Next Article in Journal
Calcium Dynamics Mediated by the Endoplasmic/Sarcoplasmic Reticulum and Related Diseases
Next Article in Special Issue
Engineering Exosomes for Cancer Therapy
Previous Article in Journal
Characterization of Copy Number Variation’s Potential Role in Marek’s Disease
Previous Article in Special Issue
Chloramidine/Bisindolylmaleimide-I-Mediated Inhibition of Exosome and Microvesicle Release and Enhanced Efficacy of Cancer Chemotherapy
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Mesenchymal Stem Cell Derived Extracellular Vesicles: A Role in Hematopoietic Transplantation?

1
Laboratory of Preclinical and Translational Research, IRCCS—Referral Cancer Center of Basilicata (CROB), 85028 Rionero in Vulture, Italy
2
CEINGE Biotecnologie Avanzate s.c.a r.l., 80147 Naples, Italy
3
Department of Molecular Medicine and Medical Biotechnologies, University of Naples Federico II, 80138 Napoli, Italy
4
Scientific Direction, IRCCS—Referral Cancer Center of Basilicata (CROB), 85028 Rionero in Vulture, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18(5), 1022; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms18051022
Submission received: 3 April 2017 / Revised: 4 May 2017 / Accepted: 4 May 2017 / Published: 9 May 2017

Abstract

:
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are a heterogeneous cellular population containing different progenitors able to repair tissues, support hematopoiesis, and modulate immune and inflammatory responses. Several clinical trials have used MSCs in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) to prevent hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) engraftment failure, reduce aplasia post chemotherapy, and to control graft versus host disease (GvHD). The efficacy of MSCs is linked to their immune suppressive and anti-inflammatory properties primarily due to the release of soluble factors. Recent studies indicate that most of these effects are mediated by extracellular vesicles (EVs). MSC-EVs have therefore therapeutic effects in regenerative medicine, tumor inhibition, and immune-regulation. MSC-EVs may offer specific advantages for patient safety, such as lower propensity to trigger innate and adaptive immune responses. It has been also shown that MSC-EVs can prevent or treat acute-GvHD by modulating the immune-response and, combined with HSCs, may contribute to the hematopoietic microenvironment reconstitution. Finally, MSC-EVs may provide a new potential therapeutic option (e.g., transplantation, gene therapy) for different diseases, particularly hematological malignancies. In this review, we will describe MSC and MSC-EVs role in improving allo-HSCT procedures and in treating GvHD.

1. Introduction

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is a choice of treatment for many malignant and non-malignant hematological diseases, but the success of this therapy is limited by several side effects [1,2]. Principal problems are due to the failure in effective eradication of the malignancy, the tolerance of the host, and the onset of infections [1,2]. One of the major complications, with the highest transplant-related mortality rate, is the graft versus host disease (GvHD), an inflammatory immunoreaction against healthy tissues of the patient, induced by donor T-cells and triggered by human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatch between the recipient and donor [3].
GvHD may be prevented by several approaches [4]. Steroids are the first-line GvHD treatment and patients who fail the therapy are at high risk to die for GvHD or its related complications. Indeed, there is no common standard treatment strategy for steroid-refractory GvHD patients [5].
Among the most recent therapeutic methods for overcoming all complications related to allo-HSCT and GvHD, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold a relatively crucial position. MSCs are multipotent progenitor cells with various biological functions including multilineage differentiation, immunosuppression, and tissue-repair promotion [6]. Due to their variegate capacities, MSCs have been widely employed in clinical studies conducted in cardiovascular diseases, type I diabetes mellitus, hepatic cirrhosis, as well as in allo-HSCT and in GvHD (https://clinicaltrials.gov/). Interestingly, recent studies have demonstrated that MSCs release extracellular vesicles (EVs) and have shown that MSC-EVs have similar functions to those of MSCs; as a consequence, MSC-EVs are widely studied as potential therapeutic agents in various diseases [7,8]. In vitro and in vivo studies indicate that MSC-EVs therapy appears to hold substantial promise, particularly in the treatment of immune-based disorders, including complications of allo-HSCT [9,10]. In this article, we will review the characteristics of MSCs and MSC-EVs and their therapeutic role in allo-HSCT and GvHD.

2. Definition and Characteristics of MSCs

MSCs are self-renewing and non-hematopoietic cells with multilineage potential to differentiate into cells of mesodermal lineage, like adipocytes, bone, fat, and cartilage cells, as well as into other embryonic lineages [6]. Due to the lack of uniform criteria to define MSCs, in 2006 the International Society of Cellular Therapy established three minimum biological parameters to better identify these cells: (i) plastic adherence in in vitro standard culture conditions; (ii) expression of cluster of differentiation (CD) 105, CD73, and CD90 and no expression of CD45, CD34, CD14 or CD11b, CD79a, or CD19 and HLA-DR (human leukocyte antigen–antigen D related) surface markers; (iii) in vitro differentiation to osteoblasts, adipocytes, and chondrocytes [8,11,12]. MSCs are easily available from different human tissues, such as umbilical cord blood (UCB), bone marrow (BM), adipose tissue, skin, liver, amniotic fluid, and placenta [13]; they can be expanded in vitro by consecutive passaging without significant alteration of their major properties [14]. MSCs release chemokines and cytokines exerting paracrine effects. In BM, MSCs are a relevant component of the hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) niche and support hematopoiesis by their capability to secrete soluble factors, such as stem cell factor (SCF), leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF), and interleukin (IL)-6 [9]. Moreover, they are able to regulate HSC quiescence in the endosteal niche and to control HSC proliferation, differentiation, and recruitment in the vascular niche [6]. Most of the clinical applications involve MSCs from BM that are considered to be safe. In different studies, BM-MSCs are replaced by umbilical cord blood stem cells (UCBsc) that are more primitive and have a higher proliferative capacity than BM-MSCs, thus indicating that they could be a good alternative source in clinical applications [15,16].

3. Immune-Regulatory Properties of MSCs

MSCs are able to exert a wide range of biological functions, prevalently due to their stem/progenitor properties, and immune-regulation and anti-inflammatory abilities. MSCs can influence multiple components of both adaptive and innate immune responses by soluble factors, such as transforming growth factor β (TGF-β), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), nitric oxide (NO), human leucocyte antigen G (HLA-G), chemokines, and also by cell contact-dependent mechanisms [12]. Numerous studies have shown that MSCs regulate the immune system mainly acting on T- and B-lymphocytes, natural killer (NK) cells, dendritic cells (DCs), monocytes, and macrophages. In particular, MSCs suppress T-cells and favor the maturation of DCs; they reduce B-cell activation and proliferation and inhibit the proliferation and cytotoxicity of NK-cells. Moreover, MSCs promote the generation of regulatory T-cells (Treg), immune system modulators, by the release of soluble factors or by cell–cell contact. Several data report that MSCs suppress T-cell activation and proliferation in response to alloantigens or mitogen stimuli, through the secretion of TGF-β, HGF, and NO [14]. T-lymphocyte suppression, mediated by MSCs, seems to be related to the inhibition of cell cycle division rather than apoptosis induction [17]. MSCs are also involved in the regulation of T-helper1/T-helper2 (Th1/Th2) balance [18]. Recent studies report that MSCs decrease the Th1 response in patients with acute-GvHD (aGvHD) and autoimmune diseases. Other studies report that as a consequence of inflammatory diseases such as allergic rhinitis [19,20] and asthma [21,22], BM-MSCs lead to a shift from Th2 to Th1 response, indicating a variable modulatory effect of MSCs depending on the local microenvironment or disease status [23].
BM-MSCs may suppress immune response by acting on Treg. Aggarwal and Pittenger report that CD4+CD25+ Treg cells increase after co-culture between peripheral blood (PB) mononuclear cells and MSCs [24,25]. MSCs can also increase the frequency of CD8+CD28 T-cells by decreasing apoptosis [26].
MSCs inhibit proliferation and arrest the cell cycle of B-cells [27,28,29]. Conversely, a recent study by Healy et al. reports that human BM-MSCs support the activation, proliferation, and survival of purified CD19+ peripheral B-cells through a cell contact-dependent mechanism [30]. As reported by different studies, MSCs exert an inhibitor effect on NK cells [24,31,32]. Spaggiari et al. show that BM-MSCs are capable of inhibiting the cytokine-induced proliferation of freshly isolated NK cells, but they also prevent NK effector functions, such as cytotoxicity and cytokine production [33]. Moreover, Thomas et al. performed co-culture experiments with BM-derived human MSCs and human NK cells demonstrating that MSCs enhanced the ability of IL-12/IL-18-stimulated NK cells to secrete interferon (IFN)-γ, playing a crucial role in the defense against infections and modulating tissue regeneration [34]. Moreover, MSCs inhibit the differentiation of DCs by inhibiting the expression of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II, CD1-α, CD40, CD80, and CD86, and by suppressing proinflammatory cytokine production. This effect prevents the DC mediated activation of T-cells [17,35,36].
Finally, MSCs are able to recruit monocytes and macrophages from across the body and into the inflamed tissue through the release of chemokine (C–C motif) ligands CCL2, CCL3, and CCL12, and promote wound repair [37]. Moreover, the co-culture of human MSCs and monocytes promotes the formation of M2 activated macrophages, which exhibit high levels of IL-10 expression, intense phagocytic activity, low tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and IFN-γ levels, and MHCII expression [38,39]. Monocyte differentiation occurs as a result of cell–cell contact and by several soluble factor-mediated mechanisms, such as indoleamine-pyrrole 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) secretion by MSCs [38,39].

4. Clinical Applications of MSCs in Allo-HSCT and GvHD

Different studies indicate that MSCs have an important role in modulating the BM microenvironment and supporting hematopoiesis [40,41,42,43]; for these reasons they are widely used in hematological diseases, in particular in allo-HSCT. In clinical practice, MSCs are co-infused with allogeneic HSCs to promote hematological engraftment and prevent engraftment failure and poor graft function [41,44,45]. Published data demonstrate that MSCs may reduce the risk of graft failure by modulating host alloreactivity and/or by promoting a better engraftment of donor hematopoiesis in HLA haploidentical allograft transplantation [41,46,47,48,49]. In UCB transplantation, the co-infusion of MSCs with UCBsc promotes hematopoietic engraftment [50,51] and may have a favorable effect on GvHD prevention [45]. On the contrary, other studies have demonstrated that the co-infusion of MSCs at the time of UCB transplantation has no effect on the kinetics of engraftment and on the prevention of GvHD [52], inhibits thymic reconstitution, and has a negative effect on patient’s survival [53]. MSCs have been also employed to stimulate ex vivo UCB-derived HSC allowed to obtain a great number of total nucleated cells and hematopoietic progenitor cells [54,55]. In a clinical trial conducted on 31 patients receiving two different units of UCBsc, one of which expanded ex vivo with MSCs, a significant improvement of early UCBsc engraftment with respect to the infusion of the un-manipulated UCBsc unit only was shown. However, this study also maintains that the un-manipulated unit provides a long-term engraftment [56]. The clinical trials on the use of MSCs in HSCT are summarized in Table 1, as well as the response rate.
MSCs are also used to treat aGvHD and chronic-GvHD (cGvHD), two major complications that occur after allo-HSCT [57,58,59]. A summary of different clinical trials of MSC therapy for GvHD is provided in Table 2. Overall, these studies have shown that MSC infusion appears to be a safe treatment option for GvHD, not associated with any long-term risk [60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74]. Although different studies have confirmed the clinical benefits in patients with steroid resistant grade II–IV aGvHD or cGvHD, other randomized controlled trials are ongoing to assess the definitive efficacy and safety of this treatment modality.
Regarding systemic distribution of infused MSCs, Von Bahr et al. studied different postmortem tissue samples and reported that there are no signs of ectopic tissue formation or MSC-derived malignancies [75]. On the other hand, Forslow et al., in a retrospective study, found that treatment with MSCs may be a risk factor for pneumonia-related mortality after allo-HSCT [76]. Moreover, MSCs co-transplanted with HSCs seem to increase the risk of relapse in patients with hematological malignancies, as reported by Ning et al. [77]. Conversely, another study indicated no significant differences in the rate of leukemia relapse, pulmonary infection, or cytomegalovirus infection within one year after haploidentical HSCT between MSC treated or not treated groups [78]. Finally, studies suggest that the negative response to MSC transfusion in allo-HSCT could be related to the heterogeneity of patient populations treated with different allo-HSCT regimens, different sources of MSCs, severity of aGvHD, and to the use of animal derived products (e.g., fetal bovine serum) in cell culture media [65,66].

5. Extracellular Vesicles

Extracellular vesicles are nanosized, cell-derived particles released by different cell types. Current EVs classification is based on biophysical properties including size, cellular origin, molecular cargo, and biogenesis [79]. The main classes of EVs are exosomes, microvesicles (also referred to as ectosomes or microparticles), apoptotic bodies, and oncosomes [79,80,81,82]. Exosomes are a homogeneous population of vesicles [83] that are released after the fusion of multivesicular bodies with the plasma membrane; their size ranges between 40 and 150 nm [81]. Exosomes are rich in tetraspanins (e.g., CD63, CD81, CD9) [84], gangliosides, phingomyelin, and disaturated lipids that confer a higher rigidity of their lipid bilayer compared with that of cell membranes [79] giving them resistance to degradation and stability as carriers of various biomolecules [85]. Their production is controlled by several regulatory mechanisms, including elements of the endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT), Rab proteins, tumor protein p53/tumor suppressor activated pathway-6 pathway, ceramide, and neutral sphingomyelinase [84,86,87]. Microvesicles bud directly from the plasma membrane, are generally more heterogeneous in size (50–2000 nm) [81], and contain cytoplasmic cargo [79]. Owing to their origin, microvesicle surface markers are largely dependent on the composition of the membrane from which they originate [9]. Additionally, microvesicles are enriched in a different class of proteins including integrins, glycoprotein Ib (GPIb), and P-selectin [79]. Apoptotic bodies are released upon the fragmentation of cells undergoing apoptosis, their diameters range between 50 and 5000 nm in size, they contain DNA binding histones, and they are depleted in glycoproteins [79,81]. Finally, oncosomes are large EVs (1–10 μm in size) produced by membrane protrusions of malignant cells [79]. Oncosomes carry different bioactive molecules, including signaling factors involved in cell metabolism and metalloproteinases that can digest the extracellular matrix and can contribute to the invasiveness of cancer cells [79]. The number of oncosomes is directly correlated with the aggressiveness of the cancer [88,89]. Oncosomes can alter the homeostasis of the tumor microenvironment by varying the structure and composition of the extracellular matrix or directly by targeting fibroblasts, and endothelial and immune cells [89].
EVs mediate cellular communication by reprogramming target cells [90] and regulating normal physiological processes [91] and pathological conditions [83,92,93,94]. EVs contain genetic and proteomic material from originating cells, thus potentially consisting of a source of potential biomarkers [95,96,97,98]. It has been reported that EVs can be recovered from different biological fluids (e.g., serum, saliva, urine, milk) [93,99,100] suggesting a new perspective for the management of cancer; in fact, they could be used as potential biomarkers by introducing a new concept of “liquid biopsy” [93]. In hematological malignancies, for example, serum EVs are positive for cancer associated surface markers and its number positively correlates with clinical parameters [101,102]. Moreover, EVs are emerging as potent genetic information agents supporting a range of biological processes and with therapeutic potential [93].

6. Characteristics and Clinical Applications of MSC-Derived EVs

It is well known that MSCs release EVs [103]. MSC-derived EVs conserve the common specific exosomal surface markers, such as CD107, CD63, CD9, and CD81 [104]. They also express surface markers which are characteristic of their cells of origin, such as CD29, CD73, CD44, and CD105 [9]. Several studies have analyzed their content of nucleic acid and proteins which is transferred to the target cells. Tomasoni et al. demonstrated that MSC-derived EVs contain several classes of RNAs, in particular, transcripts involved in the control of transcription (transcription factor CP2, clock homolog), cell proliferation (retinoblastoma-like 1, small ubiquitin-related modifier 1), and immune regulation (interleukin 1 receptor antagonist) [105]. Additionally, MSC-derived EVs contain specific microRNAs, such as miR-223, miR-564, and miR-451, involved in multi-organ development, cell survival, differentiation, and immune-regulation [104,106]. Characterization of MSC-derived EVs content reveals the abundance of several proteins. Interestingly, proteome analysis shows the presence of cytoplasmatic proteins such as surface receptors (PDGFRB, β-type platelet-derived growth factor receptor; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; PLAUR, plasminogen activator urokinase receptor), signaling molecules (RRAS/NRAS, RAS-related protein/neuroblastoma RAS; MAPK1, mitogen-activated protein kinase 1; GNA13/GNG12, guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit α-13/G protein subunit γ 12; Cdc42, cell division control protein 42 homolog; VAV2, Vav guanine nucleotide exchange factor 2), and cell adhesion molecules (FN1, fibronectin 1; EZR, ezrin; IQGAP1, IQ motif containing GTPase activating protein 1; CD47; integrins; LGALS1/LGALS3, lectin galactose binding soluble 1/lectin galactose binding soluble 3). Functional enrichment analysis shows that cellular processes, represented by the MSC-EV proteins, include cell proliferation, adhesion, migration, and morphogenesis, but also self-renewal and differentiation (TGF-β, transforming growth factor beta; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase; PPAR, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor) [107]. EVs, by using their content, mediate intercellular communication and interact with target cells influencing fundamental biological functions.
Recent studies have shown that MSC-EVs may represent a novel “acellular” therapeutic approach in regenerative medicine [108]. In fact, MSC-EVs may play a role in local tissue repair influencing progenitor cell proliferation, recruitment, and differentiation; promoting extracellular matrix remodeling and angiogenesis; and overcoming apoptosis and immunological responses. Moreover, they have an important function in stem cell plasticity and tissue regeneration, possibly contributing to the paracrine action observed upon MSCs cell transplantation [108]. MSC-exosomes could be used as a novel therapeutic modality, i.e., for cardiac diseases because they protect against acute tubular injury and reduce myocardial ischemia/reperfusion damage [109]. In addition to cardioprotective effects, MSC-EVs may represent a potential therapeutic approach to kidney diseases due to their capability of reducing fibrosis, tubular atrophy/apoptosis, and regenerating tubuloepithelial tissue [7]. Moreover, several in vitro and in vivo studies demonstrate that MSC-EVs therapy potentially promotes liver regeneration following acute injury by directly enhancing hepatocyte survival and proliferation [110].
Instead, in the tumor development context MSC EVs have a controversial role, as widely discussed by Lopatina et al. [111]. Interestingly, they report that MSC-EVs can promote or inhibit tumor growth, indicating that these different effects are probably due not only on the type and stage of the tumor, but also on the MSC culture conditions that may modify the cell secretome [111]. EVs from MSCs could be also used for drug delivery. For the first time, Pascucci et al. demonstrated that following priming with paclitaxel, MSCs are able to strongly inhibit pancreatic tumor thanks to their ability to package and deliver active drugs through microvesicles which are taken up by the cancer cells [112].

7. Therapeutic Power of MSC-EVs in Allo-HSCT and GvHD

Recent in vivo experiments suggest that the use of MSC-EVs may contribute to improving allo-HSCT. We studied the interaction between UCBsc and BM-MSC-EVs, demonstrating their cross talk and providing a new insight into the biology of cord blood transplantation [9]. In particular, by sequencing MSC-EVs small RNAs, we identified 87 miRNAs and 5 Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) able to modify the UCBsc fate. In fact, we demonstrated that CD34+ cells from UCBsc, exposed to EVs, significantly change different biological functions, becoming more viable and less differentiated. Moreover, EVs treatment of UCBsc induced an increase of C–X–C chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4) expression, a key component of the HSC niche, as well as an in vivo augmented migration of CD34+ cells from the PB to BM niche (Figure 1) [9]. In another study, murine BM-MSC-EVs treatment induced the loss of quiescence and expansion of murine hematopoietic progenitor cells [113]. The proliferation was mediated via the myeloid differentiation primary response 88 (Myd88) adapter protein and by toll-like receptor 4 [113].
Due to their capacity to modulate immune response [114,115,116,117,118,119,120], MSC–EVs could be used to attenuate an activated immune system or to prevent immunoreactions such as GVHD. In this setting, Kordelas et al. demonstrated that BM-MSC-EVs were able to alleviate symptoms in a treatment-resistant, grade IV aGvHD patient, who remained stable for five months after MSC-EVs therapy. They also tested in vitro MSC-EVs containing anti-inflammatory cytokines (IL-10, TGF β, and HLA-G) on PB mononuclear cells and NK cells isolated from one patient that were stimulated with allogeneic target cells; such a treatment resulted in a decreased release of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-γ) [121]. Moreover, in vivo MSC-EVs therapy reduced the pro-inflammatory cytokine response and the clinical symptoms of GvHD. Additionally, MSC-EVs infusion was well tolerated and no side effects were reported (Figure 1) [121].
Wang et al. instead showed that UCB-MSC-EVs could prevent aGvHD in a mouse model of allo-HSCT by modulating immune responses [10]. The study demonstrated that UCB-MSC-EVs reduce in vivo manifestations of aGvHD, attenuate the associated histological changes, and prolong mice survival. In fact, in recipient mice a significant decrease of frequency and the absolute number of CD3+CD8+ T-cells and an increased ratio of CD3+CD4+ to CD3+CD8+ T-cells were found [10]. Finally, as reported by Kordelas et al. [121], in vitro and in vivo experiments confirmed the decreased levels of different inflammatory cytokines, including IL-2, TNF-α, and IFN-γ, and an increase of anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-10 (Figure 1) [10].

8. Conclusions

Nowadays, MSCs are excellent candidates for improving the clinical therapeutic potential of HSCT and controlling GvHD. Preclinical and clinical results clearly show the efficacy of MSC treatment in the majority of studies. However, there are still many inconveniences, such as the increased risk of pneumonia-related death after allo-HSCT [76], the uncontrolled differentiation, and the unwanted long-term side effects [122]. Moreover, standardized techniques of MSCs production are still missing.
In this context, MSC-EVs, when compared with MSCs, seems to have several advantages. In particular, EVs appear to be safer than MSCs [121,123], allowing them to overcome at least some of the aforementioned problems concerning MSC clinical applications. Moreover, compared to cells EVs are more stable and reversible, have no risk of aneuploidy and a lower possibility of immune rejection due to their small size, and lower expression of membrane-bound molecules, including histocompatibility molecules [124,125]. MSC-EVs protect their contents from in vivo degradation, thus preventing problems associated with the rapid break down of soluble molecules. Overall, they provide a very promising alternative therapy in the context of allo-HSCT [124]. However, the development of standardized procedures for the isolation and storage of EVs is still needed, as well as the improvement of methods and criteria for the quality analysis of EV-based therapies.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gyurkocza, B.; Rezvani, A.; Storb, R.F. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: The state of the art. Expert Rev. Hematol. 2010, 3, 285–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Roncarolo, M.G.; Gregori, S.; Lucarelli, B.; Ciceri, F.; Bacchetta, R. Clinical tolerance in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Immunol. Rev. 2011, 241, 145–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Szyska, M.; Na, I.K. Bone marrow gvhd after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Front. Immunol. 2016, 7, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Gatza, E.; Choi, S.W. Approaches for the prevention of graft-versus-host disease following hematopoietic cell transplantation. Int. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2015, 4, 113–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Wolf, D.; von Lilienfeld-Toal, M.; Wolf, A.M.; Schleuning, M.; von Bergwelt-Baildon, M.; Held, S.A.; Brossart, P. Novel treatment concepts for graft-versus-host disease. Blood 2012, 119, 16–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Uccelli, A.; Moretta, L.; Pistoia, V. Mesenchymal stem cells in health and disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2008, 8, 726–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Rani, S.; Ryan, A.E.; Griffin, M.D.; Ritter, T. Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles: Toward cell-free therapeutic applications. Mol. Ther. J. Am. Soc. Gene Ther. 2015, 23, 812–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Chen, J.; Li, C.; Chen, L. The role of microvesicles derived from mesenchymal stem cells in lung diseases. BioMed Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 985814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. De Luca, L.; Trino, S.; Laurenzana, I.; Simeon, V.; Calice, G.; Raimondo, S.; Podesta, M.; Santodirocco, M.; Di Mauro, L.; La Rocca, F.; et al. MiRNAs and pirnas from bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell extracellular vesicles induce cell survival and inhibit cell differentiation of cord blood hematopoietic stem cells: A new insight in transplantation. Oncotarget 2016, 7, 6676–6692. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  10. Wang, L.; Gu, Z.; Zhao, X.; Yang, N.; Wang, F.; Deng, A.; Zhao, S.; Luo, L.; Wei, H.; Guan, L.; et al. Extracellular vesicles released from human umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stromal cells prevent life-threatening acute graft-versus-host disease in a mouse model of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Stem Cells Dev. 2016, 25, 1874–1883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Dominici, M.; Le Blanc, K.; Mueller, I.; Slaper-Cortenbach, I.; Marini, F.; Krause, D.; Deans, R.; Keating, A.; Prockop, D.; Horwitz, E. Minimal criteria for defining multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells. The international society for cellular therapy position statement. Cytotherapy 2006, 8, 315–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Kim, E.J.; Kim, N.; Cho, S.G. The potential use of mesenchymal stem cells in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Exp. Mol. Med. 2013, 45, e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Yu, B.; Zhang, X.; Li, X. Exosomes derived from mesenchymal stem cells. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2014, 15, 4142–4157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bernardo, M.E.; Fibbe, W.E. Mesenchymal stromal cells: Sensors and switchers of inflammation. Cell Stem Cell 2013, 13, 392–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Malgieri, A.; Kantzari, E.; Patrizi, M.P.; Gambardella, S. Bone marrow and umbilical cord blood human mesenchymal stem cells: State of the art. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med. 2010, 3, 248–269. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  16. Nagamura-Inoue, T.; He, H. Umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells: Their advantages and potential clinical utility. World J. Stem Cells 2014, 6, 195–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Da Silva Meirelles, L.; Caplan, A.I.; Nardi, N.B. In search of the in vivo identity of mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells 2008, 26, 2287–2299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Burr, S.P.; Dazzi, F.; Garden, O.A. Mesenchymal stromal cells and regulatory t cells: The Yin and Yang of peripheral tolerance? Immunol. Cell Biol. 2013, 91, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Cho, K.S.; Park, H.K.; Park, H.Y.; Jung, J.S.; Jeon, S.G.; Kim, Y.K.; Roh, H.J. Ifats collection: Immunomodulatory effects of adipose tissue-derived stem cells in an allergic rhinitis mouse model. Stem Cells 2009, 27, 259–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Cho, K.S.; Roh, H.J. Immunomodulatory effects of adipose-derived stem cells in airway allergic diseases. Current Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2010, 5, 111–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Goodwin, M.; Sueblinvong, V.; Eisenhauer, P.; Ziats, N.P.; LeClair, L.; Poynter, M.E.; Steele, C.; Rincon, M.; Weiss, D.J. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells inhibit Th2-mediated allergic airways inflammation in mice. Stem Cells 2011, 29, 1137–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Nemeth, K.; Keane-Myers, A.; Brown, J.M.; Metcalfe, D.D.; Gorham, J.D.; Bundoc, V.G.; Hodges, M.G.; Jelinek, I.; Madala, S.; Karpati, S.; et al. Bone marrow stromal cells use TGF-β to suppress allergic responses in a mouse model of ragweed-induced asthma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 5652–5657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Gao, F.; Chiu, S.M.; Motan, D.A.; Zhang, Z.; Chen, L.; Ji, H.L.; Tse, H.F.; Fu, Q.L.; Lian, Q. Mesenchymal stem cells and immunomodulation: Current status and future prospects. Cell Death Dis. 2016, 7, e2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Aggarwal, S.; Pittenger, M.F. Human mesenchymal stem cells modulate allogeneic immune cell responses. Blood 2005, 105, 1815–1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Luz-Crawford, P.; Kurte, M.; Bravo-Alegria, J.; Contreras, R.; Nova-Lamperti, E.; Tejedor, G.; Noel, D.; Jorgensen, C.; Figueroa, F.; Djouad, F.; et al. Mesenchymal stem cells generate a CD4+CD25+FOXP3+ regulatory T-cell population during the differentiation process of Th1 and Th17 cells. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2013, 4, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Liu, Q.; Zheng, H.; Chen, X.; Peng, Y.; Huang, W.; Li, X.; Li, G.; Xia, W.; Sun, Q.; Xiang, A.P. Human mesenchymal stromal cells enhance the immunomodulatory function of CD8+CD28 regulatory T cells. Cell. Mol. Immunol. 2015, 12, 708–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Glennie, S.; Soeiro, I.; Dyson, P.J.; Lam, E.W.; Dazzi, F. Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells induce division arrest anergy of activated T cells. Blood 2005, 105, 2821–2827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Augello, A.; Tasso, R.; Negrini, S.M.; Amateis, A.; Indiveri, F.; Cancedda, R.; Pennesi, G. Bone marrow mesenchymal progenitor cells inhibit lymphocyte proliferation by activation of the programmed death 1 pathway. Eur. J. Immunol. 2005, 35, 1482–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Corcione, A.; Benvenuto, F.; Ferretti, E.; Giunti, D.; Cappiello, V.; Cazzanti, F.; Risso, M.; Gualandi, F.; Mancardi, G.L.; Pistoia, V.; et al. Human mesenchymal stem cells modulate B-cell functions. Blood 2006, 107, 367–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Healy, M.E.; Bergin, R.; Mahon, B.P.; English, K. Mesenchymal stromal cells protect against caspase 3-mediated apoptosis of CD19+ peripheral B cells through contact-dependent upregulation of VEGF. Stem Cells Dev. 2015, 24, 2391–2402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Krampera, M.; Cosmi, L.; Angeli, R.; Pasini, A.; Liotta, F.; Andreini, A.; Santarlasci, V.; Mazzinghi, B.; Pizzolo, G.; Vinante, F.; et al. Role for interferon-γ in the immunomodulatory activity of human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells 2006, 24, 386–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Spaggiari, G.M.; Capobianco, A.; Becchetti, S.; Mingari, M.C.; Moretta, L. Mesenchymal stem cell-natural killer cell interactions: Evidence that activated NK cells are capable of killing MSCs, whereas MSCs can inhibit IL-2-induced NK-cell proliferation. Blood 2006, 107, 1484–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Spaggiari, G.M.; Capobianco, A.; Abdelrazik, H.; Becchetti, F.; Mingari, M.C.; Moretta, L. Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit natural killer-cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, and cytokine production: Role of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and prostaglandin E2. Blood 2008, 111, 1327–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Thomas, H.; Jager, M.; Mauel, K.; Brandau, S.; Lask, S.; Flohe, S.B. Interaction with mesenchymal stem cells provokes natural killer cells for enhanced IL-12/IL-18-induced interferon-γ secretion. Mediat. Inflamm. 2014, 2014, 143463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Ma, S.; Xie, N.; Li, W.; Yuan, B.; Shi, Y.; Wang, Y. Immunobiology of mesenchymal stem cells. Cell Death Differ. 2014, 21, 216–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Jiang, X.X.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, B.; Zhang, S.X.; Wu, Y.; Yu, X.D.; Mao, N. Human mesenchymal stem cells inhibit differentiation and function of monocyte-derived dendritic cells. Blood 2005, 105, 4120–4126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Chen, L.; Tredget, E.E.; Wu, P.Y.; Wu, Y. Paracrine factors of mesenchymal stem cells recruit macrophages and endothelial lineage cells and enhance wound healing. PLoS ONE 2008, 3, e1886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Francois, M.; Romieu-Mourez, R.; Li, M.; Galipeau, J. Human MSC suppression correlates with cytokine induction of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and bystander M2 macrophage differentiation. Mol. Ther. J. Am. Soc. Gene Ther. 2012, 20, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Maggini, J.; Mirkin, G.; Bognanni, I.; Holmberg, J.; Piazzon, I.M.; Nepomnaschy, I.; Costa, H.; Canones, C.; Raiden, S.; Vermeulen, M.; et al. Mouse bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells turn activated macrophages into a regulatory-like profile. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e9252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Meuleman, N.; Tondreau, T.; Ahmad, I.; Kwan, J.; Crokaert, F.; Delforge, A.; Dorval, C.; Martiat, P.; Lewalle, P.; Lagneaux, L.; et al. Infusion of mesenchymal stromal cells can aid hematopoietic recovery following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell myeloablative transplant: A pilot study. Stem Cells Dev. 2009, 18, 1247–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Ball, L.M.; Bernardo, M.E.; Roelofs, H.; Lankester, A.; Cometa, A.; Egeler, R.M.; Locatelli, F.; Fibbe, W.E. Cotransplantation of ex vivo expanded mesenchymal stem cells accelerates lymphocyte recovery and may reduce the risk of graft failure in haploidentical hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Blood 2007, 110, 2764–2767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Dazzi, F.; Ramasamy, R.; Glennie, S.; Jones, S.P.; Roberts, I. The role of mesenchymal stem cells in haemopoiesis. Blood Rev. 2006, 20, 161–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Pontikoglou, C.; Deschaseaux, F.; Sensebe, L.; Papadaki, H.A. Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells: Biological properties and their role in hematopoiesis and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Stem Cell Rev. 2011, 7, 569–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Lazarus, H.M.; Koc, O.N.; Devine, S.M.; Curtin, P.; Maziarz, R.T.; Holland, H.K.; Shpall, E.J.; McCarthy, P.; Atkinson, K.; Cooper, B.W.; et al. Cotransplantation of hla-identical sibling culture-expanded mesenchymal stem cells and hematopoietic stem cells in hematologic malignancy patients. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2005, 11, 389–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Bernardo, M.E.; Ball, L.M.; Cometa, A.M.; Roelofs, H.; Zecca, M.; Avanzini, M.A.; Bertaina, A.; Vinti, L.; Lankester, A.; Maccario, R.; et al. Co-infusion of ex vivo-expanded, parental MSCs prevents life-threatening acute GVHD, but does not reduce the risk of graft failure in pediatric patients undergoing allogeneic umbilical cord blood transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2011, 46, 200–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Wu, Y.; Wang, Z.; Cao, Y.; Xu, L.; Li, X.; Liu, P.; Yan, P.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, D.; Wang, J.; et al. Cotransplantation of haploidentical hematopoietic and umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells with a myeloablative regimen for refractory/relapsed hematologic malignancy. Ann. Hematol. 2013, 92, 1675–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Koc, O.N.; Gerson, S.L.; Cooper, B.W.; Dyhouse, S.M.; Haynesworth, S.E.; Caplan, A.I.; Lazarus, H.M. Rapid hematopoietic recovery after coinfusion of autologous-blood stem cells and culture-expanded marrow mesenchymal stem cells in advanced breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 2000, 18, 307–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Wu, Y.; Cao, Y.; Li, X.; Xu, L.; Wang, Z.; Liu, P.; Yan, P.; Liu, Z.; Wang, J.; Jiang, S.; et al. Cotransplantation of haploidentical hematopoietic and umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells for severe aplastic anemia: Successful engraftment and mild GVHD. Stem Cell Res. 2014, 12, 132–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Batorov, E.V.; Shevela, E.Y.; Tikhonova, M.A.; Batorova, D.S.; Ushakova, G.Y.; Sizikova, S.A.; Sergeevicheva, V.V.; Gilevich, A.V.; Kryuchkova, I.V.; Ostanin, A.A.; et al. Mesenchymal stromal cells improve early lymphocyte recovery and T cell reconstitution after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with malignant lymphomas. Cell. Immunol. 2015, 297, 80–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Wu, K.H.; Chan, C.K.; Chao, Y.H.; Peng, C.T.; Huang, J.L. Clinical consideration for mesenchymal stem cells in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Transplantation 2013, 96, e86–e87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Macmillan, M.L.; Blazar, B.R.; DeFor, T.E.; Wagner, J.E. Transplantation of ex vivo culture-expanded parental haploidentical mesenchymal stem cells to promote engraftment in pediatric recipients of unrelated donor umbilical cord blood: Results of a phase I-II clinical trial. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009, 43, 447–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Gonzalo-Daganzo, R.; Regidor, C.; Martin-Donaire, T.; Rico, M.A.; Bautista, G.; Krsnik, I.; Fores, R.; Ojeda, E.; Sanjuan, I.; Garcia-Marco, J.A.; et al. Results of a pilot study on the use of third-party donor mesenchymal stromal cells in cord blood transplantation in adults. Cytotherapy 2009, 11, 278–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Uhlin, M.; Sairafi, D.; Berglund, S.; Thunberg, S.; Gertow, J.; Ringden, O.; Uzunel, M.; Remberger, M.; Mattsson, J. Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit thymic reconstitution after allogeneic cord blood transplantation. Stem Cells Dev. 2012, 21, 1409–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Kelly, S.S.; Sola, C.B.; de Lima, M.; Shpall, E. Ex vivo expansion of cord blood. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009, 44, 673–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Bari, S.; Seah, K.K.; Poon, Z.; Cheung, A.M.; Fan, X.; Ong, S.Y.; Li, S.; Koh, L.P.; Hwang, W.Y. Expansion and homing of umbilical cord blood hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells for clinical transplantation. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015, 21, 1008–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. De Lima, M.; McNiece, I.; Robinson, S.N.; Munsell, M.; Eapen, M.; Horowitz, M.; Alousi, A.; Saliba, R.; McMannis, J.D.; Kaur, I.; et al. Cord-blood engraftment with ex vivo mesenchymal-cell coculture. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 367, 2305–2315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Baron, F.; Zachee, P.; Maertens, J.; Kerre, T.; Ory, A.; Seidel, L.; Graux, C.; Lewalle, P.; Van Gelder, M.; Theunissen, K.; et al. Non-myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation following fludarabine plus 2 Gy TBI or ATG plus 8 Gy TLI: A phase II randomized study from the Belgian Hematological Society. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2015, 8, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Ferrara, J.L.; Levine, J.E.; Reddy, P.; Holler, E. Graft-versus-host disease. Lancet 2009, 373, 1550–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Baron, F.; Labopin, M.; Ruggeri, A.; Mohty, M.; Sanz, G.; Milpied, N.; Bacigalupo, A.; Rambaldi, A.; Bonifazi, F.; Bosi, A.; et al. Unrelated cord blood transplantation for adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia: Higher incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease and lower survival in male patients transplanted with female unrelated cord blood—a report from eurocord, the acute leukemia working party, and the cord blood committee of the cellular therapy and immunobiology working party of the european group for blood and marrow transplantation. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2015, 8, 107. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  60. Le Blanc, K.; Frassoni, F.; Ball, L.; Locatelli, F.; Roelofs, H.; Lewis, I.; Lanino, E.; Sundberg, B.; Bernardo, M.E.; Remberger, M.; et al. Mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of steroid-resistant, severe, acute graft-versus-host disease: A phase II study. Lancet 2008, 371, 1579–1586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Le Blanc, K.; Rasmusson, I.; Sundberg, B.; Gotherstrom, C.; Hassan, M.; Uzunel, M.; Ringden, O. Treatment of severe acute graft-versus-host disease with third party haploidentical mesenchymal stem cells. Lancet 2004, 363, 1439–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ringden, O.; Uzunel, M.; Rasmusson, I.; Remberger, M.; Sundberg, B.; Lonnies, H.; Marschall, H.U.; Dlugosz, A.; Szakos, A.; Hassan, Z.; et al. Mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of therapy-resistant graft-versus-host disease. Transplantation 2006, 81, 1390–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Kebriaei, P.; Isola, L.; Bahceci, E.; Holland, K.; Rowley, S.; McGuirk, J.; Devetten, M.; Jansen, J.; Herzig, R.; Schuster, M.; et al. Adult human mesenchymal stem cells added to corticosteroid therapy for the treatment of acute graft-versus-host disease. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009, 15, 804–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Lucchini, G.; Introna, M.; Dander, E.; Rovelli, A.; Balduzzi, A.; Bonanomi, S.; Salvade, A.; Capelli, C.; Belotti, D.; Gaipa, G.; et al. Platelet-lysate-expanded mesenchymal stromal cells as a salvage therapy for severe resistant graft-versus-host disease in a pediatric population. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010, 16, 1293–1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Von Bonin, M.; Stolzel, F.; Goedecke, A.; Richter, K.; Wuschek, N.; Holig, K.; Platzbecker, U.; Illmer, T.; Schaich, M.; Schetelig, J.; et al. Treatment of refractory acute GVHD with third-party msc expanded in platelet lysate-containing medium. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009, 43, 245–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Arima, N.; Nakamura, F.; Fukunaga, A.; Hirata, H.; Machida, H.; Kouno, S.; Ohgushi, H. Single intra-arterial injection of mesenchymal stromal cells for treatment of steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease: A pilot study. Cytotherapy 2010, 12, 265–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Fang, B.; Song, Y.; Liao, L.; Zhang, Y.; Zhao, R.C. Favorable response to human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells in steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease. Transplant. Proc. 2007, 39, 3358–3362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Muller, I.; Kordowich, S.; Holzwarth, C.; Isensee, G.; Lang, P.; Neunhoeffer, F.; Dominici, M.; Greil, J.; Handgretinger, R. Application of multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells in pediatric patients following allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Blood Cells Mol. Dis. 2008, 40, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Ball, L.M.; Bernardo, M.E.; Roelofs, H.; van Tol, M.J.; Contoli, B.; Zwaginga, J.J.; Avanzini, M.A.; Conforti, A.; Bertaina, A.; Giorgiani, G.; et al. Multiple infusions of mesenchymal stromal cells induce sustained remission in children with steroid-refractory, grade III–IV acute graft-versus-host disease. Br. J. Haematol. 2013, 163, 501–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Introna, M.; Lucchini, G.; Dander, E.; Galimberti, S.; Rovelli, A.; Balduzzi, A.; Longoni, D.; Pavan, F.; Masciocchi, F.; Algarotti, A.; et al. Treatment of graft versus host disease with mesenchymal stromal cells: A phase I study on 40 adult and pediatric patients. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014, 20, 375–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Zhou, H.; Guo, M.; Bian, C.; Sun, Z.; Yang, Z.; Zeng, Y.; Ai, H.; Zhao, R.C. Efficacy of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of sclerodermatous chronic graft-versus-host disease: Clinical report. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010, 16, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Peng, Y.; Chen, X.; Liu, Q.; Zhang, X.; Huang, K.; Liu, L.; Li, H.; Zhou, M.; Huang, F.; Fan, Z.; et al. Mesenchymal stromal cells infusions improve refractory chronic graft versus host disease through an increase of CD5+ regulatory B cells producing interleukin 10. Leukemia 2015, 29, 636–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Muroi, K.; Miyamura, K.; Okada, M.; Yamashita, T.; Murata, M.; Ishikawa, T.; Uike, N.; Hidaka, M.; Kobayashi, R.; Imamura, M.; et al. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (JR-031) for steroid-refractory grade III or IV acute graft-versus-host disease: A phase II/III study. Int. J. Hematol. 2016, 103, 243–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Von Dalowski, F.; Kramer, M.; Wermke, M.; Wehner, R.; Rollig, C.; Alakel, N.; Stolzel, F.; Parmentier, S.; Sockel, K.; Krech, M.; et al. Mesenchymal stromal cells for treatment of acute steroid-refractory graft versus host disease: Clinical responses and long-term outcome. Stem Cells 2016, 34, 357–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. von Bahr, L.; Sundberg, B.; Lonnies, L.; Sander, B.; Karbach, H.; Hagglund, H.; Ljungman, P.; Gustafsson, B.; Karlsson, H.; Le Blanc, K.; et al. Long-term complications, immunologic effects, and role of passage for outcome in mesenchymal stromal cell therapy. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012, 18, 557–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Forslow, U.; Blennow, O.; LeBlanc, K.; Ringden, O.; Gustafsson, B.; Mattsson, J.; Remberger, M. Treatment with mesenchymal stromal cells is a risk factor for pneumonia-related death after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Eur. J. Haematol. 2012, 89, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Ning, H.; Yang, F.; Jiang, M.; Hu, L.; Feng, K.; Zhang, J.; Yu, Z.; Li, B.; Xu, C.; Li, Y.; et al. The correlation between cotransplantation of mesenchymal stem cells and higher recurrence rate in hematologic malignancy patients: Outcome of a pilot clinical study. Leukemia 2008, 22, 593–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Han, D.M.; Wang, Z.D.; Zheng, X.L.; Ding, L.; Yan, H.M.; Xue, M.; Zhu, L.; Liu, J.; Wang, H.X. Co-infusion of mesenchymal stromal cells has no effect on relapse and infection in patients with leukemia undergoing haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Leuk. Lymphoma 2015, 56, 2965–2968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Zaborowski, M.P.; Balaj, L.; Breakefield, X.O.; Lai, C.P. Extracellular vesicles: Composition, biological relevance, and methods of study. Bioscience 2015, 65, 783–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Cocucci, E.; Meldolesi, J. Ectosomes and exosomes: Shedding the confusion between extracellular vesicles. Trends Cell Biol. 2015, 25, 364–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Vader, P.; Breakefield, X.O.; Wood, M.J. Extracellular vesicles: Emerging targets for cancer therapy. Trends Mol. Med. 2014, 20, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Minciacchi, V.R.; You, S.; Spinelli, C.; Morley, S.; Zandian, M.; Aspuria, P.J.; Cavallini, L.; Ciardiello, C.; Reis Sobreiro, M.; Morello, M.; et al. Large oncosomes contain distinct protein cargo and represent a separate functional class of tumor-derived extracellular vesicles. Oncotarget 2015, 6, 11327–11341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. El Andaloussi, S.; Lakhal, S.; Mager, I.; Wood, M.J. Exosomes for targeted sirna delivery across biological barriers. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2013, 65, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Rak, J. Extracellular vesicles—Biomarkers and effectors of the cellular interactome in cancer. Front. Pharmacol. 2013, 4, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Ridder, K.; Keller, S.; Dams, M.; Rupp, A.K.; Schlaudraff, J.; Del Turco, D.; Starmann, J.; Macas, J.; Karpova, D.; Devraj, K.; et al. Extracellular vesicle-mediated transfer of genetic information between the hematopoietic system and the brain in response to inflammation. PLoS Biol. 2014, 12, e1001874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Lespagnol, A.; Duflaut, D.; Beekman, C.; Blanc, L.; Fiucci, G.; Marine, J.C.; Vidal, M.; Amson, R.; Telerman, A. Exosome secretion, including the DNA damage-induced p53-dependent secretory pathway, is severely compromised in TSAP6/Steap3-null mice. Cell Death Differ. 2008, 15, 1723–1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Ostrowski, M.; Carmo, N.B.; Krumeich, S.; Fanget, I.; Raposo, G.; Savina, A.; Moita, C.F.; Schauer, K.; Hume, A.N.; Freitas, R.P.; et al. Rab27a and Rab27b control different steps of the exosome secretion pathway. Nat. Cell Biol. 2010, 12, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Di Vizio, D.; Kim, J.; Hager, M.H.; Morello, M.; Yang, W.; Lafargue, C.J.; True, L.D.; Rubin, M.A.; Adam, R.M.; Beroukhim, R.; et al. Oncosome formation in prostate cancer: Association with a region of frequent chromosomal deletion in metastatic disease. Cancer Res. 2009, 69, 5601–5609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Minciacchi, V.R.; Freeman, M.R.; Di Vizio, D. Extracellular vesicles in cancer: Exosomes, microvesicles and the emerging role of large oncosomes. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2015, 40, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Turturici, G.; Tinnirello, R.; Sconzo, G.; Geraci, F. Extracellular membrane vesicles as a mechanism of cell-to-cell communication: Advantages and disadvantages. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 2014, 306, C621–C633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Ratajczak, J.; Miekus, K.; Kucia, M.; Zhang, J.; Reca, R.; Dvorak, P.; Ratajczak, M.Z. Embryonic stem cell-derived microvesicles reprogram hematopoietic progenitors: Evidence for horizontal transfer of mRNA and protein delivery. Leukemia 2006, 20, 847–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Cai, J.; Han, Y.; Ren, H.; Chen, C.; He, D.; Zhou, L.; Eisner, G.M.; Asico, L.D.; Jose, P.A.; Zeng, C. Extracellular vesicle-mediated transfer of donor genomic DNA to recipient cells is a novel mechanism for genetic influence between cells. J. Mol. Cell Biol. 2013, 5, 227–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Zocco, D.; Ferruzzi, P.; Cappello, F.; Kuo, W.P.; Fais, S. Extracellular vesicles as shuttles of tumor biomarkers and anti-tumor drugs. Front. Oncol. 2014, 4, 267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Gangoda, L.; Boukouris, S.; Liem, M.; Kalra, H.; Mathivanan, S. Extracellular vesicles including exosomes are mediators of signal transduction: Are they protective or pathogenic? Proteomics 2015, 15, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Caivano, A.; La Rocca, F.; Simeon, V.; Girasole, M.; Dinarelli, S.; Laurenzana, I.; De Stradis, A.; De Luca, L.; Trino, S.; Traficante, A.; et al. MicroRNA-155 in serum-derived extracellular vesicles as a potential biomarker for hematologic malignancies—A short report. Cell. Oncol. 2017, 40, 97–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Del Re, M.; Biasco, E.; Crucitta, S.; Derosa, L.; Rofi, E.; Orlandini, C.; Miccoli, M.; Galli, L.; Falcone, A.; Jenster, G.W.; et al. The detection of androgen receptor splice variant 7 in plasma-derived exosomal RNA strongly predicts resistance to hormonal therapy in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Eur. Urol. 2017, 71, 680–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Thind, A.; Wilson, C. Exosomal miRNAs as cancer biomarkers and therapeutic targets. J. Extracell. Vesicles 2016, 5, 31292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Van Giau, V.; An, S.S. Emergence of exosomal mirnas as a diagnostic biomarker for Alzheimer’s disease. J. Neurol. Sci. 2016, 360, 141–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Cheow, E.S.; Cheng, W.C.; Lee, C.N.; de Kleijn, D.; Sorokin, V.; Sze, S.K. Plasma-derived extracellular vesicles contain predictive biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets for myocardial ischemic (MI) injury. Mol. Cell. Proteom. MCP 2016, 15, 2628–2640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Foster, B.P.; Balassa, T.; Benen, T.D.; Dominovic, M.; Elmadjian, G.K.; Florova, V.; Fransolet, M.D.; Kestlerova, A.; Kmiecik, G.; Kostadinova, I.A.; et al. Extracellular vesicles in blood, milk and body fluids of the female and male urogenital tract and with special regard to reproduction. Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 2016, 53, 379–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Caivano, A.; Laurenzana, I.; De Luca, L.; La Rocca, F.; Simeon, V.; Trino, S.; D’Auria, F.; Traficante, A.; Maietti, M.; Izzo, T.; et al. High serum levels of extracellular vesicles expressing malignancy-related markers are released in patients with various types of hematological neoplastic disorders. Tumour Biol. 2015, 36, 9739–9752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. De Luca, L.; D’Arena, G.; Simeon, V.; Trino, S.; Laurenzana, I.; Caivano, A.; La Rocca, F.; Villani, O.; Mansueto, G.; Deaglio, S.; et al. Characterization and prognostic relevance of circulating microvesicles in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leuk. Lymphoma 2017, 58, 1424–1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Yeo, R.W.; Lai, R.C.; Zhang, B.; Tan, S.S.; Yin, Y.; Teh, B.J.; Lim, S.K. Mesenchymal stem cell: An efficient mass producer of exosomes for drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2013, 65, 336–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Bruno, S.; Deregibus, M.C.; Camussi, G. The secretome of mesenchymal stromal cells: Role of extracellular vesicles in immunomodulation. Immunol. Lett. 2015, 168, 154–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Tomasoni, S.; Longaretti, L.; Rota, C.; Morigi, M.; Conti, S.; Gotti, E.; Capelli, C.; Introna, M.; Remuzzi, G.; Benigni, A. Transfer of growth factor receptor mRNA via exosomes unravels the regenerative effect of mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells Dev. 2013, 22, 772–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Baglio, S.R.; Pegtel, D.M.; Baldini, N. Mesenchymal stem cell secreted vesicles provide novel opportunities in (stem) cell-free therapy. Front. Physiol. 2012, 3, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Kim, H.S.; Choi, D.Y.; Yun, S.J.; Choi, S.M.; Kang, J.W.; Jung, J.W.; Hwang, D.; Kim, K.P.; Kim, D.W. Proteomic analysis of microvesicles derived from human mesenchymal stem cells. J. Proteome Res. 2012, 11, 839–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Di Rocco, G.; Baldari, S.; Toietta, G. Towards therapeutic delivery of extracellular vesicles: Strategies for in vivo tracking and biodistribution analysis. Stem Cells Int. 2016, 2016, 5029619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Li, T.; Yan, Y.; Wang, B.; Qian, H.; Zhang, X.; Shen, L.; Wang, M.; Zhou, Y.; Zhu, W.; Li, W.; et al. Exosomes derived from human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells alleviate liver fibrosis. Stem Cells Dev. 2013, 22, 845–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Tan, C.Y.; Lai, R.C.; Wong, W.; Dan, Y.Y.; Lim, S.K.; Ho, H.K. Mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes promote hepatic regeneration in drug-induced liver injury models. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2014, 5, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Lopatina, T.; Gai, C.; Deregibus, M.C.; Kholia, S.; Camussi, G. Cross talk between cancer and mesenchymal stem cells through extracellular vesicles carrying nucleic acids. Front. Oncol. 2016, 6, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Pascucci, L.; Cocce, V.; Bonomi, A.; Ami, D.; Ceccarelli, P.; Ciusani, E.; Vigano, L.; Locatelli, A.; Sisto, F.; Doglia, S.M.; et al. Paclitaxel is incorporated by mesenchymal stromal cells and released in exosomes that inhibit in vitro tumor growth: A new approach for drug delivery. J. Controll. Release 2014, 192, 262–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Goloviznina, N.A.; Verghese, S.C.; Yoon, Y.M.; Taratula, O.; Marks, D.L.; Kurre, P. Mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles promote myeloid-biased multipotent hematopoietic progenitor expansion via Toll-like receptor engagement. J. Biol. Chem. 2016, 291, 24607–24617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Blazquez, R.; Sanchez-Margallo, F.M.; de la Rosa, O.; Dalemans, W.; Alvarez, V.; Tarazona, R.; Casado, J.G. Immunomodulatory potential of human adipose mesenchymal stem cells derived exosomes on in vitro stimulated t cells. Front. Immunol. 2014, 5, 556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Budoni, M.; Fierabracci, A.; Luciano, R.; Petrini, S.; Di Ciommo, V.; Muraca, M. The immunosuppressive effect of mesenchymal stromal cells on B lymphocytes is mediated by membrane vesicles. Cell Transplant. 2013, 22, 369–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Chen, W.; Huang, Y.; Han, J.; Yu, L.; Li, Y.; Lu, Z.; Li, H.; Liu, Z.; Shi, C.; Duan, F.; et al. Immunomodulatory effects of mesenchymal stromal cells-derived exosome. Immunol. Res. 2016, 64, 831–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Conforti, A.; Scarsella, M.; Starc, N.; Giorda, E.; Biagini, S.; Proia, A.; Carsetti, R.; Locatelli, F.; Bernardo, M.E. Microvescicles derived from mesenchymal stromal cells are not as effective as their cellular counterpart in the ability to modulate immune responses in vitro. Stem Cells Dev. 2014, 23, 2591–2599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Favaro, E.; Carpanetto, A.; Lamorte, S.; Fusco, A.; Caorsi, C.; Deregibus, M.C.; Bruno, S.; Amoroso, A.; Giovarelli, M.; Porta, M.; et al. Human mesenchymal stem cell-derived microvesicles modulate T-cell response to islet antigen glutamic acid decarboxylase in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 2014, 57, 1664–1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Mokarizadeh, A.; Delirezh, N.; Morshedi, A.; Mosayebi, G.; Farshid, A.A.; Mardani, K. Microvesicles derived from mesenchymal stem cells: Potent organelles for induction of tolerogenic signaling. Immunol. Lett. 2012, 147, 47–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Zhang, B.; Yin, Y.; Lai, R.C.; Tan, S.S.; Choo, A.B.; Lim, S.K. Mesenchymal stem cells secrete immunologically active exosomes. Stem Cells Dev. 2014, 23, 1233–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Kordelas, L.; Rebmann, V.; Ludwig, A.K.; Radtke, S.; Ruesing, J.; Doeppner, T.R.; Epple, M.; Horn, P.A.; Beelen, D.W.; Giebel, B. MSC-derived exosomes: A novel tool to treat therapy-refractory graft-versus-host disease. Leukemia 2014, 28, 970–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Haarer, J.; Johnson, C.L.; Soeder, Y.; Dahlke, M.H. Caveats of mesenchymal stem cell therapy in solid organ transplantation. Transpl. Int. 2015, 28, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Zhu, Y.G.; Feng, X.M.; Abbott, J.; Fang, X.H.; Hao, Q.; Monsel, A.; Qu, J.M.; Matthay, M.A.; Lee, J.W. Human mesenchymal stem cell microvesicles for treatment of escherichia coli endotoxin-induced acute lung injury in mice. Stem Cells 2014, 32, 116–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Reis, M.; Ogonek, J.; Qesari, M.; Borges, N.M.; Nicholson, L.; Preussner, L.; Dickinson, A.M.; Wang, X.N.; Weissinger, E.M.; Richter, A. Recent developments in cellular immunotherapy for HSCT-associated complications. Front. Immunol. 2016, 7, 500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Kalimuthu, S.; Gangadaran, P.; Li, X.J.; Oh, J.M.; Lee, H.W.; Jeong, S.Y.; Lee, S.W.; Lee, J.; Ahn, B.C. In vivo therapeutic potential of mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles with optical imaging reporter in tumor mice model. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 30418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Scheme illustrating the therapeutic power of mesenchymal stem cells extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) in HSCT and GvHD. The reported MSC-EVs effects in mice (in vivo and in vitro) are in red. The reported MSC-EVs effects in human (in vivo and in vitro) are in green. PB: Pheripheral blood; PBMC: Pheripheral blood mononuclear cells.
Figure 1. Scheme illustrating the therapeutic power of mesenchymal stem cells extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) in HSCT and GvHD. The reported MSC-EVs effects in mice (in vivo and in vitro) are in red. The reported MSC-EVs effects in human (in vivo and in vitro) are in green. PB: Pheripheral blood; PBMC: Pheripheral blood mononuclear cells.
Ijms 18 01022 g001
Table 1. Clinical trials of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) application to promote hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) engraftment in phase I/II.
Table 1. Clinical trials of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) application to promote hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) engraftment in phase I/II.
Clinical StudiesMSC SourceNo. of ptsOutcomeReferences
Breast cancer; autologous HSCTBM28Rapid hematopoietic recoveryKoc et al.
adults[46]
Hematological malignancy; autologous HSCTBM162Improvement of early lymphocyte recoveryBatorov et al.
adults[48]
Hematological malignancy; allogeneic HSCTBM46Prompt hematopoietic recoveryLazarus et al.
adults[43]
Hematological disorders; haplo-T-cell-depleted HSCTBM14Accelerate leukocyte recovery. Prevention of graft rejectionBall et al.
children[40]
Hematological disorders; UCBTBM8 childrenPrompt hematopoietic recoveryMacmillan et al. [50]
Hematological disorders; UCBTBM13 childrenNo effect on engraftment and hematopoietic recovery. GvHD preventionGonzalo-Daganzo et al. [51]
Hematological disorders; UCBT+ 3rd party HSCsBM9No effect on engraftment and GvHDBernardo et al. [44]
adults
Severe aplastic anemiaUCB21Sustained donor engraftmentWu et al.
adults[47]
Hematological malignancy; allogeneic HSCTUCB50Sustained donor engraftmentWu et al.
adults and children[45]
pts: Patients; HSCT: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; BM: Bone marrow; UCBT: Umbilical cord blood transplantation; GvHD: Graft versus host disease; UCB: Umbilical cord blood.
Table 2. Clinical trials of MSC for the treatment of GvHD.
Table 2. Clinical trials of MSC for the treatment of GvHD.
Clinical StudiesMSC SourceNo. of ptsOutcomeReferences
Grade II–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM55OR: 70%; CR: 54%; improved OS in respondersLe Blanc et al.
adults and children[59]
Grade IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCTBM1Complete resolution of grade IV aGvHDLe Blanc et al.
children[60]
Grade III–IV aGVHD and extensive cGVHD after allogeneic HSCTBM95 pts with aGvHD survived 2 months to 3 years after HSCTRingden et al.
adultsTransient response in the liver, but not in the skin in cGvHD[61]
Grade II–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM31CR: 77%; PR: 16%Kebriaei et al.
adults[62]
Grade III–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM132 pts (15%) responded and required no further immunosuppressant therapy.Von Bonin et al.
adultsOR, 28 days after first MSC infusion, was 54%[64]
Grade III aGvHD after allogeneic HSCTBM3CR: 33%; PR: 67%Arima et al.
adults[65]
Grade II–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCTAdipose tissue6CR: 83%Fang et al.
adults[66]
GVHD after allogeneic HSCTBM72 pts with severe aGvHD did not progress to cGvHD. 1 out of 3 pts showed slight improvement of cGVHDMuller et al.
children[67]
Grade II–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM11 childrenOR: 71%; CR: 24%Lucchini et al.
[63]
Grade II–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM37 childrenCR: 59%; improved OS especially in early MSC treatmentBall et al.
[68]
Grade II–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM40OR: 67%; CR: 27%. Better in children and grade IIIntrona et al.
adults and children[69]
Extensive sclerodermatous cGVHD after allogeneic HSCTBM4Improvement in signs of cGVHDZhou et al.
adults[70]
Refractory cGVHD after allogeneic HSCTBM23OR: 87%. Increase in BregsPeng et al.
adults[71]
Grade III–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCTBM25CR: 24%; OS: 60%Muroi et al.
adults[72]
Grade I–IV aGvHD after allogeneic HSCT/DLIBM58OR: 47%, CR: 9%Von Dalowski et al.
adults[73]
MSC: Mesenchymal stem cell; pts: Patients; aGVHD: Acute-graft versus host disease; HSCT: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; DLI: Donor lymphocyte infusion; BM: Bone marrow; OR: Overall response; CR: Complete response; OS: Overall survival; PR: Partial response; cGVHD: Chronic-graft versus host disease; Bregs: Regulatory B-cells.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

De Luca, L.; Trino, S.; Laurenzana, I.; Lamorte, D.; Caivano, A.; Del Vecchio, L.; Musto, P. Mesenchymal Stem Cell Derived Extracellular Vesicles: A Role in Hematopoietic Transplantation? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 1022. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms18051022

AMA Style

De Luca L, Trino S, Laurenzana I, Lamorte D, Caivano A, Del Vecchio L, Musto P. Mesenchymal Stem Cell Derived Extracellular Vesicles: A Role in Hematopoietic Transplantation? International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2017; 18(5):1022. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms18051022

Chicago/Turabian Style

De Luca, Luciana, Stefania Trino, Ilaria Laurenzana, Daniela Lamorte, Antonella Caivano, Luigi Del Vecchio, and Pellegrino Musto. 2017. "Mesenchymal Stem Cell Derived Extracellular Vesicles: A Role in Hematopoietic Transplantation?" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 18, no. 5: 1022. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms18051022

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop