrists and interventional pain specialists, mostly as cash-pay procedures that insurance does not cover.

Before booking, a short list of questions separates a well run clinic from a sales pitch:

1. What exactly is in the syringe? Your own marrow or fat, a donor product, or an exosome or amniotic product with no living cells.
2. What is its regulatory status? An FDA-approved indication, an IND for a registered trial, or the minimal manipulation exemption.
3. Who performs the procedure? Ask about board certification and image guidance.
4. What evidence applies to your condition? Published, placebo-controlled studies in your diagnosis, not testimonials.
5. What does it cost in total? Ask for the full written price, including harvest, imaging and follow-up visits; the stem cell therapy cost breakdown explains what usually drives the number.

For background on how cell treatments are offered and what the evidence supports by condition, start with the stem cell therapy treatment guide. When you are ready to compare providers, you can browse stem cell therapy clinics in the national directory and filter by state. Many of the same clinics also offer platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections and prolotherapy, which are usually less expensive, non-cellular options with their own evidence base.

On Regenerated.com, listing order is not paid ranking. Featured slots are labeled and capped. Verified means a clinic completed credential checks, not that it spent more, and the directory is free for patients. Inclusion in the directory is not an endorsement; the guide to featured, verified and organic listings explains each label.

Current Clinical Trials

As of 2026, hundreds of clinical trials involving MSCs are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, spanning indications from osteoarthritis and GVHD to heart failure, COPD, diabetic foot ulcers, and COVID-19 recovery. Phase 3 trials are underway for several indications, and the next few years are expected to bring additional regulatory decisions on MSC products in the United States and Europe.

Key areas of active investigation include:

• Knee osteoarthritis: Multiple phase 2 and phase 3 trials comparing different MSC sources and doses to placebo
• Heart failure: Trials evaluating intramyocardial and intravenous MSC delivery for ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy
• Inflammatory bowel disease: Ongoing trials for Crohn’s disease fistulas and luminal disease
• Spinal cord injury: Early-phase trials evaluating intrathecal MSC delivery for chronic spinal cord injury
• Aging and frailty: Novel trials exploring MSC infusions for age-related decline in function and immune competence

Patients interested in MSC therapy should consider enrolling in a registered clinical trial, which provides access to therapy under rigorous medical oversight and contributes to the evidence base needed for regulatory approval. A legitimate trial carries a ClinicalTrials.gov registration number.

Frequently asked questions

What is mesenchymal stem cell lineage?

Mesenchymal stem cell lineage is the range of cell types an MSC can turn into. It centers on the trilineage of osteoblasts (bone), chondrocytes (cartilage) and adipocytes (fat), and extends to tendon, stromal and muscle-type cells. All of them are connective tissue cells of mesodermal origin. The ISCT (2006) requires differentiation into bone, cartilage and fat in the lab as one of three minimum criteria for calling a cell an MSC.

Are mesenchymal stem cells multipotent or pluripotent?

Mesenchymal stem cells are multipotent. They can become several related connective tissue cell types, mainly bone, cartilage and fat cells, but they cannot form every tissue in the body. Pluripotent cells, such as embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), can give rise to all three germ layers.

What is the difference between mesenchymal and hematopoietic stem cells?

Mesenchymal and hematopoietic stem cells both live in bone marrow but build different tissues. Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) make all blood and immune cells and carry the marker CD34, while MSCs make bone, cartilage and fat and lack CD34 and CD45 by definition. MSCs also form the supporting stroma that HSCs depend on. Bone marrow transplants for leukemia rely on HSCs, not MSCs.

Do MSC injections regrow cartilage?

MSC injections have not been shown to regrow cartilage in a reliable way. Some studies report cartilage preservation on MRI, but a 2023 randomized trial of 480 people with knee osteoarthritis published in Nature Medicine found no change in MRI osteoarthritis scores at one year and no pain benefit over a corticosteroid injection. Most of any benefit is thought to come from anti-inflammatory signaling rather than new cartilage cells.

Is mesenchymal stem cell therapy FDA approved?

One mesenchymal stem cell product is FDA approved: remestemcel-L (Ryoncil), approved in December 2024 for steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease in children 2 months and older. No MSC product is FDA approved for joint pain, back pain, autoimmune disease or anti-aging. Most expanded MSC products offered by private clinics fall under FDA rules that require approval or a registered trial, so ask any clinic which pathway it uses.

Related Reading

• Stem Cell Therapy: Complete Guide
• Stem Cell Injections: Types, Costs, and What to Expect
• Peptide Therapy: Complete Guide
• Exosome Therapy: Mechanisms and Research

Sources

1. Friedenstein AJ, Chailakhjan RK, Lalykina KS. “The development of fibroblast colonies in monolayer cultures of guinea-pig bone marrow and spleen cells.” Cell Tissue Kinet. 1970;3(4):393-403. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2184.1970.tb00347.x ↩
2. Caplan AI. “Mesenchymal stem cells: time to change the name!” Stem Cells Transl Med. 2017;6(6):1445-1451. doi:10.1002/sctm.17-0051 ↩
3. Dominici M, Le Blanc K, Mueller I, et al. “Minimal criteria for defining multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells. The International Society for Cellular Therapy position statement.” Cytotherapy. 2006;8(4):315-317. doi:10.1080/14653240600855905 ↩
4. Pittenger MF, Mackay AM, Beck SC, et al. “Multilineage potential of adult human mesenchymal stem cells.” Science. 1999;284(5411):143-147. doi:10.1126/science.284.5411.143 ↩
5. Zuk PA, Zhu M, Mizuno H, et al. “Multilineage cells from human adipose tissue: implications for cell-based therapies.” Tissue Eng. 2001;7(2):211-228. doi:10.1089/107632701300062859 ↩
6. Strioga M, Viswanathan S, Darinskas A, Slaby O, Michalek J. “Same or not the same? Comparison of adipose tissue-derived versus bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem and stromal cells.” Stem Cells Dev. 2012;21(14):2724-2752. doi:10.1089/scd.2011.0722 ↩
7. Troyer DL, Weiss ML. “Wharton’s jelly-derived cells are a primitive stromal cell population.” Stem Cells. 2008;26(3):591-599. doi:10.1634/stemcells.2007-0439 ↩
8. Prockop DJ. “Repair of tissues by adult stem/progenitor cells (MSCs): controversies, myths, and changing paradigms.” Mol Ther. 2009;17(6):939-946. doi:10.1038/mt.2009.62 ↩
9. Uccelli A, Moretta L, Pistoia V. “Mesenchymal stem cells in health and disease.” Nat Rev Immunol. 2008;8(9):726-736. doi:10.1038/nri2395 ↩
10. Ankrum JA, Ong JF, Karp JM. “Mesenchymal stem cells: immune evasive, not immune privileged.” Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(3):252-260. doi:10.1038/nbt.2816 ↩
11. Chahla J, Dean CS, Moatshe G, et al. “Concentrated bone marrow aspirate for the treatment of chondral injuries and osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review of outcomes.” Orthop J Sports Med. 2016;4(1):2325967115625481. doi:10.1177/2325967115625481 ↩
12. Kurtzberg J, Prockop S, Chaudhury S, et al. “Study 275: updated expanded access program for remestemcel-L in steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease in children.” Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020;26(5):855-864. doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2020.01.026 ↩
13. Panes J, Garcia-Olmo D, Van Assche G, et al. “Expanded allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (Cx601) for complex perianal fistulas in Crohn’s disease: a phase 3 randomised, double-blind controlled trial.” Lancet. 2016;388(10051):1281-1290. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31203-X ↩
14. Gage FH, Temple S. “Neural stem cells: generating and regenerating the brain.” Neuron. 2013;80(3):588-601. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.037 ↩
15. US Food and Drug Administration. “Regulatory Considerations for Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products: Minimal Manipulation and Homologous Use.” FDA Guidance Document. 2020. ↩
16. Engler AJ, Sen S, Sweeney HL, Discher DE. “Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification.” Cell. 2006;126(4):677-689. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2006.06.044 ↩
17. Viswanathan S, Shi Y, Galipeau J, et al. “Mesenchymal stem versus stromal cells: International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy (ISCT) Mesenchymal Stromal Cell committee position statement on nomenclature.” Cytotherapy. 2019;21(10):1019-1024. doi:10.1016/j.jcyt.2019.08.002 ↩
18. Crisan M, Yap S, Casteilla L, et al. “A perivascular origin for mesenchymal stem cells in multiple human organs.” Cell Stem Cell. 2008;3(3):301-313. doi:10.1016/j.stem.2008.07.003 ↩
19. Sacchetti B, Funari A, Michienzi S, et al. “Self-renewing osteoprogenitors in bone marrow sinusoids can organize a hematopoietic microenvironment.” Cell. 2007;131(2):324-336. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.08.025 ↩
20. Zhou BO, Yue R, Murphy MM, Peyer JG, Morrison SJ. “Leptin-receptor-expressing mesenchymal stromal cells represent the main source of bone formed by adult bone marrow.” Cell Stem Cell. 2014;15(2):154-168. doi:10.1016/j.stem.2014.06.008 ↩
21. Mautner K, Gottschalk M, Boden SD, et al. “Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial.” Nat Med. 2023;29(12):3120-3126. doi:10.1038/s41591-023-02632-w ↩
22. US Food and Drug Administration. “FDA Approves First Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Therapy to Treat Steroid-refractory Acute Graft-versus-host Disease.” Press announcement, December 18, 2024. ↩
23. European Medicines Agency. “Alofisel withdrawn from the EU market.” News release, December 13, 2024. ↩
24. Kuriyan AE, Albini TA, Townsend JH, et al. “Vision loss after intravitreal injection of autologous ‘stem cells’ for AMD.” N Engl J Med. 2017;376(11):1047-1053. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1609583 ↩