Figure 8.

Effect of C-MSC CM on LEC and BEC. Effect of M199-CSS and SCM-C-MSC CM on proliferation of (A) LEC and (G) BEC was assessed after 24 h. Data shown relative to the non-conditioned control. Data shown as mean ± SEM of five independent experiments with conditioned medium from five different C-MSC donors each with five replicates. Statistical significance vs. non-conditioned control: *P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, ***P ≤ 0.001, ****P ≤ 0.0001. Effect on wound healing of (B) LEC and (H) BEC was assessed by scratch wound assay. Area of wound was measured at 2, 4, and 7 h. Data shown as mean ± SEM of five independent experiments each with n = 5. Statistical significance vs. non-conditioned control: *P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, ****P ≤ 0.0001. Effect of C-MSC CM on (lymph) angiogenic network formation of (C) LEC and (I) BEC using matrigel assays. Representative images shown of (i) non-conditioned medium, (ii) endothelial medium, (iii) M199-C-MSC CM, and (iv) SCM-C-MSC CM. Images were analyzed and number of branches (D, J), loops (E, K) and branch points (F, L) counted. Data shown as mean ± SD (n ≥ 11). Statistical significance vs. non-conditioned control: *P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01.