4.7 Article

Manufacturing Differences Affect Human Bone Marrow Stromal Cell Characteristics and Function: Comparison of Production Methods and Products from Multiple Centers

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep46731

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Intramural Research Program of the NIH
  2. Clinical Center and National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research
  3. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  4. Biomedical Excellence for Safer Transfusion collaborative

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs, also known as bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells) are manufactured using many different methods, but little is known about the spectrum of manufacturing methods used and their effects on BMSC characteristics and function. Seven centers using, and one developing, Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) processes were surveyed as to their production methods. Among the seven centers, all used marrow aspirates as the starting material, but no two centers used the same manufacturing methods. Two to four BMSC lots from each center were compared using global gene expression. Among the twenty-four BMSC lots from the eight centers intra-center transcriptome variability was low and similar among centers. Principal component analysis and unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis separated all the lots from five centers into five distinct clusters. BMSCs from six of the eight centers were tested for their ability to form bone and support hematopoiesis by in vivo transplantation (defining features of BMSCs). Those from all six centers tested formed bone, but the quantity formed was highly variable and BMSCs from only three centers supported hematopoiesis. These results show that differences in manufacturing resulted in variable BMSC characteristics including their ability to form bone and support hematopoiesis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available