4.6 Article

Therapeutic Effects of Human Amniotic Fluid-Derived Stem Cells on Renal Interstitial Fibrosis in a Murine Model of Unilateral Ureteral Obstruction

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065042

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Science Foundation of Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical College, Qinglan Lan Project [53051106]
  2. Special Talents Fund of Dean of Xuzhou Medical College [2010KJZ23]
  3. Project of Technology Development Foundation of Xuzhou City [XF10C76]
  4. Project of 7th Liu Da Ren Cai Gao Feng of Jiangsu Province, China [2010-WS043]
  5. Project of Technology Development Foundation of Kuitun City [201134]
  6. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81270769]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Interstitial fibrosis is regarded as the main pathway for the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is often associated with severe renal dysfunction. Stem cell-based therapies may provide alternative approaches for the treatment of CKD. Human amniotic fluid-derived stem cells (hAFSCs) are a novel stem cell population, which exhibit both embryonic and mesenchymal stem cell characteristics. Herein, the present study investigated whether the transplantation of hAFSCs into renal tissues could improve renal interstitial fibrosis in a murine model of unilateral ureteral obstruction (UUO). We showed that hAFSCs provided a protective effect and alleviated interstitial fibrosis as reflected by an increase in microvascular density; additionally, hAFSCs treatment beneficially modulated protein levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), hypoxia inducible factor-1 alpha (HIF-1 alpha) and transforming growth factor-beta 1 (TGF-beta 1). Therefore, we hypothesize that hAFSCs could represent an alternative, readily available source of stem cells that can be applied for the treatment of renal interstitial fibrosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available