Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Biomolecules & Therapeutics logoLink to Biomolecules & Therapeutics
. 2019 Oct 25;28(1):34–44. doi: 10.4062/biomolther.2019.065

Differentiation of Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells towards Neuronal Lineage: Clinical Trials in Nervous System Disorders

Rosa Hernández 1,2,3,†, Cristina Jiménez-Luna 1,2,4,†, Jesús Perales-Adán 1, Gloria Perazzoli 1,3, Consolación Melguizo 1,2,3,*, José Prados 1,2,3
PMCID: PMC6939692  PMID: 31649208

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been proposed as an alternative therapy to be applied into several pathologies of the nervous system. These cells can be obtained from adipose tissue, umbilical cord blood and bone marrow, among other tissues, and have remarkable therapeutic properties. MSCs can be isolated with high yield, which adds to their ability to differentiate into non-mesodermal cell types including neuronal lineage both in vivo and in vitro. They are able to restore damaged neural tissue, thus being suitable for the treatment of neural injuries, and possess immunosuppressive activity, which may be useful for the treatment of neurological disorders of inflammatory etiology. Although the long-term safety of MSC-based therapies remains unclear, a large amount of both pre-clinical and clinical trials have shown functional improvements in animal models of nervous system diseases following transplantation of MSCs. In fact, there are several ongoing clinical trials evaluating the possible benefits this cell-based therapy could provide to patients with neurological damage, as well as their clinical limitations. In this review we focus on the potential of MSCs as a therapeutic tool to treat neurological disorders, summarizing the state of the art of this topic and the most recent clinical studies.

Keywords: Mesenchymal stem cells, Nervous system disorders, Cell-based therapy, Neuronal differentiation, Clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Stem cells are a population of unspecialized cells with the ability to both self-renew and give rise to multiple cell types (Ahmadi et al., 2012). The stem cell niche consists of a heterogeneous cell population, extracellular matrix and different soluble factors, which together provide a suitable microenvironment (Ferroni et al., 2013) for the maintenance of these cells. Stem cells can be classified according to their differentiation capacity into: i) totipotent stem cells, which can generate all cell types of the organism, including embryonic and extraembryonic tissues (Sun and Ma, 2013); ii) pluripotent stem cells, which can differentiate into cell types from any of the three germ layers, thus being able to differentiate into all cells of the adult organism (Mahla, 2016); iii) multipotent stem cells, which can give rise to all cells derived from one specific lineage (Jopling et al., 2011); and finally, iv) unipotent stem cells, which can only generate one cell type (Jaenisch and Young, 2008).

Despite sharing common properties, stem cells exhibit different features when they originate from different sources (Kalladka and Muir, 2014). In fact, stem cells can be categorized as embryonic stem cells (ESCs), fetal stem cells (FSCs), perinatal stem cells (PSCs), adult stem cells (ASCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). ESCs have the advantage of being pluripotent, although their use involves high risk of tumorigenicity and generates a great ethical controversy, since they derive from embryo at the blastocyst stage (Nadig, 2009). Interestingly, iPSCs have similar characteristics to ESCs, including pluripotency, but are generated from adult somatic cells by epigenetic reprogramming and thus they can be used without ethical debate (Salehi et al., 2016). FSCs are derived from fetal tissues, even though they exhibit a lower division capacity than ESCs (Ilic and Polak, 2011). PSCs are multipotent cells that derive from perinatal extraembryonic tissues and share properties with ESCs and ASCs (Si et al., 2015). The latter, i.e., ASCs, are multipotent cells present in most adult tissues, where they play a key role in tissue regeneration (Nadig, 2009; Mahla, 2016).

The exciting potential of stem cells in tissue regeneration and repair provides an alternative approach to cell-based therapies in various diseases, especially in those that affect the nervous system (NS) (Gage and Temple, 2013). In fact, stem cells may replace some non-functional cells in neurodegenerative disorders and NS lesions (Lunn et al., 2011). In this context, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), which are adult stem cells derived from the mesoderm and neuroectoderm (Ferroni et al., 2013), exhibit a high differentiation plasticity. These cells present some advantages compared to other stem cells such as neural stem cells (NSCs), namely lack of teratoma formation capacity since they derive from adult tissues and ability to migrate towards inflammatory foci through expression of chemokine receptors (Honczarenko et al., 2006; Wakao et al., 2012; Laroni et al., 2015; Frese et al., 2016). Moreover, the use of MSCs could avoid the toxicity of the immunosuppressive regimens used with NCS (Fu et al., 2008).

Previous review articles have discussed the MSCs ability to differentiate into neurons and their possible application in clinical trials (Scuteri et al., 2011; Ullah et al., 2015; Squillaro et al., 2016). This review summarizes the potential of MSCs in regenerative medicine applied to neurological disorders, and offers a comprehensive compilation of the most recent clinical studies that employ this type of cell therapy.

MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS

MSCs are considered multipotent cells able to give rise to all cell types of mesodermal origin, including bone, cartilage and fat cells. However, their ability to differentiate into non-mesodermal cell types such as neurons has been widely reported (Drela et al., 2013; Salehi et al., 2016). Although these cells were isolated for the first time from bone marrow (Friedenstein et al., 1974), they reside in almost all tissues, with adipose tissue, placenta and umbilical cord being the most used MSC sources (Ferroni et al., 2013; Teixeira et al., 2013).

In recent decades, MSCs have been hailed as a therapeutic promise in regenerative medicine due to their accessibility and ease of in vitro expansion, reduced immunogenic properties (Salehi et al., 2016) and broad differentiation ability compared to other ASCs types (Drela et al., 2013; Ferroni et al., 2013). The International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT) established three minimal criteria for the correct identification of MSCs: i) plastic adherence; ii) positive expression of the CD73, CD90 and CD105 markers and negative for CD34, CD45, HLA-DR, CD14 or CD11B, CD79α or CD19; and iii) capacity of in vitro differentiation into adipocytes, chondrocytes and osteoblasts (Teixeira et al., 2013). Nevertheless, it has been reported that these stem cells may have variable biological features according to the source, the donor or the culture conditions (Han et al., 2017). In addition, the ability of MSCs to differentiate into cells of the neuronal lineage has been questioned. In fact, some stressful culture conditions can produce morphological changes and alter protein expression in MSCs without necessarily turning them into neurons. Among these conditions, serum deprivation, cell fusion or the addition of some components to differentiation media (e.g., dimethyl sulfoxide or β-mercaptoethanol) (Lu et al., 2004; Krabbe et al., 2005; Croft and Przyborski, 2006) have been assayed. However, more recent research has demonstrated successful and stable neuronal differentiation corroborated by multiple techniques both in vitro and in vivo (Mareschi et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2006; Takeda and Xu, 2015).

MODULATION OF MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS TO THE NEURONAL LINEAGE

Contrary to drug-based treatments, therapies employing living cells have the advantage of dynamically responding to a time-changing environment, rather than being focused on a single way of action (Kalladka and Muir, 2014). In order to treat neurological injuries with MSCs, these cells can be obtained from different sources such as the umbilical cord (HU-MSCs) (Hong et al., 2011), bone marrow (BM-MSCs) (Mahmood et al., 2003), amniotic fluid (Yan et al., 2013) or adipose tissue (AD-MSCs) (Gao et al., 2014a). However, no accurate studies comparing the functionality of MSCs according to their source have been conducted. Once implanted in the injured region, MSCs can exert the following therapeutical mechanisms: secretion of neurotrophic factors (Nagai et al., 2007), induction of neurogenesis and astroglial activation (Yoo et al., 2008), axon growth and enhancement of synaptic connections (Maltman et al., 2011), anti-apoptotic, immunomodulatory (Wang et al., 2012; Budoni et al., 2013) and antiinflammatory effects (Hawryluk et al., 2012), reduction of oxidative stress (Kemp et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2011), secretion of exosomes containing a wide range of bioactive molecules (Kim et al., 2012; Tomasoni et al., 2013), and expression of a great number of genes related to neuronal processes and transcription factors (Arboleda et al., 2011).

In general, transplanted MSCs are previously reprogrammed in vitro with the aim of improving their survival and accelerating their differentiation into nervous cells (Lu et al., 2001; Mahmood et al., 2002). In vitro reprogramming of MSCs towards neuronal lineage can be achieved through four different strategies (Fig. 1A): psychotropic drugs, small molecules, enriched media and epigenetic modifications. On the contrary, other research groups have transplanted MSCs not previously reprogrammed (Bhang et al., 2007), and even followed by the injection of growth factors in the treated zone (Liu et al., 2014).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Open in a new tab

Schematic process of the in vitro differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Differentiation factors as drugs, small molecules, the enrichment of culture media and epigenetics changes (A) make different effects on MSC like increase reactive astrocytosis, synaptogenesis, neurogenesis, myelination, apoptosis inhibition and angiogenesis. In addition, inhibition apoptosis and inflamation are also induced. MSC may be applied to promote remyelination (i.e., multiple sclerosis) where the presence of MSC marks the sites where the oligodendrocyte progenitor cell (OPC) has to join to repair the lost myelin (B). Moreover, MSCs may be used to induce restitution of injured areas and damaged circuitry of the brain after stroke (C). Finally, therapeutic application of MSCs may represent a promising approach in the treatment of spinal cord injury (D).

It is known that some drugs, namely antidepressants and antipsychotics, can increase proliferation and differentiation rates of MSCs into neurons (Nakagawa, 2010). These drugs have proved to reverse gray matter loss and slow down the reduction in brain volume in patients with neurodegenerative disorders such as schizophrenia or depression. However, the mechanisms by which this occurs are not completely understood (Nasrallah et al., 2010), although it has been observed that inhibiting glycogen synthase kinase-3β (GSK-3β) plays a key role in the proliferation of hippocampal neuronal precursor cells (Morales-Garcia et al., 2012). Atypical antipsychotic drugs like risperidone, olanzapine and aripiprazole, and antidepressants like desvenlafaxine (Asokan et al., 2014) have proved to increase in vitro neurogenesis and neuron maturation in rat models, respectively. Additionally, the antidepressants imipramine, desipramine, fluoxetine and tianeptine have shown improved differentiation efficiency of rat MSCs into neuron-like cells (Borkowska et al., 2015).

Small molecules are also emerging as cutting-edge tools in the pharmacotherapy of brain injuries. They can imitate the activity of endogenous proteins and modulate certain signaling pathways. Among these small molecules, a plethora of GSK-3β inhibitors stand out, particularly lithium, a mood stabilizer that accumulates in neurogenic brain regions and increases adult hippocampal neurogenesis (Boku et al., 2010; Zanni et al., 2017). Vitamin derivatives such as retinoic acid, known to induce differentiation of MSCs into neurogenic cells (Gao et al., 2014b; Halder et al., 2015), also play a role in the differentiation of neural progenitors. Finally, Alexanian et al. (2013) tested a combination of SMAD signaling inhibitors (SMAD1/3 and SMAD3/5/8) with chromatin modifying agents (trichostatin A and RG108) and modulators of cAMP levels, showing a high rate of BM-MSCs differentiation into neuron-like cells and an enhanced formation of synaptic-like structures. In addition, enrichment of culture media with growth factors and other inductor substances allow the in vitro differentiation of MSCs towards various cell types with morphological and functional differences (Zhu et al., 2009; Kajiyama et al., 2010; Ferro et al., 2011). Since the publication of the first neuronal differentiation medium for MSCs in 2000 (Woodbury et al., 2000), a number of media have been used for this purpose. Table 1 summarizes the substances most commonly employed and the neuronal markers most frequently studied to evaluate the differentiation efficiency of MSCs.

Table 1.

In vitro neuronal differentiation of MSC. Substances commonly used for neural differentiation and neuronal markers more frequently studied after the differentiation process

Compounds Neuronal markers Types of MSC Ref.
EGF CHAT, TH, TUB-III, MAP2 AD-MSC Marei et al., 2018
Insulin GFAP, TUB-III AD-MSC Ying et al., 2012
5-Azacytine MAP2 AD-MSC Zemel’ko et al., 2013
bFGF GFAP, MAP2, MBP, nestin UCSC Rafieemehr et al., 2015
NGF TUB-III, NF-M, PSD-95 UCSC Jahan et al., 2017
SHH Hb-9, Pax-6, NF, CHAT UCSC Yousef et al., 2017
cAMP TUB-III, NSE, MAP2, GFAP UCSC Shahbazi et al., 2016
BDNF Nestin, NSE, GFAP BM-MSC Liu et al., 2015
DMSO NSE, GFAP BM-MSC Xu et al., 2016
Retinoic acid NF BM-MSC Wang et al., 2013
BME Nestin, NSE BM-MSC Shi et al., 2016
IBMX TUB-III, GFAP, NF, NeuN, MAP2 BM-MSC / eMSC Zemel’ko et al., 2014
BHA MAP2, NSE, GFAP BM-MSC Mu et al., 2015
LIF Nestin, TUB-III, GFAP, MBP, TH hDPSC Chun et al., 2016
Open in a new tab

AD-MSC, adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells; BDNF, brain-derived neurotrophic factor; bFGF, basic fibroblast growth factor; BHA, butylated hydroxyanisole; BM-MSC, bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells; BME, 2-mercaptoethanol; CHAT, choline O-acetyltransferase; DMSO, dimethyl sulfoxide; EGF, epidermal growth factor; eMSC, menstrual blood mesenchymal stem cells; GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein; Hb-9, homeobox gene 9; hDPSC, human dental pulp stem cells; IBMX, 3-isobutyl-1-methylxanthine; LIF, leukemia inhibitory factor; MAP2, microtubule-associated protein 2; MBP, myelin basic protein; MSC, mesenchymal stem cells; NCC, neural crest cells; NF, neurofilament; NGF, nerve growth factor; NSE, neuron-specific enolase; Pax-6, paired box protein 6; PSD-95, postsynaptic density protein 95; SHH, sonic hedgehog; TH, tyrosine hydroxylase; TUB-III, ß-tubulin III; UCSC, umbilical cord blood stem cells.

Epigenetic changes lead MSCs to a particular lineage by repressing genes related to the undifferentiated state and expressing those associated with differentiation (Teven et al., 2011; Herlofsen et al., 2013). A recent study stated that changes in the neuronal phenotype of MSCs can be a result of epigenetic modifications (Alexanian, 2015). Exposing MSCs to epigenetic modifiers and neuronal induction factors turns them into neuronal lineage-like cells, suggesting that cell plasticity can be handled by combining epigenetic modulating enzymes and specific signaling pathways. Nevertheless, the mechanisms by which MSCs undergo trans-differentiation are still unclear. Alexanian (2015) developed a protocol for neuronal differentiation based on testing various epigenetic modulators such as trichostatin (TSA), valproic acid (VPA), sodium butyrate, DNZep, RG108, 5-aza-dC, zebularine or BIX 01294, in combination with substances that promote iPSCs differentiation into neuronal lineage. These authors demonstrated that chromatin-modifying compounds increase the plasticity of already differentiated cells and make them suitable to respond to differentiation-inducing signals. Some studies have shown that the exposure of MSCs to VPA, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, leads to overexpression of specific markers of neural progenitors like GFAP and nestin (Dong et al., 2013). Fila-Danilow et al. (2017) confirmed that TSA and VPA affected the expression of neuronal lineage genes, and inhibited cell proliferation and neurospheres formation in a culture of rat MSCs.

Genetic modifications of MSCs can be an effective method to achieve a faster and more durable neuronal differentiation, either alone or in combination with differentiation media. Genetically modified MSCs have demonstrated the potential to secrete brain-derived neurotrophic factors, such as BDNF, VEGF, NGF, IGF-1 (Song et al., 2009; Gu et al., 2010; Wyse et al., 2014) and neurotrophins (Zhang et al., 2012), among others, and to serve as cellular vehicles for pro-drug gene therapy (Choi et al., 2012) to treat neurodegenerative disorders. The manipulation of MSCs towards a desired epigenetic status for their differentiation into the proper neuronal lineages could be the tool for the development of alternative cell therapies focused on neurodegenerative disorders.

CLINICAL TRIALS WITH MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS FOR THE TREATMENT OF NERVOUS SYSTEM DISORDERS

The plasticity of MSCs has allowed the development of numerous clinical trials, many of which have not yet been completed (Table 2). However, data from the most recent ones show that the use of MSCs to treat NS pathologies does not imply adverse effects or structural changes. Furthermore, the increasing amount of positive results in vivo in phase I and II trials suggests that the transplantation of MSCs may lead to functional improvements and tissue regeneration.

Table 2.

Clinical trials using MSCs for neural disorders

Identifier/Country Study Phase/Patients Year Safety and effectiveness Disease
NCT02742857/India Intrathecal transplantation of bioactive peptides, MSC and transcranial laser stimulation 1/20 2017 Ongoing Traumatic brain injury
NCT02525432/USA Intravenous transplantation of autologous BM-MSC 2/55 2017 Ongoing Traumatic brain injury
NCT00875654/France Intravenous injection of autologous BM-MSC 2/31 2017 Ongoing Stroke
NCT01287936/USA Transplantation of modified SB623 stem cells into ischemic, chronic and stable cerebrovascular accident 1–2/18 2016 Cells safe Improvement after 12 months Stroke
NCT01310114/USA Intravenous administration of placenta-derived cells 2/44 2018 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT03356821/Holland Intranasal transplantation of BM-MSC in perinatal 1–2/10 2017 Ongoing Arterial infarction
NCT01678534/Spain Transplantation of allogeneic AD-MSC 2/20 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT01468064/China Transplantation of autologous BM-MSC and endothelial progenitors 1–2/20 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT01922908/USA Transplantation of autologous BM-MSC 1–2/48 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT03371329/USA Transplantation of BM-MSC 1/12 2017 Ongoing Intracerebral hemorrhage
NCT02580019/China Transplantation of HU-MSC 2/2 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT02378974 South Korea Intravenous transplantation of HU-MSC 1–2/18 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT03176498/China Intravenous transplant of HU-MSC 1–2/40 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke (convalescence)
NCT03186456/China Transplantation of HU-MSC 1/40 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT01716481/South Korea Intravenous transplantation of autologous MSC expanded with autologous serum 3/60 2017 Ongoing Stroke
NCT01297413/USA Transplantation of allogeneic BM-MSC 1–2/38 2017 Ongoing Ischemic stroke
NCT02849613/France Intravenous transplantation of allogeneic ADSC 2–3/400 2016 Ongoing Stroke
NCT02165904/Spain Subarachnoid transfer of autologous BM-MSC 2/10 2017 No secondary effects (1 year) Functional improvements Spinal cord injury
NCT02481440/China Transplantation of allogeneic umbilical cord-derived MSC 1–2/44 2018 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT01676441/South Korea Autologous MSC transplantation 2–3/32 2016 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT02574585/Brazil Transfer of autologous BM-MSC 2/40 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord (lumbar) injury
NCT02574572/Brazil Transfer of autologous BM-MSC 1/10 2018 Ongoing Spinal cord (cervical) injury
NCT02152657/Brazil Transfer of autologous MSC in spinal cord injuries by percutaneous puncture 5/1 2017 No publication available Spinal cord injury
NCT02482194/Pakistan Intrathecal transfer of autologous BM-MSC 1/9 2016 No secondary effects (2 years) Spinal cord injury
NCT02688049/China Combined treatment of MSC and NeuroRegen scaffold 1–2/30 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT02570932/Spain Intrathecal transfer of autologous BM-MSC 2/10 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT01769872/South Korea AD-MSC transplantation 1–2/15 2016 No publication available Spinal cord injury
NCT03003364 Spain Intrathecal transfer of autologous WJ-MSC 1–2/10 2017 No publication available Spinal cord injury
NCT02352077/China Transplantation of BM-MSC and NeuroRegen scaffold 1/30 2016 No secondary effects (1 year)
Small sensorial improvements		 Spinal cord injury
NCT02981576 Jordan Comparison of AD- and BM-MSC transplantation 1–2/14 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT02917291/Spain Transplantation of allogenic AD-MSC combined with H2O2 and HC016 cells 1–2/46 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT03308565/USA AD-MSC transplantation in cerebrospinal fluid 1/10 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT01909154/Spain Transfer of autologous BM-MSC 1/12 2017 No secondary effects
Small sensorial improvements		 Spinal cord injury
NCT01393977/China Differences between rehabilitation and transplantation 2/60 2017 No publication available Spinal cord injury
NCT02881489/Poland Transplantation of autologous BM-MSC 1/30 2017 Ongoing Spinal cord injury
NCT01873547/China Differences between rehabilitation and transplantation 3/300 2018 No publication available Spinal cord injury
NCT01325103/Brazil Transplantation of autologous BM-MSC 1/20 2017 No secondary effects
Neurological improvements		 Spinal cord injury
NCT01377870/Iran Evaluation of the autologous MSC transplantation in multiple sclerosis 1–2/30 2018 No publication available Multiple sclerosis
NCT01895439/Jordan Intrathecal administration of autologous BM-MSC 1–2/30 2017 No adverse secondary effects
General improvement		 Multiple sclerosis
NCT00813969/USA Autologous MSC transplantation 1/24 2016 No publication available Multiple sclerosis
NCT01933802/USA Intrathecal administration of autologous MSC 1/20 2018 Minor secondary effects (24 hours)
Improvements in muscular strength and bladder		 Multiple sclerosis
NCT01606215/United Kingdom Transplantation of MSC 1–2/13 2016 No publication available Multiple sclerosis
NCT01745783/Spain Intravenous transplantation of autologous BM-MSC 1–2/30 2018 No publication available Multiple sclerosis
NCT02611167/USA Intravenous transplantation of allogeneic BM-MSC 1–2/20 2018 Ongoing Parkinson
NCT01609283/USA Intrathecal transplantation of autologous MSC 1/27 2018 Ongoing ALS
NCT01759797/Iran Intravenous transplantation of autologous MSC 1/6 2016 No secondary effects ALS
NCT02492516/Iran Intravenous transplantation of autologous AD-MSC 1/19 2016 No publication available ALS
NCT02987413/Brazil Intrathecal transplantation of autologous MSC 1/3 2017 No secondary effects (1year) ALS
NCT01771640/Iran Intrathecal transplantation of autologous MSC 1/8 2018 No secondary effects (6 months) ALS
NCT02917681/Brazil Intrathecal transplantation of autologous MSC 1–2/28 2016 No secondary effects (10 months) ALS
NCT02290886/Spain Intravenous transplantation of AD-MSC 1–2/40 2018 No secondary effects (10 months) ALS
NCT03268603/USA Transplantation of autologous AD-MSC 2/60 2018 Ongoing ALS
NCT03280056/USA Intrathecal transplantation of autologous BM-MSC 3/200 2018 Ongoing ALS
NCT03296501 Poland Intraspinal transplantation of AD-MSC 1/30 2017 Ongoing ALS
NCT01777646/Israel Transplantation of autologous BM-MSC secreting neurotrophic factors 2/14 2018 No secondary effects (10 months) ALS
NCT02600130/USA Intravenous transplantation of MSC versus placebo 1/30 2018 Ongoing Alzheimer
NCT02833792/USA Transplantation of allogeneic MSC 2/40 2018 Ongoing Alzheimer
NCT02054208/South Korea Transplantation of HU-MSC 1–2/45 2017 No secondary effects (2 years) Alzheimer
NCT01547689/China Transplantation of HU-MSC 1–2/30 2016 No secondary effects (10 months) Alzheimer
NCT03117738/USA Intravenous transplantation of autologous AD-MSC 1–2/60 2018 No secondary effects (3 years) Alzheimer
NCT03172117/South Korea Transplantation of HU-MSC 1–2/45 2017 Ongoing Alzheimer
NCT02672306/China Transplantation of HU-MSC 1–2/40 2018 Ongoing Alzheimer
NCT02899091/South Korea Intravenous transplantation of MSC 1–2/24 2016 Ongoing Alzheimer
NCT02315027/USA Intrathecal transplantation of autologous MSC 1/30 2017 No secondary effects (1 year) SDS-MSA
NCT00911365/South Korea Transplantation of autologous MSC versus placebo 2/27 2017 No secondary effects SDS-MSA
NCT03265444/South Korea Transplantation of BM-MSC 1/9 2018 Ongoing MSA
NCT02855112/Iran Transplantation of allogeneic AD-MSC 1–2/10 2017 No secondary effects SMA1
NCT02728115/Brazil Intravenous transplantation of autologous MSC 1/6 2017 Ongoing Huntington’s chorea
NCT03252535/Brazil Transplantation of MSC 2/35 2017 Ongoing Huntington’s chorea
Open in a new tab

AD-MSC, adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells; ALS, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; BM-MSC, bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells; HU-MSC, human umbilical mesenchymal stem cells; SDS-MSA, Shy-Drager syndrome (multiple system atrophy); SMA1, spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (Werdnig-Hoffman disease); WJ-MSC, Wharton’s jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells.

After trauma, normal brain functioning may be disrupted, producing severe physical and emotional damage, which is known as traumatic brain injury (TBI). It has been shown that MSCs have potential applications in TBI to reduce brain damage and clinical sequelae. In fact, MSCs can reduce inflammation through immunosuppressive mechanisms and induce the secretion of growth factors that benefit neurons (Hasan et al., 2017). Two recent clinical trials, NCT02742857 and NCT02525432, use intrathecal and intravenous transplantation of MSCs to improve the prognosis of patients with TBI, although results are ongoing. Stroke occurs when a sudden interruption of blood flow takes place in the brain. Currently, TBI is one of the main objectives for the application of MSCs (Fig. 1B). The possibility that MSCs may be implanted into injury as self-renewing neuronal cells has been assayed (Maria Ferri et al., 2016). In fact, the use of the modified SB623 stem cells in this pathology improved the clinical evolution of the patient for at least one year. Numerous clinical trials are underway using BM-MSCs, HU-MSCs or placenta-derived cells transplanted by different methods to determine the utility of this therapy in stroke (Table 2).

On the other hand, spinal cord injury (SCI) triggers a severe loss of motor, sensory, and autonomic functions that lack proper treatment. The neurological deficit results from the direct trauma associated with a secondary injury characterized by local immune reaction, apoptosis of neurons, tissue atrophy with cavitation and glial scar formation (Fig. 1C). Recently, it has been demonstrated that MSCs promote the repair of spinal cord tissues in animal models, suggesting their potential clinical use (Qu and Zhang, 2017). A clinical trial using repeated doses of autologous BM-MSCs by subarachnoid route (NCT02165904) showed no secondary effects -at least after one year-, and functional improvements were reported. Some other studies showed similar results (NCT02352077, NCT01909154, NCT01325103).

Multiple sclerosis and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) may be excellent candidates for MSCs-based therapies. The former is an inflammatory disease in which activated T cells induce axonal demyelination and neurological disability. The latter is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by major alterations of the neuromuscular system with an unknown etiology, although the activity of the immune system is thought to play a relevant role. In both conditions, the therapeutic plasticity of MSCs may benefit the evolution and prognosis of the patients (Fig. 1D) (Ardeshiry Lajimi et al., 2013; Lewis and Suzuki, 2014). A recent clinical trial employing autologous BM-MSCs intrathecally followed by MSCs conditioned media to treat multiple sclerosis (NCT01895439) showed improvements in all the tests conducted (except for lesion volume), demonstrating the safety and feasibility of this treatment. A more recent study (NCT01933802) using the same cells and route of administration improved muscular strength and bladder function with minor secondary effects. In relation to ALS, a recent phase II study (NCT01777646) showed that MSCs induced the secretion of neurotrophic factors, and slowed its natural progression without adverse effects for at least 6 month. Similar results were observed in other studies employing MSCs from different sources and with different routes of administration (NCT01771640, NCT02290886 and NCT02987413).

Finally, MSCs are being tested in clinical trials in other NS disorders, such as Shy-Drager syndrome, Werdnig-Hoffman disease, Huntington’s chorea and Alzheimer’s disease (Table 2). Regarding Alzheimer’s disease, the use of stem cells can be a hope. However, although some clinical studies support the safety and efficacy of this therapy, there is no unifying hypothesis for an underlying mechanism of action. The presence of neurotrophic factors, the activation of immunomodulatory molecules and the increase in the expression of synaptic proteins have been implicated (Bali et al., 2017). An ongoing phase II clinical trial with autologous AD-MSCs administered intravenously did not show adverse effects after 3 years (NCT03117738). Similar results have been found in other clinical trials (NCT02054208, NCT01547689).

In conclusion, different methods supporting and stimulating endogenous neurogenesis have shown significant beneficial effects on brain regeneration, e.g., improving functions lost by injury or disease. However, it seems that the efficiency of endogenous neurogenesis supported by extrinsic stimuli is not sufficient for the regeneration of large brain deficits.

DIFFICULTIES AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES ON THE USAGE OF STEM CELLS IN THE CLINIC

The best pre-clinical results regarding the use of stem cells to treat nervous system diseases have been obtained with an early administration of cells following neuronal injury, aiming to inhibit the initial inflammatory response and to activate the immune cells. There is little evidence supporting significant benefits when cells are administered after one week (Woodcock and Morganti-Kossmann, 2013). Currently, the clinical usage of autologous MSCs is limited, mainly due to the difficulty of generating large amounts of cells to treat the patient in a short period of time. The high economic cost also constitutes a significant hindrance, especially when it comes to generating, processing and storing stem and progenitor cells before administering them to the patient. Other technical aspects that are worth considering before employing MSCs in the clinic include (Clement et al., 2017): i) difficulty of standardizing isolation protocols; ii) MSCs heterogeneicity, which affects their in vitro expansion; iii) long-term expansion of a limited number of clones with loss of multipotency; iv) choice of the route of administration, which can alter the distribution or localization of MSCs in the damaged tissue; v) dose and time of patient’s follow-up; or vi) spontaneous transformation of MSCs in other cell types during the proliferative phase, including tumor cells. Although the main objective of these therapies is functional recovery, there are several unspecific effects that stem and progenitor cells can exert, like stabilization of the blood-brain barrier or brain edema in case of trauma. In order to ensure the safety and efficacy of the treatment, monitoring should be conducted by combining magnetic resonance imaging to show the brain injury and perfusion, the study of biological parameters such as systemic concentration of pro- and antiinflammatory cytokines, and neurological tests that allow a comprehensive assessment of the neurological state of the patient.

In neuronal lineage-differentiated cells, not only the genome must be preserved, but also the epigenetic pattern must be carefully considered in order to certify the identity of cells after differentiation so as to guarantee that the cell type used at the beginning of the research is the same as the one transplanted into the patient. Neuronal stem cells can turn into neuronal tumor cells due to epigenetic and genetic modifications, first transforming differentiated cells into more primitive ones, and finally into tumor cells (Achanta et al., 2010). However, using autologous cell sources diminishes the risk of malignant transformation. Further studies are required to elucidate the mechanisms underlying stem cell transformation, which will significantly contribute to regulate cell destination and oncogenesis inhibition.

CONCLUSION

It is worth noting that, in spite of promising results from a large number of pre-clinical and clinial trials, MSCs therapies still have significant limitations. It is necessary to isolate and culture homogeneous populations of MSCs, improve the differentiation efficiency and regeneration rate, establish an optimal transplantation methodology and ensure long-term biosecurity after transplantation. It is known that the process of neuronal differentiation is mostly controlled by changes in gene expression, and thus understanding the genetic behavior of MSCs during differentiation would help to create a more effective approach to cell therapy. To date, despite several methods to stimulate neurogenesis -with notable benefits for the patient- are known, their efficiency is not enough to repair the neuronal damage secondary to severe nervous system diseases. In order to restore the normal function of the damaged tissue, conventional therapeutic approaches may not be sufficient. In this regard, combining tissue engineering, pharmacology and classic rehabilitation could be the most promising strategy. Moreover, understanding the regeneration mechanisms of the nervous tissue will allow to coordinate and improve these therapies. New in vivo and in vitro studies are needed to identify the molecular interactions between the cell graft and the host, eventually leading to a better translation to the clinic from a responsible and accesible perspective.

Footnotes

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

  1. Achanta P, Sedora Roman NI, Quinones-Hinojosa A. Gliomagenesis and the use of neural stem cells in brain tumor treatment. Anticancer Agents Med. Chem. 2010;10:121–130. doi: 10.2174/187152010790909290. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahmadi N, Razavi S, Kazemi M, Oryan S. Stability of neural differentiation in human adipose derived stem cells by two induction protocols. Tissue Cell. 2012;44:87–94. doi: 10.1016/j.tice.2011.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Alexanian AR. Epigenetic modulators promote mesenchymal stem cell phenotype switches. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 2015;64:190–194. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2015.04.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Alexanian AR, Liu QS, Zhang Z. Enhancing the efficiency of direct reprogramming of human mesenchymal stem cells into mature neuronal-like cells with the combination of small molecule modulators of chromatin modifying enzymes, SMAD signaling and cyclic adenosine monophosphate levels. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 2013;45:1633–1638. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2013.04.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Arboleda D, Forostyak S, Jendelova P, Marekova D, Amemori T, Pivonkova H, Masinova K, Sykova E. Transplantation of predifferentiated adipose-derived stromal cells for the treatment of spinal cord injury. Cell. Mol. Neurobiol. 2011;31:1113–1122. doi: 10.1007/s10571-011-9712-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ardeshiry Lajimi A, Hagh MF, Saki N, Mortaz E, Soleimani M, Rahim F. Feasibility of cell therapy in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review of 83 studies. Int. J. Hematol. Oncol. Stem Cell Res. 2013;7:15–33. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Asokan A, Ball AR, Laird CD, Hermer L, Ormerod BK. Desvenlafaxine may accelerate neuronal maturation in the dentate gyri of adult male rats. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e98530. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098530. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bali P, Lahiri DK, Banik A, Nehru B, Anand A. Potential for stem cells therapy in Alzheimer’s disease: Do neurotrophic factors play critical role? Curr. Alzheimer Res. 2017;14:208–220. doi: 10.2174/1567205013666160314145347. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bhang SH, Lee YE, Cho SW, Shim JW, Lee SH, Choi CY, Chang JW, Kim BS. Basic fibroblast growth factor promotes bone marrow stromal cell transplantation-mediated neural regeneration in traumatic brain injury. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2007;359:40–45. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2007.05.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Boku S, Nakagawa S, Koyama T. Glucocorticoids and lithium in adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Vitam. Horm. 2010;82:421–431. doi: 10.1016/S0083-6729(10)82021-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Borkowska P, Kowalska J, Fila-Danilow A, Bielecka AM, Paul-Samojedny M, Kowalczyk M, Kowalski J. Affect of antidepressants on the in vitro differentiation of rat bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells into neuronal cells. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2015;73:81–87. doi: 10.1016/j.ejps.2015.03.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. 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. doi: 10.3727/096368911X582769b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Clement F, Grockowiak E, Zylbersztejn F, Fossard G, Gobert S, Maguer-Satta V. Stem cell manipulation, gene therapy and the risk of cancer stem cell emergence. Stem Cell Investig. 2017;4:67. doi: 10.21037/sci.2017.07.03. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Croft AP, Przyborski SA. Formation of neurons by non-neural adult stem cells: Potential mechanism implicates an artifact of growth in culture. Stem Cells. 2006;24:1841–1851. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2005-0609. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Chen YT, Sun CK, Lin YC, Chang LT, Chen YL, Tsai TH, Chung SY, Chua S, Kao YH, Yen CH, Shao PL, Chang KC, Leu S, Yip HK. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell protects kidneys against ischemia-reperfusion injury through suppressing oxidative stress and inflammatory reaction. J. Transl. Med. 2011;9:51. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-9-51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Choi SA, Lee JY, Wang KC, Phi JH, Song SH, Song J, Kim SK. Human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells: Characteristics and therapeutic potential as cellular vehicles for prodrug gene therapy against brainstem gliomas. Eur. J. Cancer. 2012;48:129–137. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.04.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Chun SY, Soker S, Jang YJ, Kwon TG, Yoo ES. Differentiation of human dental pulp stem cells into dopaminergic neuron-like cells in vitro. J. Korean Med. Sci. 2016;31:171–177. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.2.171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Dong X, Pan R, Zhang H, Yang C, Shao J, Xiang L. Modification of histone acetylation facilitates hepatic differentiation of human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e63405. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Drela K, Siedlecka P, Sarnowska A, Domanska-Janik K. Human mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of neurological diseases. Acta Neurobiol. Exp. (Wars.) 2013;73:38–56. doi: 10.55782/ane-2013-1920. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Ferro F, Spelat R, Falini G, Gallelli A, D’Aurizio F, Puppato E, Pandolfi M, Beltrami AP, Cesselli D, Beltrami CA, Ambesi-Impiombato FS, Curcio F. Adipose tissue-derived stem cell in vitro differentiation in a three-dimensional dental bud structure. Am. J. Pathol. 2011;178:2299–2310. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2011.01.055. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Ferroni L, Gardin C, Tocco I, Epis R, Casadei A, Vindigni V, Mucci G, Zavan B. Potential for neural differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Adv. Biochem. Eng. Biotechnol. 2013;129:89–115. doi: 10.1007/10_2012_152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Fila-Danilow A, Borkowska P, Paul-Samojedny M, Kowalczyk M, Kowalski J. The influence of TSA and VPA on the in vitro differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells into neuronal lineage cells: Gene expression studies. Postepy Hig. Med. Dosw. (Online) 2017;71:236–242. doi: 10.5604/01.3001.0010.3809. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Frese L, Dijkman PE, Hoerstrup SP. Adipose tissue-derived stem cells in regenerative medicine. Transfus. Med. Hemother. 2016;43:268–274. doi: 10.1159/000448180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Friedenstein AJ, Deriglasova UF, Kulagina NN, Panasuk AF, Rudakowa SF, Luria EA, Ruadkow IA. Precursors for fibroblasts in different populations of hematopoietic cells as detected by the in vitro colony assay method. Exp. Hematol. 1974;2:83–92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Fu L, Zhu L, Huang Y, Lee TD, Forman SJ, Shih CC. Derivation of neural stem cells from mesenchymal stem-cells: Evidence for a bipotential stem cell population. Stem Cells Dev. 2008;17:1109–1121. doi: 10.1089/scd.2008.0068. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Gage FH, Temple S. Neural stem cells: Generating and regenerating the brain. Neuron. 2013;80:588–601. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Gao S, Zhao P, Lin C, Sun Y, Wang Y, Zhou Z, Yang D, Wang X, Xu H, Zhou F, Cao L, Zhou W, Ning K, Chen X, Xu J. Differentiation of human adipose-derived stem cells into neuron-like cells which are compatible with photocurable three-dimensional scaffolds. Tissue Eng. Part A. 2014a;20:1271–1284. doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2012.0773. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Gao Y, Bai C, Wang K, Sun B, Guan W, Zheng D. All-trans retinoic acid promotes nerve cell differentiation of yolk sac-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2014b;174:682–692. doi: 10.1007/s12010-014-1100-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Gu W, Zhang F, Xue Q, Ma Z, Lu P, Yu B. Transplantation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells reduces lesion volume and induces axonal regrowth of injured spinal cord. Neuropathology. 2010;30:205–217. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1789.2009.01063.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Halder D, Kim GH, Shin I. Synthetic small molecules that induce neuronal differentiation in neuroblastoma and fibroblast cells. Mol. Biosyst. 2015;11:2727–2737. doi: 10.1039/C5MB00161G. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Han ZC, Du WJ, Han ZB, Liang L. New insights into the heterogeneity and functional diversity of human mesenchymal stem cells. Biomed. Mater. Eng. 2017;28:S29–S45. doi: 10.3233/BME-171622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Hasan A, Deeb G, Rahal R, Atwi K, Mondello S, Marei HE, Gali A, Sleiman E. Mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of traumatic brain injury. Front. Neurol. 2017;8:28. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2017.00028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Hawryluk GW, Mothe A, Wang J, Wang S, Tator C, Fehlings MG. An in vivo characterization of trophic factor production following neural precursor cell or bone marrow stromal cell transplantation for spinal cord injury. Stem Cells Dev. 2012;21:2222–2238. doi: 10.1089/scd.2011.0596. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Herlofsen SR, Bryne JC, Hoiby T, Wang L, Issner R, Zhang X, Coyne MJ, Boyle P, Gu H, Meza-Zepeda LA, Collas P, Mikkelsen TS, Brinchmann JE. Genome-wide map of quantified epigenetic changes during in vitro chondrogenic differentiation of primary human mesenchymal stem cells. BMC Genomics. 2013;14:105. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-14-105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Honczarenko M, Le Y, Swierkowski M, Ghiran I, Glodek AM, Silberstein LE. Human bone marrow stromal cells express a distinct set of biologically functional chemokine receptors. Stem Cells. 2006;24:1030–1041. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2005-0319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Hong SQ, Zhang HT, You J, Zhang MY, Cai YQ, Jiang XD, Xu RX. Comparison of transdifferentiated and untransdifferentiated human umbilical mesenchymal stem cells in rats after traumatic brain injury. Neurochem. Res. 2011;36:2391–2400. doi: 10.1007/s11064-011-0567-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Ilic D, Polak JM. Stem cells in regenerative medicine: Introduction. Br. Med. Bull. 2011;98:117–126. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldr012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Jaenisch R, Young R. Stem cells, the molecular circuitry of pluripotency and nuclear reprogramming. Cell. 2008;132:567–582. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.01.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Jahan S, Kumar D, Kumar A, Rajpurohit CS, Singh S, Srivastava A, Pandey A, Pant AB. Neurotrophic factor mediated neuronal differentiation of human cord blood mesenchymal stem cells and their applicability to assess the developmental neurotoxicity. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2017;482:961–967. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2016.11.140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Jopling C, Boue S, Izpisua Belmonte JC. Dedifferentiation, transdifferentiation and reprogramming: Three routes to regeneration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2011;12:79–89. doi: 10.1038/nrm3043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Kajiyama H, Hamazaki TS, Tokuhara M, Masui S, Okabayashi K, Ohnuma K, Yabe S, Yasuda K, Ishiura S, Okochi H, Asashima M. Pdx1-transfected adipose tissue-derived stem cells differentiate into insulin-producing cells in vivo and reduce hyperglycemia in diabetic mice. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 2010;54:699–705. doi: 10.1387/ijdb.092953hk. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Kalladka D, Muir KW. Brain repair: Cell therapy in stroke. Stem Cells Cloning. 2014;7:31–44. doi: 10.2147/SCCAA.S38003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Kemp K, Hares K, Mallam E, Heesom KJ, Scolding N, Wilkins A. Mesenchymal stem cell-secreted superoxide dismutase promotes cerebellar neuronal survival. J. Neurochem. 2010;114:1569–1580. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2009.06553.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kim HS, Choi DY, Yun SJ, Choi SM, Kang JW, Jung JW, Hwang D, Kim KP, Kim DW. Proteomic analysis of microvesicles derived from human mesenchymal stem cells. J. Proteome Res. 2012;11:839–849. doi: 10.1021/pr200682z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Krabbe C, Zimmer J, Meyer M. Neural transdifferentiation of mesenchymal stem cells--a critical review. APMIS. 2005;113:831–844. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2005.apm_3061.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Laroni A, de Rosbo NK, Uccelli A. Mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of neurological diseases: Immunoregulation beyond neuroprotection. Immunol. Lett. 2015;168:183–190. doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2015.08.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Lewis CM, Suzuki M. Therapeutic applications of mesenchymal stem cells for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2014;5:32. doi: 10.1186/scrt421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Liu Q, Cheng G, Wang Z, Zhan S, Xiong B, Zhao X. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells differentiate into nerve-like cells in vitro after transfection with brain-derived neurotrophic factor gene. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Anim. 2015;51:319–327. doi: 10.1007/s11626-015-9875-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Liu Y, Yi XC, Guo G, Long QF, Wang XA, Zhong J, Liu WP, Fei Z, Wang DM, Liu J. Basic fibroblast growth factor increases the transplantationmediated therapeutic effect of bone mesenchymal stem cells following traumatic brain injury. Mol. Med. Rep. 2014;9:333–339. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2013.1803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Lu D, Li Y, Wang L, Chen J, Mahmood A, Chopp M. Intraarterial administration of marrow stromal cells in a rat model of traumatic brain injury. J. Neurotrauma. 2001;18:813–819. doi: 10.1089/089771501316919175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Lu P, Blesch A, Tuszynski MH. Induction of bone marrow stromal cells to neurons: Differentiation, transdifferentiation, or artifact? J. Neurosci. Res. 2004;77:174–191. doi: 10.1002/jnr.20148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Lunn JS, Sakowski SA, Hur J, Feldman EL. Stem cell technology for neurodegenerative diseases. Ann. Neurol. 2011;70:353–361. doi: 10.1002/ana.22487. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Mahla RS. Stem cells applications in regenerative medicine and disease therapeutics. Int. J. Cell Biol. 2016;2016:6940283. doi: 10.1155/2016/6940283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Mahmood A, Lu D, Lu M, Chopp M. Treatment of traumatic brain injury in adult rats with intravenous administration of human bone marrow stromal cells. Neurosurgery. 2003;53:697–702. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000079333.61863.AA. discussion 702–703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Mahmood A, Lu D, Wang L, Chopp M. Intracerebral transplantation of marrow stromal cells cultured with neurotrophic factors promotes functional recovery in adult rats subjected to traumatic brain injury. J. Neurotrauma. 2002;19:1609–1617. doi: 10.1089/089771502762300265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Maltman DJ, Hardy SA, Przyborski SA. Role of mesenchymal stem cells in neurogenesis and nervous system repair. Neurochem. Int. 2011;59:347–356. doi: 10.1016/j.neuint.2011.06.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Marei HES, El-Gamal A, Althani A, Afifi N, Abd-Elmaksoud A, Farag A, Cenciarelli C, Thomas C, Anwarul H. Cholinergic and dopaminergic neuronal differentiation of human adipose tissue derived mesenchymal stem cells. J. Cell. Physiol. 2018;233:936–945. doi: 10.1002/jcp.25937. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Mareschi K, Novara M, Rustichelli D, Ferrero I, Guido D, Carbone E, Medico E, Madon E, Vercelli A, Fagioli F. Neural differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells: Evidence for expression of neural markers and eag K+ channel types. Exp. Hematol. 2006;34:1563–1572. doi: 10.1016/j.exphem.2006.06.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Maria Ferri AL, Bersano A, Lisini D, Boncoraglio G, Frigerio S, Parati E. Mesenchymal stem cells for ischemic stroke: Progress and possibilities. Curr. Med. Chem. 2016;23:1598–1608. doi: 10.2174/0929867323666160222113702. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Morales-Garcia JA, Luna-Medina R, Alonso-Gil S, Sanz-Sancristobal M, Palomo V, Gil C, Santos A, Martinez A, Perez-Castillo A. Glycogen synthase kinase 3 inhibition promotes adult hippocampal neurogenesis in vitro and in vivo. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2012;3:963–971. doi: 10.1021/cn300110c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Mu MW, Zhao ZY, Li CG. Comparative study of neural differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells by different induction methods. Genet. Mol. Res. 2015;14:14169–14176. doi: 10.4238/2015.October.29.39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Nadig RR. Stem cell therapy - Hype or hope? A review. J. Conserv. Dent. 2009;12:131–138. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.58329. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Nagai A, Kim WK, Lee HJ, Jeong HS, Kim KS, Hong SH, Park IH, Kim SU. Multilineage potential of stable human mesenchymal stem cell line derived from fetal marrow. PLoS ONE. 2007;2:e1272. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Nakagawa S. Involvement of neurogenesis in the action of psychotropic drugs. Nihon Shinkei Seishin Yakurigaku Zasshi. 2010;30:109–113. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Nasrallah HA, Hopkins T, Pixley SK. Differential effects of antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs on neurogenic regions in rats. Brain Res. 2010;1354:23–29. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2010.07.075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Qu J, Zhang H. Roles of mesenchymal stem cells in spinal cord injury. Stem Cells Int. 2017;2017:5251313. doi: 10.1155/2017/5251313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Rafieemehr H, Kheyrandish M, Soleimani M. Neuroprotective effects of transplanted mesenchymal stromal cells-derived human umbilical cord blood neural progenitor cells in EAE. Iran. J. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2015;14:596–604. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Salehi H, Amirpour N, Niapour A, Razavi S. An overview of neural differentiation potential of human adipose derived stem cells. Stem Cell Rev. 2016;12:26–41. doi: 10.1007/s12015-015-9631-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Scuteri A, Miloso M, Foudah D, Orciani M, Cavaletti G, Tredici G. Mesenchymal stem cells neuronal differentiation ability: A real perspective for nervous system repair? Curr. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2011;6:82–92. doi: 10.2174/157488811795495486. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Shahbazi A, Safa M, Alikarami F, Kargozar S, Asadi MH, Joghataei MT. Rapid induction of neural differentiation in human umbilical cord matrix mesenchymal stem cells by cAMP-elevating agents. Int. J. Mol. Cell. Med. 2016;5:167–177. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Shi Y, Hu Y, Lv C, Tu G. Effects of reactive oxygen species on differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Ann. Transplant. 2016;21:695–700. doi: 10.12659/AOT.900463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Si JW, Wang XD, Shen SG. Perinatal stem cells: A promising cell resource for tissue engineering of craniofacial bone. World J. Stem Cells. 2015;7:149–159. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v7.i1.149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Song CH, Honmou O, Ohsawa N, Nakamura K, Hamada H, Furuoka H, Hasebe R, Horiuchi M. Effect of transplantation of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells on mice infected with prions. J. Virol. 2009;83:5918–5927. doi: 10.1128/JVI.00165-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Squillaro T, Peluso G, Galderisi U. Clinical trials with mesenchymal stem cells: An update. Cell Transplant. 2016;25:829–848. doi: 10.3727/096368915X689622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Sun T, Ma QH. Repairing neural injuries using human umbilical cord blood. Mol. Neurobiol. 2013;47:938–945. doi: 10.1007/s12035-012-8388-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Takeda YS, Xu Q. Neuronal differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells using exosomes derived from differentiating neuronal cells. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0135111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Teixeira FG, Carvalho MM, Sousa N, Salgado AJ. Mesenchymal stem cells secretome: A new paradigm for central nervous system regeneration? Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2013;70:3871–3882. doi: 10.1007/s00018-013-1290-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Teven CM, Liu X, Hu N, Tang N, Kim SH, Huang E, Yang K, Li M, Gao JL, Liu H, Natale RB, Luther G, Luo Q, Wang L, Rames R, Bi Y, Luo J, Luu HH, Haydon RC, Reid RR, He TC. Epigenetic regulation of mesenchymal stem cells: a focus on osteogenic and adipogenic differentiation. Stem Cells Int. 2011;2011:201371. doi: 10.4061/2011/201371. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. 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. doi: 10.1089/scd.2012.0266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Ullah I, Subbarao RB, Rho GJ. Human mesenchymal stem cells - current trends and future prospective. Biosci. Rep. 2015;35:e00191. doi: 10.1042/BSR20150025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Wakao S, Kuroda Y, Ogura F, Shigemoto T, Dezawa M. Regenerative effects of mesenchymal stem cells: Contribution of muse cells, a novel pluripotent stem cell type that resides in mesenchymal cells. Cells. 2012;1:1045–1060. doi: 10.3390/cells1041045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Wang N, Xu Y, Qin T, Wang FP, Ma LL, Luo XG, Zhang TC. Myocardin-related transcription factor-A is a key regulator in retinoic acid-induced neural-like differentiation of adult bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Gene. 2013;523:178–186. doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2013.03.043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Wang SP, Wang ZH, Peng DY, Li SM, Wang H, Wang XH. Therapeutic effect of mesenchymal stem cells in rats with intracerebral hemorrhage: Reduced apoptosis and enhanced neuroprotection. Mol. Med. Rep. 2012;6:848–854. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2012.997. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Woodbury D, Schwarz EJ, Prockop DJ, Black IB. Adult rat and human bone marrow stromal cells differentiate into neurons. J. Neurosci. Res. 2000;61:364–370. doi: 10.1002/1097-4547(20000815)61:4<364::AID-JNR2>3.0.CO;2-C. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Woodcock T, Morganti-Kossmann MC. The role of markers of inflammation in traumatic brain injury. Front. Neurol. 2013;4:18. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2013.00018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Wyse RD, Dunbar GL, Rossignol J. Use of genetically modified mesenchymal stem cells to treat neurodegenerative diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2014;15:1719–1745. doi: 10.3390/ijms15021719. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Xu J, Lu H, Miao ZN, Wu WJ, Jiang YZ, Ge F, Fang WF, Zhu AH, Chen G, Zhou JH, Lu YZ, Tang ZF, Wang Y. Immunoregulatory effect of neuronal-like cells in inducting differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2016;20:5041–5048. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Yan ZJ, Zhang P, Hu YQ, Zhang HT, Hong SQ, Zhou HL, Zhang MY, Xu RX. Neural stem-like cells derived from human amnion tissue are effective in treating traumatic brain injury in rat. Neurochem. Res. 2013;38:1022–1033. doi: 10.1007/s11064-013-1012-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Ying C, Hu W, Cheng B, Zheng X, Li S. Neural differentiation of rat adipose-derived stem cells in vitro. Cell. Mol. Neurobiol. 2012;32:1255–1263. doi: 10.1007/s10571-012-9850-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Yoo SW, Kim SS, Lee SY, Lee HS, Kim HS, Lee YD, Suh-Kim H. Mesenchymal stem cells promote proliferation of endogenous neural stem cells and survival of newborn cells in a rat stroke model. Exp. Mol. Med. 2008;40:387–397. doi: 10.3858/emm.2008.40.4.387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Yousef B, Sanooghi D, Faghihi F, Joghataei MT, Latifi N. Evaluation of motor neuron differentiation potential of human umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells, in vitro. J. Chem. Neuroanat. 2017;81:18–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2017.01.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Zanni G, Michno W, Di Martino E, Tjarnlund-Wolf A, Pettersson J, Mason CE, Hellspong G, Blomgren K, Hanrieder J. Lithium accumulates in neurogenic brain regions as revealed by high resolution ion imaging. Sci. Rep. 2017;7:40726. doi: 10.1038/srep40726. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Zemel’ko VI, Kozhukharova IV, Kovaleva ZV, Domnina AP, Pugovkina NA, Fridlianskaia II, Puzanov MV, Anisimov SV, Grinchuk TM, Nikol’skii NN. BDNF secretion in human mesenchymal stem cells isolated from bone marrow, endometrium and adipose tissue. Tsitologiia. 2014;56:204–211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Zemel’ko VI, Kozhukharova IB, Alekseenko LL, Domnina AP, Reshetnikova GF, Puzanov MV, Dmitrieva RI, Grinchuk TM, Nikol’skii NN, Anisimov SV. Neurogenic potential of human mesenchymal stem cells isolated from bone marrow, adipose tissue and endometrium: a comparative study. Tsitologiia. 2013;55:101–110. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Zhang H, Huang Z, Xu Y, Zhang S. Differentiation and neurological benefit of the mesenchymal stem cells transplanted into the rat brain following intracerebral hemorrhage. Neurol. Res. 2006;28:104–112. doi: 10.1179/016164106X91960. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Zhang YJ, Zhang W, Lin CG, Ding Y, Huang SF, Wu JL, Li Y, Dong H, Zeng YS. Neurotrophin-3 gene modified mesenchymal stem cells promote remyelination and functional recovery in the demyelinated spinal cord of rats. J. Neurol. Sci. 2012;313:64–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2011.09.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Zhu Y, Liu T, Song K, Ning R, Ma X, Cui Z. ADSCs differentiated into cardiomyocytes in cardiac microenvironment. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2009;324:117–129. doi: 10.1007/s11010-008-9990-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Biomolecules & Therapeutics are provided here courtesy of Korean Society of Applied Pharmacology

RESOURCES