4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Similar ex vivo expansion and post-irradiation regenerative potential of juvenile and aged salivary gland stem cells

期刊

RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY
卷 116, 期 3, 页码 443-448

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.06.022

关键词

Radiation-xerostomia; Salivary glands; Stem cells; Regeneration; Aging

资金

  1. Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW) [11.600.1023]
  2. Netherlands Institute for Regenerative Medicine (NIRM) [FES0908]
  3. Dutch Cancer Society [RUG2013-5792]
  4. SA Archimedes DoRa programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and purpose: Salivary gland dysfunction is a major side effect of radiotherapy for head and neck cancer patients, which in the future might be salvaged by autologous adult salivary gland stem cell (SGSC) therapy. Since frail elderly patients may have decreased activity of SGSCs, we aimed to characterize the potential of aged SGSC-population in a murine model. Materials and methods: Salivary glands and salisphere-derived cells from young and old mice were tested for CD24 and CD29 stem cell marker expression using FACS. Moreover, in vitro expansion capability and in vivo regeneration potential upon post-irradiation transplantation of young and aged SGSCs were measured. Results: An increase in CD24(hi)/CD29(hi) putative stem cells was detected in aged salivary glands albeit with a decrease in functional ability to form salispheres. However, the salispheres formed from aged mice salivary glands expressed CD24(hi)/CD29(hi) to the same extent as the ones from young mice. Moreover, following exposure to adequate growth conditions old and young SGSCs exhibited similar in vitro expansion- and in vivo regeneration potential. Conclusions: Aged SGSCs although reduced in number are in vitro indistinguishable from young SGSCs and could potentially be used to ameliorate age- or treatment related salivary gland dysfunction. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据