4.6 Review

Urine-Derived Stem Cells: Applications in Regenerative and Predictive Medicine

期刊

CELLS
卷 9, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells9030573

关键词

urine-derived stem cells; personalized medicine; regenerative medicine; induced-pluripotent stem cells

资金

  1. FEDER funds through the Operational Programme Competitiveness Factors-COMPETE
  2. FCT-Foundation for Science and Technology [PTDC/BTM-SAL/29297/2017, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-029297, PTDC/MED-FAR/29391/2017, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-029391, IF/01182/2015, UIDB/04539/2020]
  3. FundacAo para a Ciencia e Tecnologia/Ministerio da EducacAo e Ciencia [iNOVA4Health-UID/Multi/04462/2013]
  4. FEDER under the PT2020 Partnership Agreement
  5. Foundation for Science and Technology [PD/BD/114119/2015]
  6. Russian Government Program of Competitive Growth
  7. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PD/BD/114119/2015] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite being a biological waste, human urine contains a small population of cells with self-renewal capacity and differentiation potential into several cell types. Being derived from the convoluted tubules of nephron, renal pelvis, ureters, bladder and urethra, urine-derived stem cells (UDSC) have a similar phenotype to mesenchymal stroma cells (MSC) and can be reprogrammed into iPSC (induced pluripotent stem cells). Having simple, safer, low-cost and noninvasive collection procedures, the interest in UDSC has been growing in the last decade. With great potential in regenerative medicine applications, UDSC can also be used as biological models for pharmacology and toxicology tests. This review describes UDSC biological characteristics and differentiation potential and their possible use, including the potential of UDSC-derived iPSC to be used in drug discovery and toxicology, as well as in regenerative medicine. Being a new cellular platform amenable to noninvasive collection for disease stratification and personalized therapy could be a future application for UDSC.

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

4.6
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