Equine Cord Blood Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Have Greater Differentiation and Similar Immunosuppressive Potential to Cord Tissue Mesenchymal Stromal Cells
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are the most common cell population studied for therapeutic use in veterinary medicine. MSCs obtained from neonatal sources such as umbilical cord tissue (CT-MSCs) or cord blood (CB-MSCs) are appealing due to the non-invasive nature of procurement and the time allowed for characterization of cells before use. However, it remains unclear as to whether CB- or CT-MSCs have equivalent progenitor and non-progenitor functions. CB-MSCs have been shown to have superior chondrogenic potential to MSCs from other sources, whereas their immunomodulatory capacity does not seem to vary significantly. Using equine CB-MSCs and CT-MSCs from the same donors, we hypothesized that MSCs from both sources would have a similar immunophenotype, that CB-MSCs would be more amenable to differentiation, and that they can equally suppress lymphocyte proliferation. We evaluated cells from both sources for "classic" equine MSC markers CD90, CD105, CD29, and CD44, as well as pericyte markers CD146, NG2, and α-SMA. Contrary to our hypothesis, CB-MSCs showed mid- to high expression of pericyte surface markers CD146 and NG2, whereas expression in CT-MSCs was absent. On trilineage differentiation, CB-MSCs were more osteogenic and chondrogenic based on alkaline phosphatase activity and glycosaminoglycan content, respectively. Finally, using a mononuclear cell (MNC) suppression assay, we determined that both CB-MSCs and CT-MSCs are capable of suppressing stimulated MNC proliferation to a similar degree. We have determined that the choice of MSC tissue source should be made with the intended application in mind. This appears to be particularly relevant if pursuing a progenitor-based treatment strategy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it