4.5 Article

Multiple administrations of human marrow stromal cells through cerebrospinal fluid prolong survival in a transgenic mouse model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

CYTOTHERAPY
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 299-306

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/14653240902806986

关键词

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; bone marrow stromal cells; intrathecal transplantation; SOD1

资金

  1. Natural Science Fund of Shandong Province [32716]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background aims The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is the main obstacle to cell therapy for neurologic disorders such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Intrathecal injection is a potential method for cell transplantation because it would bypass the BBB. We investigated the effects of human marrow stromal cells (hMSC) delivered through cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in a transgenic mouse model of ALS. Methods 5105 hMSC were delivered into the CSF of SOD1 transgenic mice at the age of 8 weeks (single transplantation group) or 8, 10 and 12 weeks (multiple transplantation group). Clinical observation, weight, hanging wire test and motor neuron count were used to assess the disease progression in the SOD1 mice. Immunohistochemistry was performed with human-specific antibody against HuNu to examine the distribution of hMSC in the lumbar spinal cord parenchyma of SOD1 mice at the age of 15 weeks. Results Single transplantation of hMSC did not have a beneficial effect in SOD1 mice. Multiple transplantations of hMSC attenuated weight loss, enhanced motor performance, decreased motor neuron loss and, importantly, increased survival in SOD1 transgenic mice. However, only a few hMSC delivered through the CSF migrated into the lumbar spinal cord parenchyma of SOD1 mice. Conclusions Multiple administrations of hMSC through CSF may have a therapeutic effect in SOD1 mice, although limited numbers of cells migrate into the lumbar spinal cord parenchyma. It is likely that the hMSC remaining in CSF are responsible for the effect in SOD1 mice.

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

4.5
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