4.2 Article

Human stem-progenitor cells from neonatal cord blood have greater hematopoietic expansion capacity than those from mobilized adult blood

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL HEMATOLOGY
卷 30, 期 7, 页码 816-823

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0301-472X(02)00818-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P01 CA70970] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. In this study we compared the hematopoietic capacity of CD34(+) cell preparations from neonatal cord blood (CB) vs adult mobilized peripheral blood (PBSC) before and after ex vivo culture. Methods. CD34(+) cell preparations purified from CB or PBSC were cultured in serum-free medium containing FKT: FI.T-3 ligand (FL), KIT ligand (KL), and thrombopoietin (TPO). Results. After 1-4 weeks ex vivo culture, CB CD34(+) cell preparations had greatly increased numbers of total cells, CD34(+) cells, and colony-forming cells (CFC). In contrast, ex vivo-cultured PBSC CD34(+) cell preparations generated far less in vitro assessed hematopoietic capacity. Nonobese diabetic severe combined immunodeficient mouse (NOD/SCID) engrafting potential (SEP) was maintained in ex vivo-cultured CB CD34(+) cell preparations, whereas ex vivo-cultured PBSC lost SEP. CB CD34(+) cells continued to proliferate throughout 3 weeks ex vivo, whereas after 1 week, no additional cell divisions were detected in PBSC CD34(+) cells. After 3 weeks in culture, the average CB CD34(+) cell had divided more than 5 times, as compared to only 2 times for the average PBSC CD34(+) cell. Conclusion. CB CD34(+) cell preparations generated massively increased in vitro assessed hematopoietic capacity and maintained SEP during 1- to 4-week ex vivo cultures. In contrast, ex vivo-cultured PBSC CD34(+) cell preparations generated far less in vitro assessed hematopoietic capacity and decreased SEP. The differences in the in vitro proliferative indices of membrane dye-labeled CD34(+) cells from CB vs PBSC correlated with these functional differences. (C) 2002 International Society for Experimental Hematology. Published by Elsevier Science Inc.

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

4.2
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