Stem Cells in Veterinary Medicine—Current State and Treatment Options

Types of Stem Cells

By definition, stem cells are undifferentiated cells capable of self—renewal and transformation into different specialized cells (1). They are classified by their source as (a) embryonic (ESC), (b) adult, and (c) induced pluripotent stem cells (IPSC) (2, 3). Considering their phase of development and differentiation, they are further classified as totipotent, pluripotent, or multipotent cells (4).

Totipotent stem cells are present only in a very early embryo during the morula stage before gastrulation starts. They are capable of developing into all embryonic and extra-embryonic tissues. Subsequent divisions of cells during early embryonic development lead to the emergence of the blastocyst with pluripotent ESC being present in the inner cell mass. ESC can give rise to all tissue cells in the body, with the exception of extra-embryonic tissues and germ cells (2, 5). With further cell development, pluripotent ESC gradually lose their pluripotency and become multipotent. The multipotent stage is characterized by the ability of cells to differentiate into limited types of specific cells, often depending on their germ layer origin (6).

The first isolation of human ESC was reported in 1998 (7). This triggered numerous studies about gene expression and function during embryonic development and cell differentiation processes, as well as attempts to identify gene targets for new drugs that might be useful in tissue regeneration therapies. However, broad-spectrum therapeutic capabilities of human ESC collided with ethical, moral, and cultural dilemmas because their harvesting is associated with the destruction of human embryos. Other sources of stem cells, therefore, had to be explored to continue the research into stem cell—based therapies. One alternative was developed in 2006 by Takahashi and Yamanaka, who reprogrammed adult mouse fibroblasts into pluripotent stem cells by retroviral transduction of four specific genes: OCT4, c-Myc, SOX2, and KLF4. These cells were termed IPSC and are similar to the ESC in their morphology, growth properties, and in the expression of ESC marker genes. Although the discovery of IPSC was remarkable progress in stem cell therapy, retroviral transductions can create chromosomal alterations, which increase the risk of tumorigenesis, raising questions about the safety of IPSC for regenerative medicine (3).

Another alternative to ESCs presents the stem cells which are present in the adult organism. Bone marrow and umbilical cord blood contain hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) and non-hematopoietic or mesenchymal stem cells (MSC), the latter residing also in numerous other tissues. These cells are multipotent because they can differentiate into specific body cell types. HSCs can differentiate into different cells of the immune system, erythrocytes and platelets, and MSCs into cells of bone, cartilage, ligaments, tendons, fat, skin, muscle, and connective tissue. MSCs are activated endogenously when needed to replace dead, injured, or diseased tissue cells (8). The first mention of adult multipotent cells/MSC dates to 1968 when the osteogenic population of cells with fibroblast-like morphology was isolated from the bone marrow (9). Early studies showed that multipotent stem cells are capable of differentiating into osteoblasts, chondroblasts, and adipocytes (10). This leads to the belief that MSCs show their therapeutic potential through differentiation into tissue cells (11, 12). However, numerous subsequent studies have questioned this and today it is believed that the primary mechanism of MSC regenerative abilities stems from their immunomodulatory and tissue repair mechanisms. It is presumed that perivascular localization of MSC in various tissues plays an essential role in enabling these cells to detect local or distant tissue damage and respond to it by directed migration to the site of injury and participation in the healing process (13). Based on this, Caplan proposed that the term “mesenchymal stem cells” should be changed into “medicinal signaling cell” (MSC) (14).

Compared to other stem cell types, MSCs are recognized as the most promising stem cell type for stem cell therapy due to the simple procedures needed for their harvest, isolation, high cell yield upon their harvesting, and the lack of ethical restraint when in use. To prevent the confusion in the field of adult stem cells research, The Mesenchymal and Tissue Stem Cell Committee of the International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT) proposed a set of standards to define human MSC for both laboratory-based scientific investigations and pre-clinical studies (15). In essence: (1) MSC must be plastic-adherent when maintained in standard culture conditions using tissue culture flasks, (2) 95% of the MSC population must express CD105, CD73, and CD90 and lack the expression of CD45, CD34, CD14 or CD11b, CD79a or CD19, and HLA class II, and (3) MSCs must be able to differentiate into osteoblasts, adipocytes, and chondroblasts under standard in vitro differentiating conditions.

MSC Sources

Tissue Origin of MSC

To date, MSCs were successfully isolated from various tissues, and based on the source they have different properties, which should be considered when choosing the optimal stem cell therapy approach aiming at the tissue healing. In dogs, horses and cats, the most common companion veterinary patients, MSCs have been isolated from bone marrow (16–23), adipose tissue (16, 17, 19–21, 23, 24), synovium (16), synovial fluid (17, 21, 25, 26), synovial membrane (26), infrapatellar fat pad (16), umbilical cord (27–29), umbilical cord blood (19, 30, 31), Wharton's Jelly (19, 31), muscle and periosteum (20, 32), gingiva and periodontal ligament (33), peripheral blood (34–37), endometrium (38), and placenta (31). In mice, MSCs were also isolated from the brain, spleen, liver, kidney, lung, muscle, thymus, and pancreas (39). Currently, the most commonly used sources of MSC for stem cell therapies are bone marrow and adipose tissue because they offer larger number of MSCs than other tissues. Among the two, the adipose tissue is a particularly attractive source of MSCs due to the minimally invasive procedure needed to obtain cells. Although MSCs isolated from bone marrow and adipose tissue have similar surface immunophenotyping and trilineage differentiation (16, 17, 40), there are important differences in terms of proliferation and differentiation capacity, and their secretory profiles. In some studies, canine adipose tissue derived MSC (ADMSC) were shown to have higher proliferative potential (17, 19, 40, 41), whereas bone marrow derived MSC (BMMSC) exhibited a higher secretory production of soluble factors and exosomes (19, 41). Canine ADMSCs were reported to have superior chondrogenic (17) and osteogenic potential (19) in comparison to BMMSCs, whereas in horses, chondrogenic and osteogenic potential seem to be higher in BMMSC (42, 43). Equine BMMSCs also seem to have a higher migration capacity (21) than ADMSCs. Another potential source of stem cells with high chondrogenic potential might be synovium derived MSCs, as some studies have shown that they are expanding more rapidly than ADMSC in horses (21) and have a greater chondrogenic potential than ADMSC and BMMSC in dogs (16, 17). When choosing adipose tissue as a source of MSCs, anatomical site of harvesting is also important. Guercio et al. (44) reported that subcutaneous ADMSCs have better proliferation potential than ADMSCs derived from visceral fat depots, and Yaneselli et al. (45) reported that subcutaneous ADMSCs remain multipotential in cell culture for a longer time and have higher osteogenic potential. Bahamondes et al. (46) also reported that visceral adipose tissue yields a higher number of MSCs in comparison to subcutaneous adipose tissue.

Since differences in stem cell properties might lead to differences in the success of stem cell therapy, they will have to be explored more closely in the future. Currently, there is no evidence that would generally suggest the preferential tissue source of MSC. This is at least partially due to variability in donors' species, donors' age, and donors' health conditions in different studies. Moreover, lack of standardization for the isolation, culture, and characterization of animal MSC considerably hinders the comparison of results between studies, and the variety of tissue sources are causing problems to set the criteria to define MSC. To date, there are no minimal established criteria for the identification of MSC in animals like criteria in humans (15). While all animal MSC show plastic adherence and differentiation potential, not all express the same panel of surface antigens that has been described for human MSC. Most non-human MSC express CD29 and CD44. However, the expression of CD73, CD90, and CD105 varies depending on the species and strain (47).

Autologous and Allogeneic MSC

Based on the donor–recipient relationship, stem cells can be classified as autologous, allogeneic, or xenogeneic stem cells. Autologous stem cells are collected from and administered to the same individual, allogeneic stem cells are collected from a donor and used in a recipient of the same species, whereas xenogeneic stem cells are those that are transplanted across species (48). When aiming to choose the most appropriate type of cells for particular stem cell therapy, choosing between autologous vs. allogeneic sources may prove challenging, and advantages and disadvantages for one over the other option should be considered. The isolation and expansion of autologous stem cells are time-consuming and associated with the costly procedure. Moreover, the potency of autologous MSC could be affected by patient age (44, 49–53) and existing disease (54). The need for allogeneic off-the-shelf stem cell products derived from young and healthy donors is, therefore, on the rise.

The main concern with allogeneic stem cell therapy is the possibility that MHC I surface molecules on allogeneic MSCs are recognized by recipient CD8+T cells, leading to direct cytotoxicity of foreign cells. In addition, MHC II molecules can be recognized by recipient CD4+ T cells, leading to either cytotoxic or humoral immune response. MHC molecules could also be subjected to indirect recognition by antigen presenting cells, leading to alloantibody production in B cells (55). Despite promising results regarding the safety of allogeneic MSC, several studies conducted in vitro (56, 57) and in vivo not only in rodents (58, 59) but also in horses (60–62) and dogs (63), showed immunogenic responses provoked by allogeneic MSC. This has raised some concerns about their presumed immunoprivileged characteristics. Joswig et al. (60), Bertoni et al. (64), and Cabon et al. (63) reported local side effects when the application of allogeneic cells was repeated and proposed that adverse reactions are most likely due to recipient's immune recognition of cells after re-exposure. However, when the effects of single and repeated applications of allogeneic cells for osteoarthritis treatment were compared in horses, no clinically relevant differences were observed in the outcome (65).

In line with contradictory clinical outcomes concerning to the immunogenicity of MSC, conflicting results have also been reported in terms of MHC expression depending on their state, tissue origin, breeds, individual donor, and culture conditions. For example, Menard et al. (66) showed that ADMSCs possess an increased capacity to modulate immune cells and that their phenotypic and transcriptomic profile is consistent with lower immunogenicity in comparison to BMMSC.

Regardless of many positive results of the studies encouraging the use of allogeneic MSC, several studies have confirmed that immunosuppressive properties of MSC do not exclude their immunogenicity. Further research is therefore needed to determine potential mechanisms to regulate MHC expression on MSC and to reach an agreement on the issue of MSC immunogenicity. Autologous stem cells, therefore, remain the most commonly used stem cell source in contemporary veterinary medicine.

Therapeutic Potentials of MSC

Although stem cells were initially thought to be the source of cells that would differentiate and replace damaged or diseased tissues, it has become evident that the therapeutic properties of MSC are achieved mainly through their immunomodulatory functions, which operate in the interaction with the immune system cells. Complex immunomodulation activity of MSC includes their paracrine action, secretion of extracellular vesicles (ECV), apoptosis mediated immunomodulation, and mitochondrial transfer of membrane vesicles and organelles.

Paracrine Effects

Increasing evidence suggests that the primary mechanism of action of MSC relies on paracrine signaling which results in functional changes in the immune cells, such as monocytes/macrophages (67), dendritic cells (68), T-cells (69), B-cells (70), and natural killer cells (71). Several factors have been reported to contribute to the immunomodulatory effects of MSC. Among them are well-established effectors such as transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β), indolamine-2,3-dioxygenase (IDO), prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), interleukin 10 (IL-10), and tumor necrosis factor- (TNF) stimulated gene-6 (TSG-6).

TGF-β is involved in many biological processes such as proliferation and differentiation of cells, embryonic development, wound healing, and angiogenesis (72). It affects migration and homing of MSC (73, 74) and their proliferation and differentiation. TGF-β was shown to induce a switch from inflammatory (M1) to antiinflammatory/regulatory (M2) state of macrophages and thus importantly participates in the induction of the regulatory T-cells (Tregs) (75–79). IDO, a metabolic enzyme, is another soluble factor that is secreted by MSC in an inflammatory environment (70). IDO catalyzes reactions leading to T- and B-cell cycle arrest (80), inhibition of T-cell proliferation and induction of Tregs generation (81), inhibition of B-cells (80), and NK cells (82), and is correlated with bystander differentiation of M2 macrophages (83). PGE2, the major prostaglandin, modulates chemokine production, inhibits the attraction of proinflammatory cells, and enhances differentiation of regulatory cells (84). It is a crucial mediator in NK-cell inhibition (82) and has a role in macrophage polarization toward the M2 phenotype (85). Also, its role was recently demonstrated in the clearance of apoptotic cells by MSC (86). IL-10 is an antiinflammatory cytokine that limits Th1 and Th2 response and accessory functions of macrophage and dendritic cells while inhibiting T-cell expansion (87) and driving the production of Tregs (88). MSCs' secretion of IL-10 is stimulated by an inflammatory environment and contact with T-cells (68, 89). TSG-6 is an inflammation-associated protein with anti-inflammatory and protective properties (90). MSC constitutively express TSG-6, which affects their morphology, the size of ECV, proliferation rate, differentiation potential, survival, and colony-forming unit capacity and is, therefore, crucial in maintaining MSC stemness (91). It was shown that TSG-6 induces the switch from M1 to M2 phenotype and increases the number of Tregs, resulting in relieving the symptoms of inflammatory conditions in experimental models of many diseases (92–95).

MSCs are, therefore, capable of altering the course and consequences of a particular disease through the paracrine effects on an individual's immune response.

Secretion of Extracellular Vesicles (ECV)

The paracrine action of MSCs is not limited solely to the secretion of soluble factors since MSCs have the capability to transfer various molecules through the extracellular vesicles (ECV). ECVs are vesicles arising from the plasma membrane by outward or inward budding (96). They are carriers of miRNA, mRNA, proteins, and mitochondria that are protected by the membrane. This enables ECVs to move long distances inside the body (97, 98). ECV include exosomes, which are 30–150 nm large plasma membrane coated vesicles of endocytotic origin, microvesicles, which are 100–1000 nm large vesicles of non-endocytotic origin, and apoptotic bodies, 50 nm−5 μm large vesicles released during membrane blebbing of apoptotic cells (99).

MSCs were shown to secrete exosomes and at least three other similarly sized types of ECV (100).

Regarding ECVs mechanisms of action, they seem to be similar to those exhibited by MSC themselves. The study by Hyvarinen et al. (101) demonstrated that ECVs enhance M2 macrophages in the same way as MSC, via PGE2 activation. Further, results from a recent study suggest that ECVs suppress T-cells through TGF-β and adenosine signaling (102). The primary role in increasing Tregs was attributed to TSG-6 from canine ADMSC-derived ECVs used for therapy of induced colitis in mice (92). ECVs were also shown to upregulate the IL-10 production when used to treat a mouse model of sepsis (103). In the pig, mouse, and rat animal models, MSC derived ECVs were reported to be beneficial in the respiratory (104), renal (105), and liver diseases (106), and also in the treatment of osteoarthritis (107), spinal cord injury (108), cerebral ischemia (109), and myocardial infarction (110). ECVs were also used in dogs and horses. Kornicka-Garbowska et al. (111) reported improved angiogenesis and elasticity of damaged tendon in a stallion after treatment with ADMSC-derived microvesicles. In dogs, ECVs were reported to promote vascularization, collagen synthesis, and cutaneous wound healing with better effects than their originator cells (112).

ECVs represent the potential to exploit MSC effects in a cell-free manner, with the main advantage being the avoidance of possible MSC side effects such as immune response and pulmonary embolism upon intravenous (IV) application of MSC (97, 98). Yet, cell-to-cell contact is believed to be important for some MSC immunomodulatory properties (68, 70, 113). When heat-inactivated MSCs without secretome but with the intact membrane integrity were infused IV, they did modulate monocyte function in the same way as control cells, increasing IL-10 levels and reducing IFN-γ levels. The results of this study suggest that immune response after MSC administration is not dependent on their active immunomodulatory activity (114), and contact with MSCs alone is sufficient for some immunomodulatory effects.

However, the lack of standardized techniques for isolation and purification of the ECVs remains the major limitation in ECV research. The most commonly used methods for exosome isolation are ultracentrifugation, ultrafiltration, tangential flow filtration, precipitation and size exclusion chromatography and immunoaffinity based methods. For example, key markers of exosomes are associated with endocytosis (115) and include caveolins, clathrins, transferrin receptors, tetraspanins (CD81, CD63, CD9), Alix and TSG101 (116). Ligands and cargo differ between ECV types leading to the presumption that each type of ECVs has a different function. Lack of standardized methods for exosome isolation leads to the incapacity to separate exosomes from other similarly sized ECV. Moreover, there is presently no standard measurement for ECV purity. Inconsistencies in describing ECVs are, therefore, present in the literature (116, 117). Guidelines of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles appeal to the researchers to use the generic term “extracellular vesicle” rather than a designation of a specific subtype, which should be carefully defined if used. Furthermore, guidelines suggest that isolation and preparation procedure should be described in detail to allow the replication. Confirmation of ECV function requires demonstration that the effect of ECVs occurs without cell-cell contact, and is not achieved with the soluble, non-ECV associated secreted factors (118).

Apoptosis-Mediated Immunomodulation

Apoptosis might also play an important role in the immunomodulatory effect of MSC. Phagocytic clearance of dying cells (efferocytosis) takes part not only in resolving inflammation and restoring the function of damaged tissue but also in the adaptive and immune responses in inflamed tissues (119). In a study conducted by Luk et al. (114), heat-inactivated MSC modulated monocyte function in the same way as control cells, resulting in increasing IL-10 levels and reducing IFN-γ levels. The results of this study suggest that immune response after MSC administration is not dependent on their active immunomodulatory activity but is derived from other cells, triggered by MSC presence. Recent evidence also shows that innate immune system cells are determinant in mediating the MSC effect. In particular, it was demonstrated by Galleu et al. that MSCs undergo apoptosis in the presence of cytotoxic cells, namely CD56+ NK cells and CD8+ T-cells, after being IV infused. MSC apoptosis induced by cytotoxic cells is MHC-independent and requires physical contact between MSC and cytotoxic cells. Apoptotic MSCs are then phagocytosed by macrophages that ultimately deliver immunosuppressive activity by producing IDO (120). Similar results were obtained by Cheung et al. (121), where monocytes, engulfed with apoptotic MSC, enhanced the inhibition of T-cell proliferation by producing PGE2. Mechanism of apoptosis derived immunosuppression can be, therefore, predictive in clinical therapies where patients displaying high cytotoxicity would be more responsive to MSC (120, 121). de Witte et al. (122) also showed that MSCs were rapidly phagocytosed in the lungs by monocytes and neutrophils after IV administration in mice. Phagocytosis of MSC induces expression of regulatory phenotype in monocytes and induces their polarization, which in turn modulates an adaptive immune system by inducing T-reg cells.

Mitochondrial Transfer

The mitochondrial transfer has been proposed as another mechanism of MSC action. In addition to transferring molecules via ECVs, MSCs seem to be capable of intercellular transfer of organelles via tunneling nanotubes. In 2006 the first mitochondria transfer between MSC and somatic cells was observed (123). This study revealed that active transfer of mitochondria from adult stem cells to somatic cells can rescue aerobic respiration in mammalian cells with non-functional mitochondria. In a mouse model of pneumonia, human BMMSC could transfer their mitochondria through the tunneling nanotubes to alveolar macrophages, which led to the enhanced phagocytosis of macrophages and antimicrobial effect of MSC (124). Mitochondria transfer was also demonstrated in vivo from systemically administered BMMSC to diabetic nephropathy mice model (125). Since mitochondrial transfer is associated with various physiological and pathological activities, the mitochondrial transfer could be potentially useful for future treatments of many pathological conditions.

MSC Homing

Besides their complex mechanisms of immunomodulation, one of the key advantages of MSC-based therapies is their ability to home the damaged tissue. MSC homing is tightly correlated with chemical factors such as chemokines, cytokines, and growth factors. One of the main chemical factors involved in MSC migration is a stromal cell derived factor 1 (SDF-1), a chemokine released from damaged tissue, sending chemo-attractive signals for cells expressing CXCR4 receptors on the outer membrane (126). However, CXCR4 in non-activated MSCs is present only at low levels on the cell surface but at higher levels intracellularly. Upon activation, MSCs can quickly translocate CXCR4 molecules to the cell surface, which enables them to follow the migration cues (127). Besides CXCR4, other chemokine receptors have been identified on MSC membranes that are involved in MSC migration, such as CCR6, CCR9, CXCR3, and CXCR6 (128). Another chemical agent upregulated in injured tissues and inflammation is osteopontin (OPN). This cytokine recruits MSC to the sites of injury through ligation to the integrin β1 that is expressed on MSC upon induction by OPN (129). Among growth factors, fibroblast growth factor (130), vascular endothelial growth factor (131), hepatocyte growth factor (132), insulin-like growth factor-1 (133), and TGF-β1 (134) have been shown to affect MSC homing importantly. Mechanical factors such as mechanical strain, shear stress, matrix stiffness, and microgravity are also importantly involved in MSC homing (135). In stem cell therapies, local transplantation of MSC is a desirable method for cell administration. In some instances, however, intraparenchymal injection of MSC may not be possible due to potential invasiveness (136). Systemic applications, of which IV route is the least invasive, are therefore preferred. The homing of MSC after IV application is faced with various obstacles. Firstly, systemically transplanted MSC must first exit the circulation and then migrate to the site of the injury (137). Secondly, the MSCs after IV transplantation are often sequestrated and then cleared from the lungs (122, 138–142). MSC are relatively large cells, with the average size of 30 μm in suspension. In comparison, pulmonary capillaries are, on average, only 14 μm in diameter, which causes the mechanical entrapment of MSC in the lungs (138). In addition to their size, molecular interactions of MSC with the pulmonary endothelium may be another reason for their accumulation in the lungs. Wang et al. (143) were the first to show that the critical cause of MSC entrapment in lung tissue is the excessive expression and activation of integrins. Their study demonstrated that the blockade of integrins resulted in substantially reduced lung entrapment of MSCs in mice, increased levels of circulating MSCs in the blood, and enhanced homing of MSCs toward the target tissues. Monitoring MSCs after systemic infusion also demonstrated that MSCs are short lived and often disappear 24 h after infusion (122, 139). The long-term beneficial effects of MSCs are thus somehow contradictory to their short lifetime (144). Interestingly, their therapeutic effect may not be correlated with cells' viability, as it was shown by de Witte et al. (122) that despite the accumulation of cells in the lungs and short viability after IV administration, MSC exhibit long term effect through the apoptosis and phagocytosis by immune cells.

To avoid problems with IV administration, other routes have been tested, such as intraarterial (IA) and intraperitoneal (IP) administration. IA administration may reduce the accumulation of MSC in the filtering organs and is thus a promising way for stem cell treatment of ischemic injuries (98). IA injection of MSC may allow better distribution of cells. Centralized IA administration of MSC via the femoral artery in an intact porcine model showed increased uptake of MSC in various organs, especially in the liver (98). The downside of IA administration is that it is technically a more challenging procedure than IV injection (145) and there is a risk of a possible intravascular occlusion (145, 146). Sole et al. (145) observed arterial thrombosis in horses when the intraarterial application of allogeneic BMMSC was performed via IA regional limb perfusion. Interestingly, the complication of thrombosis was not detected when performing IA injection without using a tourniquet, indicating that a thrombosis is a consequence of blood stasis and not the MSC application (147). Similarly, IA injection of MSC was proven feasible with allogeneic equine BMMSC injected into the cranial tibial artery in horses, also without a tourniquet (148). Nishimura et al. (149) also proved the safety and efficacy of the IA application of MSCs by administering autologous BMMSCs via the hepatic artery in a canine model of liver fibrosis. IP administration of MSCs is rarely used, but carries the potential to reach intraabdominal sites and appears relatively safe when used in cats (150). IP administration of MSCs was shown to be beneficial also in the treatment of bladder detrusor deterioration in rats (151) and in inflammatory bowel disease in mice (93). Moreover, the IP approach was used to inject Neo-islets, aggregates of ADMSCs and pancreatic islet cells in an FDA guided pilot study in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in pet dogs. Neo-islets appear to engraft, redifferentiate, produce insulin, and do not trigger auto- or alloimmune response (152).

MSC Preconditioning With Proinflammatory Cytokines

Since many patients treated with MSCs suffer from acute or chronic inflammatory diseases, the inflammatory environment is likely to be present in vivo when MSCs are being administered. Priming MSCs with IFN-γ before treatment, therefore, imitates the environment in which MSCs will be present in the body. It was proposed that inflammatory conditions enhance the interaction between MSCs and B-cells. Luk et al. (70) showed that MSCs cultured under inflammatory enviroment significantly reduced B-cell proliferation and IgG production by B-cells via induction of indolamine-2,3-dioxygenase activity (IDO), whereas MSCs cultured under non-inflammatory conditions increased the percentage B-regs, but did not influence their proliferation. Tissue origin should also be considered when deciding about priming of MSCs with IFN-γ as, for example, canine MSCs from Wharton jelly are not influenced by IFN-γ (102). In correlation with preconditioning MSCs to improve their therapeutic potential, preconditioning of ECVs has also been shown to be beneficial for their therapeutic effectiveness. Recently it was reported that ECVs from canine MSCs, preconditioned with antiinflammatory cytokines, enhanced macrophage polarization and generation of Tregs in murine colitis (92). However, some studies also reported adverse effects of preconditioning MSC with proinflammatory cytokines. IFN-γ pretreatment enhanced the immunogenicity of MSC with the upregulation of MHC (71) and MHC II expression (153–155). IFN-γ pretreatment also importantly upregulates the expression of genes involved in apoptosis, reflecting negative influence on MSC (156). It was also shown that treatment with both IFN-γ and TNF-α induced apoptosis in mice MSCs. Apoptosis was stimulated by the expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and the generation of nitric oxide, required for apoptosis (157). To avoid adverse effects of preconditioning with IFN-γ with simultaneous enchancement of their immunosuppressive abilities, pretreatment of MSCs with IL-17A was proposed as an alternative (156). A study by Brandt et al. (158) demonstrated that equine ADMSCs are compromised in an inflammatory environment. High concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines TNF-α and IL-1β and the presence of leukocytes increased ADMSCs proliferation potential and osteogenic differentiation, but negatively affected cells' viability, engraftment, chondrogenic and adipogenic differentiation potential, and expression of the musculoskeletal markers. Conflicting results from various studies about preconditioning MSC with proinflammatory cytokines, therefore, suggest that, although there is a potential beneficial effect of such pretreatments, these should be considered very carefully, and further studies will be needed to clarify potential positive effects of such preconditioning.

Clinical use of MSC in Veterinary Medicine

To date, stem cells have been used, mostly experimentally, for treatments of a variety of diseases in different animal species. The initial focus of regenerative veterinary medicine was directed to the orthopedic diseases, but the focus is now rapidly expanding to other areas such as orodental and digestive tract diseases, liver, renal, cardiac, respiratory, neuromuscular, dermal, olfactory, and reproductive system diseases. Stem cell treatments were most often used in dogs and horses for various diseases of various organ systems, and in cats for renal, respiratory, and inflammatory diseases.

Musculoskeletal System Diseases

Tendons and Ligaments Diseases

Traumatic and stress injuries of tendons and ligaments naturally heal with the formation of a scar tissue, which is functionally deficient in comparison to the healthy tissue. While the initial injury causes a reduction in structural stiffness, fibrosis obliterates the physiological architecture, and function of the tendon or ligament (159). This results in compromised locomotor function prone to re-injury (160). The optimal treatment should, therefore, aim at the restoring normal structure and function of the tissue. Traditional therapies for tendon injuries in horses are based on cooling (161), bandage, and rehabilitation period with controlled exercise. Pharmacological treatments include the use of systemic and local corticosteroids or other anti-inflammatory drugs (162), but surgical treatment is often required (163, 164). These conservative techniques do not allow for complete tissue healing, reinjury is common, and often animals aren't able to return to the preinjury performance level (162). Ideal treatment should, therefore, aim to regenerate normal tendon matrix. The use of MSC has been introduced as an alternative to the traditional approach because it represents a potential tool for better tissue regeneration (165, 166). Regenerative cell-based therapy aims toward healing with the proper formation of collagen fibers and successful regaining of normal tendon activity with a lesser risk for reoccurrences. It is predicted that MSC isolated from the same tissue that needs treatment would be the most adequate source of MSC for stem cell therapy. The best source of stem cells for tendinopathies would, therefore, be tendon-derived stem cells (167), but the isolation of stem cells from tendon tissue is very challenging, and no standard induction protocol for tendonogenesis exists (168). Stem cells from other sources, mainly from adipose tissue and bone marrow, were therefore used for tendon regeneration. Autologous BMMSC implantation into the horse superficial digital flexor tendon was first reported in 2003 (165). After cells were injected into 11 racehorses with superficial digital flexor tendon lesions, significant clinical recovery was reported (169). Similarly, in a cohort study including 141 racehorses with naturally occurred superficial digital flexor tendon injury, intralesional injection of autologous BMMSC resulted in <28% of reinjuries in all horses with 2 years follow up (170). Results showed a significant reduction in reinjury rate compared to those from a similar study of the same type of injury and follow-up, where horses were treated with intralesional injection of hyaluronan, beta aminopropionitrile fumarate or polysulfated glycosaminoglycans (160). It was demonstrated by Smith et al. (171) that autologous BMMSC treatment of naturally occurring tendinopathies induces the formation of tissue resembling a normal tendon matrix rather than a fibrous tissue that is formed during the natural healing process. In addition to the autologous MSC therapy, promising results were also reported with allogeneic MSC therapy for tendon and ligament disorders such as tendinitis of superficial and deep digital flexor tendons and desmitis of the suspensory and inferior check ligaments (172). However, in surgically induced lesions of the equine superficial digital flexor tendons, autologous BM- or ADMSC therapy rendered no or very small improvement in comparison to other treatments like platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (173, 174).

Similar to horses, dogs were also subjected to experimental MSC treatments. A common injury in dogs is a tear of a cranial crucial ligament in the stifle joint (175). Its rupture is associated with stifle osteoarthritis and is the most common cause of lameness in adult dogs (176). Currently, the recommended therapy is a surgical correction (177).

Positive treatment results from several studies highlighted the value of MSC use in this condition. It was demonstrated that the level of post-operative lameness and pain after single intra-articular injection of allogeneic BMMSC could be a valuable alternative to 1 month course of oral administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in dogs requiring tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) (178). It was shown that intraarticularly injected autologous BMMSCs engraft to the site of the injured cranial crucial ligament (179) and have an anti-inflammatory effect. Post-operatively intraarticular or IV injection of autologous MSC in dogs with the same condition resulted in a decreased level of CD8+ T-cells, decreased serum and synovia CRP, and decreased synovial IFN-γ levels that persisted over 8 weeks after BMMSC injection (180). In cases of partial tears with no destabilization of the stifle joint, where surgery is not the optimal solution, promising results were collected from the retrospective study, where autologous BMMSC treatment in combination with PRP prevented progression of further degenerative changes in the joint and contralateral ligament rupture in dogs (181).

Joint Diseases

Because of the relative hypocellularity and avascularization, cartilage tissue has a limited capacity of self-repair. In horses, it is further affected by the enormous loading forces and mechanical stress that are placed on the articular surfaces during the performance (182). One of the most common reasons for equine athletic career-ending and chronic lameness are joint diseases, with osteoarthritis being the most prevalent (183). Conventional treatment of musculoskeletal injuries, involving the damage to the articular cartilage, ligaments, and menisci is often associated with poor prognosis for the athletic performance of horses (184, 185). The in vivo effectiveness of intra-articular MSC treatment of bone, meniscal, and cartilage conditions in horses has been reported. The most studied and described locomotive system disorder in horses is bone spavin, a degenerative joint disease in which conventional treatment is based on the application of anti-inflammatory corticosteroids for decreasing pain and inflammation. Results obtained from the study in which 16 horses with bone spavin were treated intraarticularly with autologous ADMSC suggest the positive and long-lasting effect of MSC therapy. No signs of lameness were observed 180 days after treatment in the treated horses in comparison to the untreated control group. This was confirmed by scintigraphic examination, revealing no signs of inflammation process in tarsal joints of treated horses when compared to the control group where inflammation was still present (186). MSC treatment is also very promising in horses with meniscal damage. Horses treated with intraarticular administration of autologous BMMSC returned to work in a higher percentage than those treated with arthroscopy alone (187). In one study, 80 horses with osteoarthritis were treated with allogeneic ADMSC, and a significant reduction in the lameness was observed during 90 days follow-up period, suggesting the beneficial effect of allogeneic cells (188). Similarly, allogeneic umbilical cord derived MSC for the treatment of osteoarthritis of metacarpophalangeal/metatarsophalangeal joint in horses resulted in a significantly improved lameness over 6 months, but no clinical differences were observed with either single or repeated MSC injection (65). Some studies, however, did report adverse clinical responses after repeated intraarticular injections of allogeneic MSCs in horses with osteoarthritis (60). Even single injections of allogeneic MSCs have been reported to induce mild to moderate local inflammatory signs (64). Several studies in dogs demonstrated that MSC administration into the arthritic joints decrease the patients' discomfort and increase their functional ability. A significant improvement in lameness was confirmed in dogs with stifle osteoarthritis (189) demonstrated by the significantly delayed progression of osteoarthritis in autologous ADMSC treated joints compared to placebo-treated joints. Similar results were reported by Black et al. (190) and Vilar et al. (191) in dogs with hip osteoarthritis. The effect of intraarticular injection of autologous ADMSCs in treating canine osteoarthritis of different joints seems to be long-lasting, as shown in a study with up to 4-year follow-up (192). Significant improvement of MSC therapy for treating osteoarthritis has also been shown with the use of allogeneic ADMSCs. In 74 dogs treated with allogeneic ADMSCs in a prospective, randomized, masked, and placebo-controlled study, no adverse effects were reported, and efficacy in reducing clinical signs was shown in comparison to the placebo group (193). In another extensive study performed on 203 dogs with severe osteoarthritis, causing severe chronic pain, and lameness, results showed excellent improvement in 90% of young dogs and good improvement in 60% of older dogs 10 weeks after the treatment (194). In a dog model of osteoarthritis treated with allogeneic umbilical cord derived MSCs, cartilage repair was demonstrated in the form of cartilage neogenesis, decreased joint fluid content, reduced inflammatory response, and improved healing of the surrounding tissues in comparison to the control untreated group (27). Contrary to study in horses, repeated allogeneic MSC therapy was shown to be safe with only mild and self-limiting inflammatory reactions without adverse effects even 2 years after intraarticular MSC injection (63). MSC therapy of canine osteoarthritis, either autologous or allogeneic, was also tested and proved to be beneficial in combination with PRP or hyaluronic acid (191, 195, 196). In the comparison of ADMSC and PRP treatments in dogs' osteoarthritis, MSC therapy had stronger and more beneficial effects (197).

MSC therapy in treating musculoskeletal disorders has proven remarkably effective, especially in horses with tendon injuries, bone spavin, and meniscal damages, and in dogs with osteoarthritic conditions. Such positive outcomes of MSC therapies are thus decreasing the need for prolonged local or systemic use of anti-inflammatory drugs with their known toxic side effects. However, additional studies are needed to broaden our knowledge on mechanisms of action of MSCs, and especially allogeneic MSCs, as not all studies provided positive results on their safety when used in the therapy. MSC derived ECVs might represent a promising alternative to the allogeneic MSC therapy as they mimic several biological actions of MSCs. ECV therapy has already been tested for treating suspensory ligament injury in a stallion, rendering positive results shown as increased lesion filling, improved angiogenesis, and elasticity of the damaged tendon (111).

Orodental Diseases

Oral pain and mastication problems can have a major impact on the quality of the animal's life. Many oral diseases can also lead to systemic problems (198). Oral diseases such as dental caries, periodontal disease, permanent tooth loss, oral mucosal lesions, oropharyngeal cancer, and dental trauma are also one of the major public health problems worldwide (199). With the expanding development of regenerative cell therapy, stem cells have attracted interest in the healing of orodental tissues. Studies focus on MSCs immunomodulatory effects to induce regeneration of dental and periodontal tissues, and differentiation potential of MSCs to improve implant strength and bone tissue repair in the alveolar defects. In addition to usual sources of stem cells such as bone marrow and adipose tissue, cells derived from local tissues such as dental pulp stem cells (DPSC) (200–202) or periodontal ligament stem cells (PDLSC) (203, 204) are studied as a therapeutic option in orodental diseases. In experimental dog models, autologous BMMSCs or xenogeneic periodontal ligament MSCs have proven beneficial in periodontal ligament reconstruction, when combined with the growth factors (205), fibrin glue, PRP (206), ephrinB2—a membrane protein regulating bone homeostasis (204) or with a construct of porous biphasic calcium phosphate (203). Allogeneic ADMSCs alone are also capable of inducing periodontal tissue regeneration in the mini pig periodontal defect model (207). For dental pulp regeneration, autologous (200) and allogeneic (201) stem cells from dental pulp or autologous BMMSCs (208) were efficient in dental pulp regeneration in canine models. Although these studies show promise in orodental tissue regeneration, others have reported no beneficial effect of stem cells in dental conditions, such as defects associated with dental implants (209).

Studies conducted on animal models do indeed represent a basis and reference for the use of stem cells and tissue engineering in promoting orodental tissue regeneration. However, extensive research is still needed to prove the efficacy and usefulness of stem cell treatments for orodental problems on actual patients with naturally occurring diseases.

However, very encouraging results are emerging from the MSC treatment of feline chronic gingivostomatitis (FCGS), a painful and debilitating oral condition in cats, characterized by chronic inflammation of gingiva extending to the buccal and caudal oral mucosa. Cats suffering from FCGS are presented with anorexia, oral pain, weight loss, ptyalism, halitosis, and lack of grooming (210). Current treatment options include medications such as corticosteroids (211), cyclosporin (212), and surgical extraction of teeth (213) and have variable response rate and several possible adverse effects (214). Arzi et al. (215) showed that IV treatment with autologous ADMSC resulted in complete clinical and histological resolution or reduction in clinical disease severity in most cats. Immunomodulation of MSC was demonstrated by the normalization of immune cell subsets, serum protein, and cytokine levels. The results of the study also suggested the absence of CD8Io cells as a biomarker to predict the response to MSC therapy (215). Interestingly, allogeneic ADMSCs seem to have lower clinical efficacy in comparison to autologous MSC in treating FCGS (216). The clinical, histologic and systemic response was demonstrated in 70% of cats with FCGS treated with IV administration of allogeneic ADMSC (217).

Digestive tract Diseases

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an autoimmune condition with chronic hypersensitivity reaction in the intestinal mucosa of unknown etiology (218). Some dogs are refractory to the traditional lifelong treatments using cyclosporine or steroids (219). Single IV infusion of allogeneic ADMSCs resulted in clinical remission in 9 out of 11 dogs with severe IBD 6 weeks after the treatment together with a significant increase in albumin, cobalamin, and folate levels in the blood (219). IBD is also relatively common in cats with chronic vomiting and diarrhea. In a placebo-controlled blinded study, cats with IBD were treated with allogeneic ADMSC. The owners reported significant improvement or complete resolution of clinical signs in 5 out of 7 cats. In contrast, in cats receiving placebo, no change, or even worsening of the clinical symptoms were reported (220).

Due to their immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects, MSCs seem to be a suitable alternative therapy for dogs and cats with IBD. Results of preliminary studies are promising, but significant follow-up studies and further research is needed to establish MSC treatment as a safe and effective method for treating IBD in animals.

Liver Diseases

Several studies focused on stem cell treatments of liver disease in dogs. Yan et al. (142) examined the effect of IV administration of autologous ADMSC for artificially induced acute hepatic injury in dogs. ADMSC homed to the liver, levels of liver enzymes in the peripheral blood were reduced, and liver tissue structure was restored after the therapy, indicating a potential for MSC use in liver diseases in pets. MSC were also used in a canine model of liver cirrhosis. IV application of autologous BMMSC significantly decreased the area of the liver fibrosis and improved liver function in the group receiving cells without any adverse side effects (221). Similarly to the IV, IA administration of BMMSC in a canine model of liver fibrosis was shown to be safe, but, interestingly, the effect on reducing levels of the liver enzymes in peripheral blood lasted longer with IA application of MSC (149). Autologous ADMSCs were also used repeatedly IV to treat 10 dogs with degenerative hepatopathy. All animals exhibited significantly improved liver function concerning the decline in hepatic biomarkers after each application in comparison to the control group (222). A clinical case of hepatocutaneous syndrome treated with MSC was also reported. Allogeneic ADMSCs were administered repeatedly either into the liver parenchyma or IV. The dog survival with regressed or limited clinical signs was longer than expected for this disease (223).

Since IV administration of MSCs results in the accumulation of cells in the liver after being cleared from the lungs (122, 142), IV route of the administration seem to be logical for treating liver diseases that are responsive to the MSC therapy in animals. Yet conclusions on the best administration route and also on the MSC efficacy and safety of allogeneic MSCs in treating liver diseases is limited by a low number of studies conducted on actual patients. Therefore, further studies are needed to address these issues.

Renal Diseases

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a common medical condition in geriatric cats and is characterized by chronic tubulointerstitial nephritis, tubular atrophy, and interstitial fibrosis. Currently, renal transplantation is the only therapy that may restore renal function (224).

Stem cell based therapies may, therefore, present less aggressive treatment options. Due to severe side effects and anesthesia associated risks of intrarenal stem cell inoculation, IV application of stem cells is the preferred choice of cell delivery (225, 226). However, IV administration of allogeneic ADMSC in cats with kidney disease was not associated with any side effects, but neither were any short-term improvements in the renal function reported (227, 228). However, in a study conducted by Vidane et al. (226) cats with spontaneous CKD were repeatedly injected IV with allogeneic MSC derived from the feline amniotic membranes, and after the second administration of MSC, significant improvement in the renal function was observed. Specifically, serum creatinine and urine protein concentrations decreased, and urine specific gravity increased. Considerable improvement was also reported in the overall clinical condition of cats, including food intake and social behavior.

Contradictory results from a few studies hinder the conclusion on the suitability of MSC therapy in cats with CKD. Further studies are necessary to determine the possible influence of different factors that might affect the results of MSC therapy in cats with CKD, such as tissue source of MSC, single or repeated administrations of MSCs, and time of application in regard to the stage of the disease. Additionally, too few studies have been conducted with regard to the safety of allogeneic cells in cats, and this will have to be further explored.

Cardiac Diseases

In human medicine, cardiac stem cell therapies directed toward myocardial repair following the acute or chronic myocardial infarction are being used for several years (229). Primary myocardial infarction is rarely observed in the companion animals (230). However, in large and giant dog breeds, dilated cardiomyopathy is a fairly common disease. Inevitable progression of this disorder leads to the refractory congestive heart failure and death (231). An experimental treatment for this condition was performed in Dobermans with retrograde coronary venous allogeneic ADMSC delivery. Although the treatment was safe, no beneficial effects of stem cell therapy were observed (231). Similarly, treatment of dilated cardiomyopathy with allogeneic cardiosphere-derived cells did not have any beneficial effects after cells were transplanted into the coronary vessels (232). In smaller dog breeds, the most common cardiac disease is the degenerative valvular disease, which is often complicated by ventricular dilation and dysfunction (233). Petchdee and Sompeewong investigated the effect of IV administration of puppy deciduous teeth derived stem cells on the degenerative valvular disease (234). Their results showed an improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction, but this was a small study, and more studies will be needed to establish any potential positive effects.

Respiratory Diseases

Respiratory diseases are a common problem also in veterinary medicine. Especially in horses, asthma, comprised of several diseases such as recurrent airway obstruction (RAO) or inflammatory airway disease, is a severe medical condition for which there is no successful treatment available. The disease develops in the presence of moldy hay, dusty straw, and pollens. Horses suffer from frequent coughing, increased respiratory effort at rest, and exercise intolerance. Clinical signs can be controlled by the administration of corticosteroids, bronchodilators, or changing environment. Medications may have adverse side effects, and new therapy options are needed. Barussi et al. (235) studied the effect of the intratracheal application of bone marrow derived mononuclear cells on the course of the respiratory inflammation in horses affected by RAO. Comparison of treatment with single intratracheal administration of autologous cells and oral therapy with dexamethasone showed that bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells improved clinical signs and the inflammatory response in horses suffering from RAO. Levels of IL-10 increased after the cell treatment and were significantly higher than in the control group treated with dexamethasone. The results of this study correlate with positive results of experimental studies with induced respiratory conditions in dogs (236) and cats (237).

Neuromuscular Diseases and Injuries

One of the most common neuromuscular injuries in both humans and animals are spinal cord injuries (SCI), which often result in a lifelong disabilities (238). In dogs, spinal cord injury could be induced by trauma or herniated vertebral disc. In both pathologies, stem cell treatments were tested with beneficial results. Autologous BMMSC therapy was tested for spontaneous injury of the spinal cord due to spinal trauma in dogs with locally administered cells through hemilaminectomy. Mild to moderate improvements in gait, nociception, and proprioception were observed in some of the animals (238, 239). In another study, allogeneic BMMSCs were combined with the standard medication therapy and this combination induced significantly better improvement in the functional recovery of the patients with traumatic spinal cord injury in comparison to the conventional medication alone (240). Similarly, as in MSC therapy of dogs with traumatic spinal cord injury, positive results of MSC therapy were also observed in acute disc herniation in dogs. Dogs with acute paraplegia had faster locomotor recovery after the epidural application of ADMSCs in comparison to dogs treated with surgical decompression alone (241). However, in dogs with naturally occurring degenerative intervertebral disc disease, transplantation of autologous BMMSC did not affect clinical outcomes, and no regenerative effects were detected in any of the three dog patients (242).

Results of the studies using MSC for the treatment of the traumatic spinal cord injuries and disc herniation in dogs did show some positive effects, but future studies are necessary to find a way to augment currently observed therapeutic effects of the MSC therapies. One possibility is a tissue engineering approach. In one study, constructed canine MSC-derived neural network tissue was transplanted into the spinal cord and resulted in the gradual restoration of paralyzed limb motor function (243). More studies and further developments are therefore needed to establish whether cell therapy and tissue engineering approaches are beneficial for spinal cord injuries, especially in patients with spontaneous injuries where the progress of the disease is often very different from the experimentally induced pathologies.

Skin Diseases and Wound Healing

Unsuccessful wound healing is often the consequence of a variety of inadequate cellular and molecular mechanisms. It often leads to the persistent, chronic wound, accompanied by the discomfort for the patient. Therefore, for the treatment of chronic wounds with severe inflammation and hyper-plastic response, MSCs might be potentially a viable treating option due to their anti-inflammatory and regenerative potential (244). Several studies in animal models have shown the beneficial effect of MSC treatment in wound healing in goats (245), sheep (246), horses (247), and dogs (248). Significantly improved cutaneous wound healing was also achieved using MSC derived ECV injected locally to treat circular wounds created in dogs (112). In addition to animal models, significant improvement of naturally occurring wounds has been documented in several studies using stem cell therapy. In four horses with naturally occurring infected wounds unresponsive to conventional therapies, peripheral blood stem cells were injected locally and systemically. In all four cases, the positive outcome of the treatment was seen as crusts formation and small scars in the center of the wound, leading to the tissue overgrowth within 4 weeks after treatment (36). Complete healing of the non-healing skin wound was also observed in a filly after repeated local application of heterologous Wharton/s Jelly derived MSC with the use of carboxymethylcellulose gel. The wound healed completely in 5 days (249).

In addition to wound healing, MSCs were also used for the treatment of atopic dermatitis, one of the most common skin diseases in dogs. Contradictory results of two studies using a similar number of IV administrated ADMSC in dogs with atopic dermatitis have been reported. In the first one, no significant improvement of clinical signs or pruritus was observed (250). The second study included 22 dogs with atopic dermatitis, non-responsive to conventional therapy. Pruritus decreased significantly after 1 week and cadesi-04 scores after 1 month after IV administration of allogeneic ADMSC. Remission of clinical signs lasted for at least 6 months, with no adverse side events observed (251).

Several studies in both laboratory animals and clinical veterinary patients suggest that stem cells might be interesting novel therapy to promote chronic wound healing. But as with other diseases, numerous questions remain unanswered and will have to be addressed in future studies before such treatments will enter general clinical practice. Regarding AD in dogs, the data are very limited, and, therefore, it is impossible to predict at the moment whether stem cell treatments might prove to be beneficial in the future.

Eye Diseases

Stem cell therapy is also investigated in the ophthalmology. Some eye diseases, for example, corneal ulcers are incurable with available methods. Autologous peripheral blood stem cells were used for the treatment of three clinical cases of chronic corneal ulcers and one case of retinal detachment in the horse, all non-responsive to the conventional therapy. Cells were applied either IV or locally into the ophthalmic artery, by subconjunctival injection or in the form of eye drop formulation. All four patients showed significant improvement after treatment, with the restoration of the epithelial surface as well as a decrease in inflammation (37). Subconjunctival administration of autologous BMMSC also led to the improvement of immune mediated keratitis in 3 out of 4 horses, seen as increased corneal clarity, reduced neovascularization of the area, and decreased surface irregularities (252). Immunomodulatory effects of MSC could potentially change the course of equine recurrent uveitis (ERU), as increased expression of IFN-γ by cd4+ T cells from horses with ERU decreased after incubation with ADMSC in vitro. Activation of CD4+- T cells was shown to decrease via contact dependent mechanism and PGE2 signaling (253). In cats, MSC therapy was proposed for the treatment of feline eosinophilic keratitis (FEK), as allogeneic ADMSC implanted subconjunctivally showed promising results seen as an effective decrease in the clinical signs of FEK throughout the study (254). In dogs, MSC therapy has been shown as an effective therapeutic alternative for treating keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS) or dry eye disease. Allogeneic ADMSC implanted locally around the lacrimal gland of both eyes significantly reduced clinical signs with a sustained effect during a study period (255). Similarly, the study by Sgrignoli et al. (256) demonstrated that the expression of KCS markers CD4, IL-6, IL-1, and TNF-α in dogs was decreased significantly 6 months after repeated topical administration of allogeneic ADMSC into the conjunctival sac.

Based on the published studies, MSC therapy holds a great promise in regenerative eye medicine and presents innovative solutions for several eye diseases in animals, such as corneal ulcers, immune mediated and eosinophilic keratitis, recurrent uveitis, and dry keratoconjunctivitis. However, additional blinded prospective studies, especially for recurrent uveitis in horses, are needed to assess the in vivo effect of MSC administration more accurately. Continuous scientific research is undoubtedly needed to fully understand the complexity and severity of specific diseases and regenerative effects of stem cells in the eye therapies, which would contribute to bring stem cell therapy closer to translation into clinics.

Reproductive System Diseases

Many studies are attempting to find treatments for fertility improvement, both for commercial purposes in farm animals and for the translation into human medicine. The goal of restoring fertility with an intraovarian injection of BMMSC was, however, not accomplished, and ovarian function could not be improved or restored in aged mares (257). Similarly, no changes in sperm parameters or fertility rates were observed after intratesticular administration of allogeneic BMMSC in stallions. However, the safety of the procedure at least suggests that such an approach could be theoretically exploited to treat degenerative testicular conditions (258). Interestingly, dog sperms seem to be susceptible to the treatment with ADMSC derived ECV during cryopreservation, as the addition of ECVs reduced the number of damaged sperms decrease of ROS in thawed semen (259). Based on the results from the treatment of other inflammatory conditions, there is a hope that pathologies of reproductive organs will also be susceptible to the MSC treatment. In mares, for example, endometriosis is an incurable degenerative disease of the uterus and is causing substantial economic losses in the equine industry (260). To exploit MSCs immunomodulatory properties in uterine pathologies, endometrial MSCs were investigated and isolated from sows (261), cows (262), ewes (263), goats (264), and mares (265). MSCs delivery to the uterus of mares with endometriosis has already been proposed by Mambelli et al. (266), who demonstrated that MSCs remain in the uterus up to 21 days after intrauterine application. Still, additional studies are needed to assess potential immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties of endometrial MSC and their potential in the treatment of endometriosis (260). In addition to the reproductive system pathologies, MSC therapy is also investigated for the potential treatment of mastitis in farm animals, showing an antiproliferative effect against Staphylococcus aureus mediated mastitis in cows (267) and reparative and antifibrotic effect in goat chronic mastitis (268).

Safety and Regulatory Aspects of Stem Cell Therapies in Veterinary Medicine

The European Medicines Agency's (EMA) Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use (CVMP) has proposed some basic guidelines for stem cell based medications for veterinary use. Strict microbiological monitoring during the entire manufacturing process from the sourcing of materials to the finished product is essential. Since the use of allogeneic MSC in dogs and horses is increasing, so are the raising questions for manufacturers, authorities, and users. Currently, no specific guidance is available. Safety aspects of extraneous agents concerning veterinary medicinal products are included in the guidelines for the production and control of immunological veterinary medicinal products. In these guidelines is a list of viruses and bacteria for horses and dogs that should not be present in the medicinal products, and this should be adhered to also with the allogeneic MSC. Furthermore, investigations for protozoa may be relevant for dogs and horses depending on the animal region of origin, a prevalent epidemiological situation in their region of origin, and the travel history of the animal donors. Furthermore, as a general guideline, it is recommended that cell donors are always clinically healthy. If cells from newborn animals or placental tissues are used, it is advisable to test mothers for the presence of any infectious agents. To demonstrate the absence of disease-causing agents. A combination of donor screening using anamnesis and clinical information, donor testing for the presence of specific disease agents and product (cells ready for therapy) testing should be applied. All material with biological origin needed for collection, selection, culture, and modification of cells should also be clearly specified and evaluated for the absence of any potentially harmful agents. Furthermore, aseptic manufacturing is necessary for reducing the presence of extraneous agents (269). Within the EU, there is currently no central legislation about stem cell therapies in veterinary medicine, so currently, each EU member state regulates the field independently. However, this is expected to change in the near future with EMA issuing guidelines and legislative rules for regenerative veterinary medicine.

In 2015 the USA Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published recommendations for the use of cell-based products in animals. According to this, cell-based products, including animal stem cell based products (ASCP) that are intended for use in the diagnosis, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of diseases, are regulated as new animal medicines and require a premarket review to be legally marketed. The requirements for approval include the demonstration of safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality. Evaluation of tumorigenicity, immunogenicity, donor selection criteria, the transmission of infectious agents, long term safety, cell survival, biodistribution, and ectopic tissue formation are required (48). In the future, additional regulatory guidelines can be expected. It is unclear whether these new regulations will significantly affect the advancement of stem cell trials and the development of novel therapies (230), but any new regulations should be prepared and approved by experts from various fields, from cell biology to clinical veterinary medicine. Currently, no animal cell based treatments are FDA-approved. Considering a great promise that veterinary regenerative medicine holds for the future, FDA started the Veterinary Innovation Program or VIP to help manufacturers/providers of stem cell therapies with obtaining high-quality data from well-conducted, well-controlled, and well-designed scientific studies (270).

Summary

Veterinary regenerative medicine is an active area of research. Significant advances in developing safe and effective stem cell therapies have been made in recent years. Notable outcomes of MSC therapies have been reported, especially for orthopedic conditions in dogs and horses, but important advancements in MSC therapy have also been made in treating other conditions such as FCGS, IBD, and wound healing. Positive outcomes of many studies suggest a great promise for the future of stem cell therapies for various animal diseases, but numerous issues need to be addressed. One of them is the optimal source for MSC isolation. Adipose and bone marrow derived MSC were used in the majority of the studies, but mostly because they are easily obtainable and easy to work with. Therefore, other stem cells from different tissues might prove in the future to be more suitable for the treatments of certain diseases.

Furthermore, the effect of age and potentially sex on the medicinal properties of MSC will have to be established in future studies. Time with regard to the disease progression, dosage of cells, and mode of MSC application also vary widely between studies. There are no standard protocols established that would suggest the optimal treatment protocols for specific diseases. IV application of MSCs has been often used for treating various animal diseases, despite some suggestions about short viability and rapid clearance of cells. However, some studies suggest that healing immunomodulatory processes in the body are induced by apoptosis-mediated immunomodulation through the immune cells, and this could prolong the action of MSCs. Lung entrapment of MSC after IV application is also an important issue in the field of systemic stem cell therapies. Although other routes of administration have been considered to avoid lung entrapment, the main alternative to IV administration of MSC might be systemic administration of ECV. Early studies suggest that ECVs could be a promising, cell-free stem cell therapy that would prevent lung entrapment and avoid possible pulmonary embolism caused by IV application of MSC, but further studies are needed about both efficacy and safety of ECVs. Another unresolved question is the use of autologous or allogeneic cells. Autologous cells are certainly safer, but their use is more complicated and expensive for the animal owners. Allogeneic cells from healthy donors are, therefore, a possible alternative, but there are still unresolved questions about their immunogenicity and potential to trigger an immune response in the recipient of cells.

Despite considerable advancements in veterinary regenerative medicine in recent years, this field is still in its infancy and much more work is needed to resolve many questions before proven, standardized therapies could be offered to the clinical patients. We live in exciting times as new regenerative therapies are on the rise. One can be hopeful that the continuous research in this area will lead us to the point when the stem cell treatments for many currently untreatable diseases will not be a mere possibility but a realistic and accessible choice for the patients in both veterinary and human medicine.

Author Contributions

MVo and NA drafted the manuscript. MVe and GM edited the draft. All authors contributed to the final manuscript.

Funding

MVo and NA are recipients of doctoral fellowships from Slovenian research agency. Research programme P4-0053 from Slovenian research agency.

Conflict of Interest

GM is partial owner of Animacel ltd.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

1. Morrison SJ, Wandycz AM, Hemmati HD, Wright DE, Weissman IL. Identification of a lineage of multipotent hematopoietic progenitors. Development. (1997) 124:1929–39.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

2. Evans MJ, Kaufman MH. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature. (1981) 292:154–6. doi: 10.1038/292154a0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. (2006) 126:663–76. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Wagers AJ, Weissman IL. Plasticity of adult stem cells. Cell. (2004) 116:639–48. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00208-9

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Martin GR. Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (1981) 78:7634–8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.78.12.7634

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Thomson JA, Marshall VS. Primate embryonic stem cells. Curr Top Dev Biol. (1998) 38:133–65. doi: 10.1016/S0070-2153(08)60246-X

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Thomson JA, Itskovitz-Eldor J, Shapiro SS, Waknitz MA, Swiergiel JJ, Marshall VS, et al. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science. (1998) 282:1145–7. doi: 10.1126/science.282.5391.1145

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Caplan AI. Mesenchymal stem cells. J Orthop Res. (1991) 9:641–50. doi: 10.1002/jor.1100090504

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Friedenstein AJ, Petrakova KV, Kurolesova AI, Frolova GP. Heterotopic of bone marrow. Analysis of precursor cells for osteogenic and hematopoietic tissues. Transplantation. (1968) 6:230–47. doi: 10.1097/00007890-196803000-00009

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Dennis JE, Merriam A, Awadallah A, Yoo JU, Johnstone B, Caplan AI. A quadripotential mesenchymal progenitor cell isolated from the marrow of an adult mouse. J Bone Miner Res. (1999) 14:700–9. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.1999.14.5.700

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Miyahara Y, Nagaya N, Kataoka M, Yanagawa B, Tanaka K, Hao H, et al. Monolayered mesenchymal stem cells repair scarred myocardium after myocardial infarction. Nat Med. (2006) 12:459–65. doi: 10.1038/nm1391

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Quinn C, Flake AW. In vivo differentiation potential of mesenchymal stem cells: prenatal and postnatal model systems. Transfus Med Hemother. (2008) 35:239–47. doi: 10.1159/000129129

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

13. Niess H, Thomas MN, Schiergens TS, Kleespies A, Jauch KW, Bruns C, et al. Genetic engineering of mesenchymal stromal cells for cancer therapy: turning partners in crime into Trojan horses. Innov Surg Sci. (2016) 1:19–32. doi: 10.1515/iss-2016-0005

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Caplan AI. Mesenchymal stem cells: time to change the name! stem cells. Transl Med. (2017). 6:1445–51. doi: 10.1002/sctm.17-0051

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

15. Dominici M, Le Blanc K, Mueller I, Slaper-Cortenbach I, Marini F, Krause D, et al. Minimal criteria for defining multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells. The international society for cellular therapy position statement. Cytotherapy. (2006) 8:315–7. doi: 10.1080/14653240600855905

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Sasaki A, Mizuno M, Ozeki N, Katano H, Otabe K, Tsuji K, et al. Canine mesenchymal stem cells from synovium have a higher chondrogenic potential than those from infrapatellar fat pad, adipose tissue, and bone marrow. PLoS ONE. (2018) 13:e0202922. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202922

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Bearden RN, Huggins SS, Cummings KJ, Smith R, Gregory CA, Saunders WB. In-vitro characterization of canine multipotent stromal cells isolated from synovium, bone marrow, and adipose tissue: a donor-matched comparative study. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2017) 8:218. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0639-6

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Zhang S, Zhao C, Liu S, Wang Y, Zhao Y, Guan W, et al. Characteristics and multilineage differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells derived from the Tibetan mastiff. Mol Med Rep. (2018) 18:2097–109. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2018.9172

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Kang BJ, Ryu HH, Park SS, Koyama Y, Kikuchi M, Woo HM, et al. Comparing the osteogenic potential of canine mesenchymal stem cells derived from adipose tissues, bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, and Wharton's Jelly for treating bone defects. J Vet Sci. (2012) 13:299–310. doi: 10.4142/jvs.2012.13.3.299

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Radtke CL, Nino-Fong R, Esparza, Gonzalez BP, Stryhn H, McDuffee LA. Characterization and osteogenic potential of equine muscle tissue- and periosteal tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells in comparison with bone marrow- and adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Am J Vet Res. (2013) 74:790–800. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.74.5.790

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Arevalo-Turrubiarte M, Olmeo C, Accornero P, Baratta M, Martignani E. Analysis of mesenchymal cells (MSCs) from bone marrow, synovial fluid and mesenteric, neck and tail adipose tissue sources from equines. Stem Cell Res. (2019) 37:101442. doi: 10.1016/j.scr.2019.101442

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Martin DR, Cox NR, Hathcock TL, Niemeyer GP, Baker HJ. Isolation and characterization of multipotential mesenchymal stem cells from feline bone marrow. Exp Hematol. (2002) 30:879–86. doi: 10.1016/S0301-472X(02)00864-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Webb TL, Quimby JM, Dow SW. In vitro comparison of feline bone marrow-derived and adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells. J Feline Med Surg. (2012) 14:165–8. doi: 10.1177/1098612X11429224

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Lee BY, Li Q, Song WJ, Chae HK, Kweon K, Ahn JO, et al. Altered properties of feline adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells during continuous in vitro cultivation. J Vet Med Sci. (2018) 80:930–8. doi: 10.1292/jvms.17-0563

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Krawetz RJ, Wu YE, Martin L, Rattner JB, Matyas JR, Hart DA. Synovial fluid progenitors expressing CD90+ from normal but not osteoarthritic joints undergo chondrogenic differentiation without micro-mass culture. PLoS ONE. (2012) 7:e43616. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043616

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Prado AA, Favaron PO, da Silva LC, Baccarin RY, Miglino MA, Maria DA. Characterization of mesenchymal stem cells derived from the equine synovial fluid and membrane. BMC Vet Res. (2015) 11:281. doi: 10.1186/s12917-015-0531-5

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

27. Zhang BY, Wang BY, Li SC, Luo DZ, Zhan X, Chen SF, et al. Evaluation of the curative effect of umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell therapy for knee arthritis in dogs using imaging technology. Stem Cells Int. (2018) 2018:1983025. doi: 10.1155/2018/1983025

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Denys M, Leon A, Robert C, Saulnier N, Josson-Schramme A, Legrand L, et al. Biosafety evaluation of equine umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (UC-MSCs) by systematic pathogen screening in peripheral maternal blood and paired UC-MSCs. Biopreserv Biobank. (2020) 18:73–81. doi: 10.1089/bio.2019.0071

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Carrade DD, Affolter VK, Outerbridge CA, Watson JL, Galuppo LD, Buerchler S, et al. Intradermal injections of equine allogeneic umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells are well tolerated and do not elicit immediate or delayed hypersensitivity reactions. Cytotherapy. (2011) 13:1180–92. doi: 10.3109/14653249.2011.602338

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

30. Koch TG, Heerkens T, Thomsen PD, Betts DH. Isolation of mesenchymal stem cells from equine umbilical cord blood. BMC Biotechnol. (2007) 7:26. doi: 10.1186/1472-6750-7-26

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Carrade DD, Owens SD, Galuppo LD, Vidal MA, Ferraro GL, Librach F, et al. Clinicopathologic findings following intra-articular injection of autologous and allogeneic placentally derived equine mesenchymal stem cells in horses. Cytotherapy. (2011) 13:419–30. doi: 10.3109/14653249.2010.536213

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Kisiel AH, McDuffee LA, Masaoud E, Bailey TR, Esparza Gonzalez BP, Nino-Fong R. Isolation, characterization, and in vitro proliferation of canine mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow, adipose tissue, muscle, and periosteum. Am J Vet Res. (2012) 73:1305–17. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.73.8.1305

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Mensing N, Gasse H, Hambruch N, Haeger JD, Pfarrer C, Staszyk C. Isolation and characterization of multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells from the gingiva and the periodontal ligament of the horse. BMC Vet Res. (2011) 7:42. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-7-42

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Sato K, Yamawaki-Ogata A, Kanemoto I, Usui A, Narita Y. Isolation and characterisation of peripheral blood-derived feline mesenchymal stem cells. Vet J. (2016) 216:183–8. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2016.08.009

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Longhini ALF, Salazar TE, Vieira C, Trinh T, Duan Y, Pay LM, et al. Peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells demonstrate immunomodulatory potential for therapeutic use in horses. PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0212642. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212642

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

36. Spaas JH, Broeckx S, Van de Walle GR, Polettini M. The effects of equine peripheral blood stem cells on cutaneous wound healing: a clinical evaluation in four horses. Clin Exp Dermatol. (2013) 38:280–4. doi: 10.1111/ced.12068

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Marfe G, Massaro-Giordano M, Ranalli M, Cozzoli E, Di Stefano C, Malafoglia V, et al. Blood derived stem cells: an ameliorative therapy in veterinary ophthalmology. J Cell Physiol. (2012) 227:1250–6. doi: 10.1002/jcp.22953

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

38. Rink BE, Amilon KR, Esteves CL, French HM, Watson E, Aurich C, et al. Isolation and characterization of equine endometrial mesenchymal stromal cells. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2017) 8:166. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0616-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

39. da Silva Meirelles L, Chagastelles PC, Nardi NB. Mesenchymal stem cells reside in virtually all post-natal organs and tissues. J Cell Sci. (2006) 119:2204–13. doi: 10.1242/jcs.02932

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Russell KA, Chow NH, Dukoff D, Gibson TW, LaMarre J, Betts DH, et al. Characterization and immunomodulatory effects of canine adipose tissue- and bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells. PLoS ONE. (2016) 11:e0167442. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167442

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Villatoro AJ, Alcoholado C, Martin-Astorga MC, Fernandez V, Cifuentes M, Becerra J. Comparative analysis and characterization of soluble factors and exosomes from cultured adipose tissue and bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells in canine species. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. (2019) 208:6–15. doi: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2018.12.003

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

42. Vidal MA, Robinson SO, Lopez MJ, Paulsen DB, Borkhsenious O, Johnson JR, et al. Comparison of chondrogenic potential in equine mesenchymal stromal cells derived from adipose tissue and bone marrow. Vet Surg. (2008) 37:713–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2008.00462.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Fideles SOM, Ortiz AC, Assis AF, Duarte MJ, Oliveira FS, Passos GA, et al. Effect of cell source and osteoblast differentiation on gene expression profiles of mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow or adipose tissue. J Cell Biochem. (2019) 120: 11842–52. doi: 10.1002/jcb.28463

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Guercio A, Di Bella S, Casella S, Di Marco P, Russo C, Piccione G. Canine mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs): characterization in relation to donor age and adipose tissue-harvesting site. Cell Biol Int. (2013) 37:789–98. doi: 10.1002/cbin.10090

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Yaneselli KM, Kuhl CP, Terraciano PB, de Oliveira FS, Pizzato SB, Pazza K, et al. Comparison of the characteristics of canine adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells extracted from different sites and at different passage numbers. J Vet Sci. (2018) 19:13–20. doi: 10.4142/jvs.2018.19.1.13

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Bahamondes F, Flores E, Cattaneo G, Bruna F, Conget P. Omental adipose tissue is a more suitable source of canine mesenchymal stem cells. BMC Vet Res. (2017) 13:166. doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1053-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Boxall SA, Jones E. Markers for characterization of bone marrow multipotential stromal cells. Stem Cells Int. (2012) 2012:975871. doi: 10.1155/2012/975871

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

48. FDA. CVM GFI #218 Cell-Based Products for Animal Use. (2015). Available online at: https://www.fda.gov/media/88925/download (accessed February 15, 2020).

Google Scholar

49. Sancak IG, Ozen A, Bayraktaroglu AG, Ceylan A, Can P. Characterization of mesenchymal stem cells isolated from the adipose tissue of young and old dogs. Veteriner Fakültesi dergisi. (2016) 63:297–302. doi: 10.1501/Vetfak_0000002743

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

50. Zajic B, Webb LT, Webb P, Coy WJ, Quimby MJ. Comparison of proliferative and immunomodulatory potential of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells from young and geriatric cats. J Feline Med Surg. (2017) 19:1096–102. doi: 10.1177/1098612X16680703

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

51. Taguchi T, Borjesson DL, Osmond C, Griffon DJ. Influence of donor's age on immunomodulatory properties of canine adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells Dev. (2019) 28:1562–71. doi: 10.1089/scd.2019.0118

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

52. Iohara K, Murakami M, Nakata K, Nakashima M. Age-dependent decline in dental pulp regeneration after pulpectomy in dogs. Exp Gerontol. (2014) 52:39–45. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2014.01.020

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

53. Lee J, Lee KS, Kim CL, Byeon JS, Gu NY, Cho IS, et al. Effect of donor age on the proliferation and multipotency of canine adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells. J Vet Sci. (2017) 18:141–8. doi: 10.4142/jvs.2017.18.2.141

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

54. Marycz K, Kornicka K, Maredziak M, Golonka P, Nicpon J. Equine metabolic syndrome impairs adipose stem cells osteogenic differentiation by predominance of autophagy over selective mitophagy. J Cell Mol Med. (2016) 20:2384–404. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12932

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

55. Wieczorek M, Abualrous ET, Sticht J, Alvaro-Benito M, Stolzenberg S, Noe F, et al. Major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and MHC class II proteins: conformational plasticity in antigen presentation. Front Immunol. (2017) 8:292. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00292

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

56. Schnabel LV, Pezzanite LM, Antczak DF, Felippe JB, Fortier LA. Equine bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells are heterogeneous in MHC class II expression and capable of inciting an immune response in vitro. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2014) 5:13. doi: 10.1186/scrt402

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

57. Berglund AK, Schnabel LV. Allogeneic major histocompatibility complex-mismatched equine bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells are targeted for death by cytotoxic anti-major histocompatibility complex antibodies. Equine Vet J. (2017) 49:539–44. doi: 10.1111/evj.12647

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

58. Oliveira RL, Chagastelles PC, Sesterheim P, Pranke P. In vivo immunogenic response to allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells and the role of preactivated mesenchymal stem cells cotransplanted with allogeneic islets. Stem Cells Int. (2017) 2017:9824698. doi: 10.1155/2017/9824698

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

59. Ryan AE, Lohan P, O'Flynn L, Treacy O, Chen X, Coleman C, et al. Chondrogenic differentiation increases antidonor immune response to allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell transplantation. Mol Ther. (2014) 22:655–67. doi: 10.1038/mt.2013.261

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

60. Joswig AJ, Mitchell A, Cummings KJ, Levine GJ, Gregory CA, Smith R, et al. Repeated intra-articular injection of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells causes an adverse response compared to autologous cells in the equine model. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2017) 8:42. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0503-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

61. Pezzanite LM, Fortier LA, Antczak DF, Cassano JM, Brosnahan MM, Miller D, et al. Equine allogeneic bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells elicit antibody responses in vivo. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2015) 6:54. doi: 10.1186/s13287-015-0053-x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

62. Ursini TL, Amelse LL, Elkhenany HA, Odoi A, Carter-Arnold JL, Adair HS, et al. Retrospective analysis of local injection site adverse reactions associated with 230 allogenic administrations of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in 164 horses. Equine Vet J. (2019) 51:198–205. doi: 10.1111/evj.12992

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

63. Cabon Q, Febre M, Gomez N, Cachon T, Pillard P, Carozzo C, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of single or repeated intra-articular injection of allogeneic neonatal mesenchymal stromal cells for managing pain and lameness in moderate to severe canine osteoarthritis without anti-inflammatory pharmacological support: pilot clinical study. Front Vet Sci. (2019) 6:10. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00010

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

64. Bertoni L, Branly T, Jacquet S, Desance M, Desquilbet L, Rivory P, et al. Intra-articular injection of 2 different dosages of autologous and allogeneic bone marrow- and umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells triggers a variable inflammatory response of the fetlock joint on 12 sound experimental horses. Stem Cells Int. (2019) 2019:9431894. doi: 10.1155/2019/9431894

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

65. Magri C, Schramme M, Febre M, Cauvin E, Labadie F, Saulnier N, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of single versus repeated intra-articular injection of allogeneic neonatal mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of osteoarthritis of the metacarpophalangeal/metatarsophalangeal joint in horses: a clinical pilot study. PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0221317. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221317

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

66. Menard C, Dulong J, Roulois D, Hebraud B, Verdiere L, Pangault C, et al. Integrated transcriptomic, phenotypic, and functional study reveals tissue-specific immune properties of mesenchymal stromal cells. Stem Cells. (2019) 38:146–59. doi: 10.1002/stem.3077

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

67. Souza-Moreira L, Soares VC, Dias S, Bozza PT. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells modulate lipid metabolism and lipid droplet biogenesis via AKT/mTOR -PPARγ signalling in macrophages. Sci Rep. (2019) 9:20304. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-56835-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

68. Gao WX, Sun YQ, Shi J, Li CL, Fang SB, Wang D, et al. Effects of mesenchymal stem cells from human induced pluripotent stem cells on differentiation, maturation, and function of dendritic cells. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2017) 8:48. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0499-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

69. Laing AG, Fanelli G, Ramirez-Valdez A, Lechler RI, Lombardi G, Sharpe PT. Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit T-cell function through conserved induction of cellular stress. PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0213170. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213170

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

70. Luk F, Carreras-Planella L, Korevaar SS, de Witte SFH, Borras FE, Betjes MGH, et al. Inflammatory conditions dictate the effect of mesenchymal stem or stromal cells on B cell function. Front Immunol. (2017) 8:1042. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01042

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

71. Spaggiari GM, Capobianco A, Becchetti S, Mingari MC, Moretta L. Mesenchymal stem cell-natural killer cell interactions: evidence that activated NK cells are capable of killing MSCs, whereas MSCs can inhibit IL-2-induced NK-cell proliferation. Blood. (2006) 107:1484–90. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-07-2775

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

72. Blobe GC, Schiemann WP, Lodish HF. Role of transforming growth factor beta in human disease. N Engl J Med. (2000) 342:1350–8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200005043421807

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

73. Deng M, Mei T, Hou T, Luo K, Luo F, Yang A, et al. TGFβ3 recruits endogenous mesenchymal stem cells to initiate bone regeneration. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2017) 8:258. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0693-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

74. Dubon MJ, Yu J, Choi S, Park KS. Transforming growth factor beta induces bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell migration via noncanonical signals and N-cadherin. J Cell Physiol. (2018) 233:201–13. doi: 10.1002/jcp.25863

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

75. Liu F, Qiu H, Xue M, Zhang S, Zhang X, Xu J, et al. MSC-secreted TGF-β regulates lipopolysaccharide-stimulated macrophage M2-like polarization via the Akt/FoxO1 pathway. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2019) 10:345. doi: 10.1186/s13287-019-1447-y

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

76. Wu R, Liu C, Deng X, Chen L, Hao S, Ma L. Enhanced alleviation of aGVHD by TGF-β1-modified mesenchymal stem cells in mice through shifting MPhi into M2 phenotype and promoting the differentiation of Treg cells. J Cell Mol Med. (2020) 24:1684–99. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.14862

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

77. Gazdic M, Markovic BS, Arsenijevic A, Jovicic N, Acovic A, Harrell CR, et al. Crosstalk between mesenchymal stem cells and T regulatory cells is crucially important for the attenuation of acute liver injury. Liver Transpl. (2018) 24:687–702. doi: 10.1002/lt.25049

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

78. Schmidt A, Zhang XM, Joshi RN, Iqbal S, Wahlund C, Gabrielsson S, et al. Human macrophages induce CD4(+)Foxp3(+) regulatory T cells via binding and re-release of TGF-β. Immunol Cell Biol. (2016) 94:747–62. doi: 10.1038/icb.2016.34

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

79. Melief SM, Schrama E, Brugman MH, Tiemessen MM, Hoogduijn MJ, Fibbe WE, et al. Multipotent stromal cells induce human regulatory T cells through a novel pathway involving skewing of monocytes toward anti-inflammatory macrophages. Stem Cells. (2013) 31:1980–91. doi: 10.1002/stem.1432

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

80. Franquesa M, Mensah FK, Huizinga R, Strini T, Boon L, Lombardo E, et al. Human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells abrogate plasmablast formation and induce regulatory B cells independently of T helper cells. Stem Cells. (2015) 33:880–91. doi: 10.1002/stem.1881

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

81. Fallarino F, Grohmann U, You S, McGrath BC, Cavener DR, Vacca C, et al. The combined effects of tryptophan starvation and tryptophan catabolites down-regulate T cell receptor zeta-chain and induce a regulatory phenotype in naive T cells. J Immunol. (2006) 176:6752–61. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.11.6752

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

82. Spaggiari GM, Capobianco A, Abdelrazik H, Becchetti F, Mingari MC, Moretta L. Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit natural killer-cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, and cytokine production: role of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and prostaglandin E2. Blood. (2008) 111:1327–33. doi: 10.1182/blood-2007-02-074997

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

83. Francois M, Romieu-Mourez R, Li M, Galipeau J. Human MSC suppression correlates with cytokine induction of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and bystander M2 macrophage differentiation. Mol Ther. (2012) 20:187–95. doi: 10.1038/mt.2011.189

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

84. Kalinski P. Regulation of immune responses by prostaglandin E2. J Immunol. (2012) 188:21–8. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1101029

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

85. Jin L, Deng Z, Zhang J, Yang C, Liu J, Han W, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells promote type 2 macrophage polarization to ameliorate the myocardial injury caused by diabetic cardiomyopathy. J Transl Med. (2019) 17:251. doi: 10.1186/s12967-019-1999-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

86. Zhang Z, Huang S, Wu S, Qi J, Li W, Liu S, et al. Clearance of apoptotic cells by mesenchymal stem cells contributes to immunosuppression via PGE2. EBioMedicine. (2019) 45:341–50. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.06.016

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

87. de Vries JE. Immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory properties of interleukin 10. Ann Med. (1995) 27:537–41. doi: 10.3109/07853899509002465

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

88. Couper KN, Blount DG, Riley EM. IL-10: the master regulator of immunity to infection. J Immunol. (2008) 180:5771–7. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.180.9.5771

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

89. Najar M, Raicevic G, Fayyad-Kazan H, De Bruyn C, Bron D, Toungouz M, et al. Bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells induce proliferative, cytokinic and molecular changes during the T cell response: the importance of the IL-10/CD210 axis. Stem Cell Rev Rep. (2015) 11:442–52. doi: 10.1007/s12015-014-9567-3

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

90. Day AJ, Milner CM. TSG-6: a multifunctional protein with anti-inflammatory and tissue-protective properties. Matrix Biol. (2019) 78–9:60–83. doi: 10.1016/j.matbio.2018.01.011

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

91. Romano B, Elangovan S, Erreni M, Sala E, Petti L, Kunderfranco P, et al. TNF-stimulated gene-6 is a key regulator in switching stemness and biological properties of mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells. (2019) 37:973–87. doi: 10.1002/stem.3010

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

92. An JH, Li Q, Bhang DH, Song WJ, Youn HY. TNF-α and INF-γ primed canine stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles alleviate experimental murine colitis. Sci Rep. (2020) 10:2115. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58909-4

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

93. Song WJ, Li Q, Ryu MO, Ahn JO, Bhang DH, Jung YC, et al. TSG-6 released from intraperitoneally injected canine adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells ameliorate inflammatory bowel disease by inducing M2 macrophage switch in mice. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2018) 9:91. doi: 10.1186/s13287-018-0841-1

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

94. Wang S, Lee JS, Hyun J, Kim J, Kim SU, Cha HJ, et al. Tumor necrosis factor-inducible gene 6 promotes liver regeneration in mice with acute liver injury. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2015) 6:20. doi: 10.1186/s13287-015-0019-z

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

95. Um S, Kim HY, Lee JH, Song IS, Seo BM. TSG-6 secreted by mesenchymal stem cells suppresses immune reactions influenced by BMP-2 through p38 and MEK mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. Cell Tissue Res. (2017) 368:551–61. doi: 10.1007/s00441-017-2581-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

96. Abels ER, Breakefield XO. Introduction to extracellular vesicles: biogenesis, RNA cargo selection, content, release, and uptake. Cell Mol Neurobiol. (2016) 36:301–12. doi: 10.1007/s10571-016-0366-z

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

97. Jung JW, Kwon M, Choi JC, Shin JW, Park IW, Choi BW, et al. Familial occurrence of pulmonary embolism after intravenous, adipose tissue-derived stem cell therapy. Yonsei Med J. (2013) 54:1293–6. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2013.54.5.1293

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

98. Makela T, Takalo R, Arvola O, Haapanen H, Yannopoulos F, Blanco R, et al. Safety and biodistribution study of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells and mononuclear cells and the impact of the administration route in an intact porcine model. Cytotherapy. (2015) 17:392–402. doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2014.12.004

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

99. Kalra H, Drummen GP, Mathivanan S. Focus on extracellular vesicles: introducing the next small big thing. Int J Mol Sci. (2016) 17:170. doi: 10.3390/ijms17020170

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

100. Lai RC, Tan SS, Yeo RW, Choo AB, Reiner AT, Su Y, et al. MSC secretes at least 3 EV types each with a unique permutation of membrane lipid, protein and RNA. J Extracell Vesicles. (2016) 5:29828. doi: 10.3402/jev.v5.29828

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

101. Hyvarinen K, Holopainen M, Skirdenko V, Ruhanen H, Lehenkari P, Korhonen M, et al. Mesenchymal stromal cells and their extracellular vesicles enhance the anti-inflammatory phenotype of regulatory macrophages by downregulating the production of interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-22. Front Immunol. (2018) 9:771. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00771

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

102. Crain SK, Robinson SR, Thane KE, Davis AM, Meola DM, Barton BA, et al. Extracellular vesicles from Wharton's Jelly mesenchymal stem cells suppress CD4 expressing T cells through transforming growth factor beta and adenosine signaling in a canine model. Stem Cells Dev. (2019) 28:212–26. doi: 10.1089/scd.2018.0097

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

103. Park KS, Svennerholm K, Shelke GV, Bandeira E, Lasser C, Jang SC, et al. Mesenchymal stromal cell-derived nanovesicles ameliorate bacterial outer membrane vesicle-induced sepsis via IL-10. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2019) 10:231. doi: 10.1186/s13287-019-1352-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

104. Khatri M, Richardson LA, Meulia T. Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles attenuate influenza virus-induced acute lung injury in a pig model. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2018) 9:17. doi: 10.1186/s13287-018-0774-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

105. Eirin A, Zhu XY, Puranik AS, Tang H, McGurren KA, van Wijnen AJ, et al. Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles attenuate kidney inflammation. Kidney Int. (2017) 92:114–24. doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2016.12.023

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

106. Haga H, Yan IK, Takahashi K, Matsuda A, Patel T. Extracellular vesicles from bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells improve survival from lethal hepatic failure in mice. Stem Cells Transl Med. (2017) 6:1262–72. doi: 10.1002/sctm.16-0226

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

107. Cosenza S, Ruiz M, Toupet K, Jorgensen C, Noel D. Mesenchymal stem cells derived exosomes and microparticles protect cartilage and bone from degradation in osteoarthritis. Sci Rep. (2017) 7:16214. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-15376-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

108. Ruppert KA, Nguyen TT, Prabhakara KS, Toledano Furman NE, Srivastava AK, Harting MT, et al. Human mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles modify microglial response and improve clinical outcomes in experimental spinal cord injury. Sci Rep. (2018) 8:480. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18867-w

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

109. Deng M, Xiao H, Zhang H, Peng H, Yuan H, Xu Y, et al. Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles ameliorates hippocampal synaptic impairment after transient global ischemia. Front Cell Neurosci. (2017) 11:205. doi: 10.3389/fncel.2017.00205

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

110. Liu L, Jin X, Hu CF, Li R, Zhou Z, Shen CX. Exosomes derived from mesenchymal stem cells rescue myocardial ischaemia/reperfusion injury by inducing cardiomyocyte autophagy via AMPK and Akt pathways. Cell Physiol Biochem. (2017) 43:52–68. doi: 10.1159/000480317

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

111. Kornicka-Garbowska K, Pedziwiatr R, Wozniak P, Kucharczyk K, Marycz K. Microvesicles isolated from 5-azacytidine-and-resveratrol-treated mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of suspensory ligament injury in horse-a case report. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2019) 10:394. doi: 10.1186/s13287-019-1469-5

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

112. El-Tookhy OS, Shamaa AA, Shehab GG, Abdallah AN, Azzam OM. Histological evaluation of experimentally induced critical size defect skin wounds using exosomal solution of mesenchymal stem cells derived microvesicles. Int J Stem Cells. (2017) 10:144–53. doi: 10.15283/ijsc17043

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

113. Fu QL, Chow YY, Sun SJ, Zeng QX, Li HB, Shi JB, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells modulate T-cell phenotypes in allergic rhinitis. Allergy. (2012) 67:1215–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2012.02875.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

114. Luk F, de Witte SF, Korevaar SS, Roemeling-van Rhijn M, Franquesa M, Strini T, et al. Inactivated mesenchymal stem cells maintain immunomodulatory capacity. Stem Cells Dev. (2016) 25:1342–54. doi: 10.1089/scd.2016.0068

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

115. Tan SS, Yin Y, Lee T, Lai RC, Yeo RW, Zhang B, et al. Therapeutic MSC exosomes are derived from lipid raft microdomains in the plasma membrane. J Extracell Vesicles. (2013) 2:22614. doi: 10.3402/jev.v2i0.22614

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

116. Toh WS, Zhang B, Lai RC, Lim SK. Immune regulatory targets of mesenchymal stromal cell exosomes/small extracellular vesicles in tissue regeneration. Cytotherapy. (2018) 20:1419–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2018.09.008

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

117. Reiner AT, Witwer KW, van Balkom BWM, de Beer J, Brodie C, Corteling RL, et al. Concise review: developing best-practice models for the therapeutic use of extracellular vesicles. Stem Cells Transl Med. (2017) 6:1730–9. doi: 10.1002/sctm.17-0055

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

118. Thery C, Witwer KW, Aikawa E, Alcaraz MJ, Anderson JD, Andriantsitohaina R, et al. Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles 2018. (MISEV2018): a position statement of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles and update of the MISEV2014 guidelines. J Extracell Vesicles. (2018). 7:1535750. doi: 10.1080/20013078.2018.1461450

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

119. Elliott MR, Koster KM, Murphy PS. Efferocytosis signaling in the regulation of macrophage inflammatory responses. J Immunol. (2017) 198:1387–94. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1601520

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

120. Galleu A, Riffo-Vasquez Y, Trento C, Lomas C, Dolcetti L, Cheung TS, et al. Apoptosis in mesenchymal stromal cells induces in vivo recipient-mediated immunomodulation. Sci Transl Med. (2017) 9:eaam7828. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aam7828

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

121. Cheung TS, Galleu A, von Bonin M, Bornhauser M, Dazzi F. Apoptotic mesenchymal stromal cells induce prostaglandin E2 in monocytes: implications for the monitoring of mesenchymal stromal cell activity. Haematologica. (2019) 104:e438–41. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.214767

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

122. de Witte SFH, Luk F, Sierra Parraga JM, Gargesha M, Merino A, Korevaar SS, et al. Immunomodulation by therapeutic mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) is triggered through phagocytosis of MSC by monocytic cells. Stem Cells. (2018) 36:602–15. doi: 10.1002/stem.2779

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

123. Spees JL, Olson SD, Whitney MJ, Prockop DJ. Mitochondrial transfer between cells can rescue aerobic respiration. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2006) 103:1283–8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510511103

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

124. Jackson MV, Morrison TJ, Doherty DF, McAuley DF, Matthay MA, Kissenpfennig A, et al. Mitochondrial transfer via tunneling nanotubes is an important mechanism by which mesenchymal stem cells enhance macrophage phagocytosis in the in vitro and in vivo models of ARDS. Stem Cells. (2016) 34:2210–23. doi: 10.1002/stem.2372

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

125. Li C, Cheung MKH, Han S, Zhang Z, Chen L, Chen J, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells and their mitochondrial transfer: a double-edged sword. Biosci Rep. (2019) 39:BSR20182417. doi: 10.1042/BSR20182417

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

126. Penn MS. SDF-1:CXCR4 axis is fundamental for tissue preservation and repair. Am J Pathol. (2010) 177:2166–8. doi: 10.2353/ajpath.2010.100803

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

127. Wynn RF, Hart CA, Corradi-Perini C, O'Neill L, Evans CA, Wraith JE, et al. A small proportion of mesenchymal stem cells strongly expresses functionally active CXCR4 receptor capable of promoting migration to bone marrow. Blood. (2004) 104:2643–5. doi: 10.1182/blood-2004-02-0526

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

128. Chamberlain G, Wright K, Rot A, Ashton B, Middleton J. Murine mesenchymal stem cells exhibit a restricted repertoire of functional chemokine receptors: comparison with human. PLoS ONE. (2008) 3:e2934. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002934

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

129. Zou C, Song G, Luo Q, Yuan L, Yang L. Mesenchymal stem cells require integrin β1 for directed migration induced by osteopontin in vitro. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. (2011) 47:241–50. doi: 10.1007/s11626-010-9377-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

130. Wang X, Zhen L, Miao H, Sun Q, Yang Y, Que B, et al. Concomitant retrograde coronary venous infusion of basic fibroblast growth factor enhances engraftment and differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells for cardiac repair after myocardial infarction. Theranostics. (2015) 5:995–1006. doi: 10.7150/thno.11607

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

131. Ball SG, Shuttleworth CA, Kielty CM. Vascular endothelial growth factor can signal through platelet-derived growth factor receptors. J Cell Biol. (2007) 177:489–500. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200608093

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

132. Forte G, Minieri M, Cossa P, Antenucci D, Sala M, Gnocchi V, et al. Hepatocyte growth factor effects on mesenchymal stem cells: proliferation, migration, and differentiation. Stem Cells. (2006) 24:23–33. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2004-0176

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

133. Xinaris C, Morigi M, Benedetti V, Imberti B, Fabricio AS, Squarcina E, et al. A novel strategy to enhance mesenchymal stem cell migration capacity and promote tissue repair in an injury specific fashion. Cell Transplant. (2013) 22:423–36. doi: 10.3727/096368912X653246

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

134. Gao P, Zhou Y, Xian L, Li C, Xu T, Plunkett B, et al. Functional effects of TGF-β1 on mesenchymal stem cell mobilization in cockroach allergen-induced asthma. J Immunol. (2014) 192:4560–70. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1303461

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

135. Fu X, Liu G, Halim A, Ju Y, Luo Q, Song AG. Mesenchymal stem cell migration and tissue repair. Cells. (2019) 8:784. doi: 10.3390/cells8080784

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

136. Nowakowski A, Walczak P, Lukomska B, Janowski M. Genetic engineering of mesenchymal stem cells to induce their migration and survival. Stem Cells Int. (2016) 2016:4956063. doi: 10.1155/2016/4956063

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

137. Ullah M, Liu DD, Thakor AS. Mesenchymal stromal cell homing: mechanisms and strategies for improvement. iScience. (2019) 15:421–38. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2019.05.004

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

138. Gao J, Dennis JE, Muzic RF, Lundberg M, Caplan AI. The dynamic in vivo distribution of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells after infusion. Cells Tissues Organs. (2001) 169:12–20. doi: 10.1159/000047856

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

139. Eggenhofer E, Benseler V, Kroemer A, Popp FC, Geissler EK, Schlitt HJ, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells are short-lived and do not migrate beyond the lungs after intravenous infusion. Front Immunol. (2012) 3:297. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2012.00297

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

140. Jasmin, Jelicks LA, Tanowitz HB, Peters VM, Mendez-Otero R, de Carvalho ACC, et al. Molecular imaging, biodistribution and efficacy of mesenchymal bone marrow cell therapy in a mouse model of Chagas disease. Microbes Infect. (2014) 16:923–35. doi: 10.1016/j.micinf.2014.08.016

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

141. Kraitchman DL, Tatsumi M, Gilson WD, Ishimori T, Kedziorek D, Walczak P, et al. Dynamic imaging of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells trafficking to myocardial infarction. Circulation. (2005) 112:1451–61. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.537480

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

142. Yan Y, Fang J, Wen X, Teng X, Li B, Zhou Z, et al. Therapeutic applications of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells on acute liver injury in canines. Res Vet Sci. (2019) 126:233–9. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2019.09.004

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

143. Wang S, Guo L, Ge J, Yu L, Cai T, Tian R, et al. Excess integrins cause lung entrapment of mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells. (2015) 33:3315–26. doi: 10.1002/stem.2087

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

144. Abe T, Sumi K, Kunimatsu R, Oki N, Tsuka Y, Awada T, et al. Bone regeneration in a canine model of artificial jaw cleft using bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells and carbonate hydroxyapatite carrier. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. (2020) 57:208–17. doi: 10.1177/1055665619868868

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

145. Sole A, Spriet M, Padgett KA, Vaughan B, Galuppo LD, Borjesson DL, et al. Distribution and persistence of technetium-99 hexamethyl propylene amine oxime-labelled bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in experimentally induced tendon lesions after intratendinous injection and regional perfusion of the equine distal limb. Equine Vet J. (2013) 45:726–31. doi: 10.1111/evj.12063

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

146. Walczak P, Zhang J, Gilad AA, Kedziorek DA, Ruiz-Cabello J, Young RG, et al. Dual-modality monitoring of targeted intraarterial delivery of mesenchymal stem cells after transient ischemia. Stroke. (2008) 39:1569–74. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.502047

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

147. Trela JM, Spriet M, Padgett KA, Galuppo LD, Vaughan B, Vidal MA. Scintigraphic comparison of intra-arterial injection and distal intravenous regional limb perfusion for administration of mesenchymal stem cells to the equine foot. Equine Vet J. (2014) 46:479–83. doi: 10.1111/evj.12137

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

148. Torrent A, Spriet M, Espinosa-Mur P, Clark KC, Whitcomb MB, Borjesson DL, et al. Ultrasound-guided injection of the cranial tibial artery for stem cell administration in horses. Equine Vet J. (2019) 51:681–7. doi: 10.1111/evj.13065

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

149. Nishimura T, Takami T, Sasaki R, Aibe Y, Matsuda T, Fujisawa K, et al. Liver regeneration therapy through the hepatic artery-infusion of cultured bone marrow cells in a canine liver fibrosis model. PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0210588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210588

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

150. Parys M, Nelson N, Koehl K, Miller R, Kaneene JB, Kruger JM, et al. Safety of intraperitoneal injection of adipose tissue-derived autologous mesenchymal stem cells in cats. J Vet Intern Med. (2016) 30:157–63. doi: 10.1111/jvim.13655

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

151. Wiafe B, Kadam R, Metcalfe PD. Intraperitoneal administration of mesenchymal stem cells is effective at mitigating detrusor deterioration after pBOO. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. (2020) 318:F549–56. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.00486.2019

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

152. Gooch A, Zhang P, Hu Z, Loy Son N, Avila N, Fischer J, et al. Interim report on the effective intraperitoneal therapy of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in pet dogs using “Neo-Islets,” aggregates of adipose stem and pancreatic islet cells (INAD 012-776). PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0218688. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218688

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

153. Le Blanc K, Tammik C, Rosendahl K, Zetterberg E, Ringdén O. HLA expression and immunologic propertiesof differentiated and undifferentiated mesenchymal stem cells. Exp Hematol. (2003) 31:890–6. doi: 10.1016/S0301-472X(03)00110-3

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

154. Klyushnenkova E, Mosca JD, Zernetkina V, Majumdar MK, Beggs KJ, Simonetti DW, et al. T cell responses to allogeneic human mesenchymal stem cells: immunogenicity, tolerance, and suppression. J Biomed Sci. (2005) 12:47–57. doi: 10.1007/s11373-004-8183-7

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

155. van Megen KM, van 't Wout ET, Lages Motta J, Dekker B, Nikolic T, Roep BO. Activated mesenchymal stromal cells process and present antigens regulating adaptive immunity. Front Immunol. (2019) 10:694. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00694

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

156. Sivanathan KN, Rojas-Canales D, Grey ST, Gronthos S, Coates PT. Transcriptome profiling of IL-17A preactivated mesenchymal stem cells: a comparative study to unmodified and IFN-γ modified mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells Int. (2017) 2017:1025820. doi: 10.1155/2017/1025820

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

157. Li X, Shang B, Li YN, Shi Y, Shao C. IFNγ and TNFα synergistically induce apoptosis of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells via the induction of nitric oxide. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2019) 10:18. doi: 10.1186/s13287-018-1102-z

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

158. Brandt L, Schubert S, Scheibe P, Brehm W, Franzen J, Gross C, et al. Tenogenic properties of mesenchymal progenitor cells are compromised in an inflammatory environment. Int J Mol Sci. (2018) 19:2549. doi: 10.3390/ijms19092549

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

159. Dakin SG, Jespers K, Warner S, O'Hara LK, Dudhia J, Goodship AE, et al. The relationship between in vivo limb and in vitro tendon mechanics after injury: a potential novel clinical tool for monitoring tendon repair. Equine Vet J. (2011) 43:418–23. doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00303.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

160. Dyson SJ. Medical management of superficial digital flexor tendonitis: a comparative study in 219 horses (1992-2000). Equine Vet J. (2004) 36:415–9. doi: 10.2746/0425164044868422

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

161. Petrov R, MacDonald MH, Tesch AM, Van Hoogmoed LM. Influence of topically applied cold treatment on core temperature and cell viability in equine superficial digital flexor tendons. Am J Vet Res. (2003) 64:835–44. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2003.64.835

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

162. Chan KM, Fu SC. Anti-inflammatory management for tendon injuries - friends or foes? Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol. (2009) 1:23. doi: 10.1186/1758-2555-1-23

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

163. Jann HW, Stein LE, Good JK. Strength characteristics and failure modes of locking-loop and three-loop pulley suture patterns in equine tendons. Vet Surg. (1990) 19:28–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01139.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

164. Eliashar E, Schramme MC, Schumacher J, Ikada Y, Smith RK. Use of a bioabsorbable implant for the repair of severed digital flexor tendons in four horses. Vet Rec. (2001) 148:506–9. doi: 10.1136/vr.148.16.506

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

165. Smith RK, Korda M, Blunn GW, Goodship AE. Isolation and implantation of autologous equine mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow into the superficial digital flexor tendon as a potential novel treatment. Equine Vet J. (2003) 35:99–102. doi: 10.2746/042516403775467388

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

166. Renzi S, Ricco S, Dotti S, Sesso L, Grolli S, Cornali M, et al. Autologous bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells for regeneration of injured equine ligaments and tendons: a clinical report. Res Vet Sci. (2013) 95:272–7. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2013.01.017

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

167. Filomeno P, Dayan V, Tourino C. Stem cell research and clinical development in tendon repair. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. (2012) 2:204–11.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

168. Costa-Almeida R, Calejo I, Gomes ME. Mesenchymal stem cells empowering tendon regenerative therapies. Int J Mol Sci. (2019) 20:3002. doi: 10.3390/ijms20123002

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

169. Pacini S, Spinabella S, Trombi L, Fazzi R, Galimberti S, Dini F, et al. Suspension of bone marrow-derived undifferentiated mesenchymal stromal cells for repair of superficial digital flexor tendon in race horses. Tissue Eng. (2007) 13:2949–55. doi: 10.1089/ten.2007.0108

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

170. Godwin EE, Young NJ, Dudhia J, Beamish IC, Smith RK. Implantation of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells demonstrates improved outcome in horses with overstrain injury of the superficial digital flexor tendon. Equine Vet J. (2012) 44:25–32. doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00363.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

171. Smith RK, Werling NJ, Dakin SG, Alam R, Goodship AE, Dudhia J. Beneficial effects of autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in naturally occurring tendinopathy. PLoS ONE. (2013) 8:e75697. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075697

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

172. Van Loon VJ, Scheffer CJ, Genn HJ, Hoogendoorn AC, Greve JW. Clinical follow-up of horses treated with allogeneic equine mesenchymal stem cells derived from umbilical cord blood for different tendon and ligament disorders. Vet Q. (2014) 34:92–7. doi: 10.1080/01652176.2014.949390

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

173. Geburek F, Roggel F, van Schie HTM, Beineke A, Estrada R, Weber K, et al. Effect of single intralesional treatment of surgically induced equine superficial digital flexor tendon core lesions with adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells: a controlled experimental trial. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2017) 8:129. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0564-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

174. Romero A, Barrachina L, Ranera B, Remacha AR, Moreno B, de Blas I, et al. Comparison of autologous bone marrow and adipose tissue derived mesenchymal stem cells, and platelet rich plasma, for treating surgically induced lesions of the equine superficial digital flexor tendon. Vet J. (2017) 224:76–84. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2017.04.005

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

175. Harasen G. Diagnosing rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament. Can Vet J. (2002) 43:475–6.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

176. Chuang C, Ramaker MA, Kaur S, Csomos RA, Kroner KT, Bleedorn JA, et al. Radiographic risk factors for contralateral rupture in dogs with unilateral cranial cruciate ligament rupture. PLoS ONE. (2014) 9:e106389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106389

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

177. Molsa SH, Hyytiainen HK, Hielm-Bjorkman AK, Laitinen-Vapaavuori OM. Long-term functional outcome after surgical repair of cranial cruciate ligament disease in dogs. BMC Vet Res. (2014) 10:266. doi: 10.1186/s12917-014-0266-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

178. Taroni M, Cabon Q, Febre M, Cachon T, Saulnier N, Carozzo C, et al. Evaluation of the effect of a single intra-articular injection of allogeneic neonatal mesenchymal stromal cells compared to oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory treatment on the postoperative musculoskeletal status and gait of dogs over a 6-month period after tibial plateau leveling osteotomy: a pilot study. Front Vet Sci. (2017) 4:83. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00083

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

179. Linon E, Spreng D, Rytz U, Forterre S. Engraftment of autologous bone marrow cells into the injured cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. Vet J. (2014) 202:448–54. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.08.031

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

180. Muir P, Hans EC, Racette M, Volstad N, Sample SJ, Heaton C, et al. Autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells modulate molecular markers of inflammation in dogs with cruciate ligament rupture. PLoS ONE. (2016) 11:e0159095. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159095

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

181. Canapp SO Jr, Leasure CS, Cox C, Ibrahim V, Carr BJ. Partial cranial cruciate ligament tears treated with stem cell and platelet-rich plasma combination therapy in 36 dogs: a retrospective study. Front Vet Sci. (2016) 3:112. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2016.00112

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

182. Frisbie DD, Stewart MC. Cell-based therapies for equine joint disease. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract. (2011) 27:335–49. doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2011.06.005

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

183. Rossdale PD, Hopes R, Digby NJ, offord K. Epidemiological study of wastage among racehorses 1982 and (1983). Vet Rec. (1985) 116:66–9. doi: 10.1136/vr.116.3.66

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

184. Walmsley JR, Phillips TJ, Townsend HG. Meniscal tears in horses: an evaluation of clinical signs and arthroscopic treatment of 80 cases. Equine Vet J. (2003) 35:402–6. doi: 10.2746/042516403776014163

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

185. Cohen JM, Richardson DW, McKnight AL, Ross MW, Boston RC. Long-term outcome in 44 horses with stifle lameness after arthroscopic exploration and debridement. Vet Surg. (2009) 38:543–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2009.00524.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

186. Nicpon J, Marycz K, Grzesiak J. Therapeutic effect of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell injection in horses suffering from bone spavin. Pol J Vet Sci. (2013) 16:753–4. doi: 10.2478/pjvs-2013-0107

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

187. Ferris DJ, Frisbie DD, Kisiday JD, McIlwraith CW, Hague BA, Major MD, et al. Clinical outcome after intra-articular administration of bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells in 33 horses with stifle injury. Vet Surg. (2014) 43:255–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2014.12100.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

188. Marinas-Pardo L, Garcia-Castro J, Rodriguez-Hurtado I, Rodriguez-Garcia MI, Nunez-Naveira L, Hermida-Prieto M. Allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (horse allo 20) for the treatment of osteoarthritis-associated lameness in horses: characterization, safety, and efficacy of intra-articular treatment. Stem Cells Dev. (2018) 27:1147–60. doi: 10.1089/scd.2018.0074

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

189. Mohoric L, Zorko B, Ceh K, Majdic G. Blinded placebo study of bilateral osteoarthritis treatment using adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells. Slovenian Vet Res. (2016) 53:167–74.

Google Scholar

190. Black LL, Gaynor J, Gahring D, Adams C, Aron D, Harman S, et al. Effect of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem and regenerative cells on lameness in dogs with chronic osteoarthritis of the coxofemoral joints: a randomized, double-blinded, multicenter, controlled trial. Vet Ther. (2007) 8:272–84.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

191. Vilar JM, Morales M, Santana A, Spinella G, Rubio M, Cuervo B, et al. Controlled, blinded force platform analysis of the effect of intraarticular injection of autologous adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells associated to PRGF-Endoret in osteoarthritic dogs. BMC Vet Res. (2013) 9:131. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-9-131

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

192. Srzentic Drazilov S, Mrkovacki J, Spasovski V, Fazlagic A, Pavlovic S, Nikcevic G. The use of canine mesenchymal stem cells for the autologous treatment of osteoarthritis. Acta Vet Hung. (2018) 66:376–89. doi: 10.1556/004.2018.034

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

193. Harman R, Carlson K, Gaynor J, Gustafson S, Dhupa S, Clement K, et al. A prospective, randomized, masked, and placebo-controlled efficacy study of intraarticular allogeneic adipose stem cells for the treatment of osteoarthritis in dogs. Front Vet Sci. (2016) 3:81. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2016.00081

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

194. Shah K, Drury T, Roic I, Hansen P, Malin M, Boyd R, et al. Outcome of allogeneic adult stem cell therapy in dogs suffering from osteoarthritis and other joint defects. Stem Cells Int. (2018) 2018:7309201. doi: 10.1155/2018/7309201

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

195. Li L, Duan X, Fan Z, Chen L, Xing F, Xu Z, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells in combination with hyaluronic acid for articular cartilage defects. Sci Rep. (2018) 8:9900. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-27737-y

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

196. Guercio A, Di Marco P, Casella S, Cannella V, Russotto L, Purpari G, et al. Production of canine mesenchymal stem cells from adipose tissue and their application in dogs with chronic osteoarthritis of the humeroradial joints. Cell Biol Int. (2012) 36:189–94. doi: 10.1042/CBI20110304

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

197. Cuervo B, Rubio M, Sopena J, Dominguez JM, Vilar J, Morales M, et al. Hip osteoarthritis in dogs: a randomized study using mesenchymal stem cells from adipose tissue and plasma rich in growth factors. Int J Mol Sci. (2014) 15:13437–60. doi: 10.3390/ijms150813437

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

198. Babu NC, Gomes AJ. Systemic manifestations of oral diseases. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. (2011) 15:144–7. doi: 10.4103/0973-029X.84477

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

199. Petersen PE, Bourgeois D, Ogawa H, Estupinan-Day S, Ndiaye C. The global burden of oral diseases and risks to oral health. Bull World Health Organ. (2005) 83:661–9.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

200. Abdelaz P, ElZoghbi A, Shokry M, Ahmed AZ, Rasha H. Reparative dentin formation using stem cell therapy versus calcium hydroxide in direct pulp capping: an animal study. Braz Dent J. (2019) 30:542–9. doi: 10.1590/0103-6440201902711

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

201. Iohara K, Utsunomiya S, Kohara S, Nakashima M. Allogeneic transplantation of mobilized dental pulp stem cells with the mismatched dog leukocyte antigen type is safe and efficacious for total pulp regeneration. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2018) 9:116. doi: 10.1186/s13287-018-0855-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

202. Colpak HA, Gonen ZB, Ozdamar S, Alkan A, Kutuk N. Vertical ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration procedure and dental pulp derived mesenchymal stem cells with simultaneous dental implant placement: a histologic study in a sheep model. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. (2019) 120:216–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2018.12.011

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

203. Shi H, Zong W, Xu X, Chen J. Improved biphasic calcium phosphate combined with periodontal ligament stem cells may serve as a promising method for periodontal regeneration. Am J Transl Res. (2018) 10:4030–41.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

204. Wang P, Wang W, Geng T, Liu Y, Zhu S, Liu Z, et al. EphrinB2 regulates osteogenic differentiation of periodontal ligament stem cells and alveolar bone defect regeneration in beagles. J Tissue Eng. (2019) 10:2041731419894361. doi: 10.1177/2041731419894361

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

205. Xu M, Wei X, Fang J, Xiao L. Combination of SDF-1 and bFGF promotes bone marrow stem cell-mediated periodontal ligament regeneration. Biosci Rep. (2019) 39:BSR20190785. doi: 10.1042/BSR20190785

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

206. Rezaei M, Jamshidi S, Saffarpour A, Ashouri M, Rahbarghazi R, Rokn AR, et al. Transplantation of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells, platelet-rich plasma, and fibrin glue for periodontal regeneration. Int J Periodont Restor Dent. (2019) 39:e32–45. doi: 10.11607/prd.3691

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

207. Venkataiah VS, Handa K, Njuguna MM, Hasegawa T, Maruyama K, Nemoto E, et al. Periodontal regeneration by allogeneic transplantation of adipose tissue derived multi-lineage progenitor stem cells in vivo. Sci Rep. (2019) 9:921. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37528-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

208. El-Zekrid MH, Mahmoud SH, Ali FA, Helal ME, Grawish ME. Healing capacity of autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells on partially pulpotomized dogs' teeth. J Endod. (2019) 45:287–94. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.11.013

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

209. Sanchez-Garces MA, Alvira-Gonzalez J, Sanchez CM, Barbany Cairo JR, Del Pozo MR, Gay-Escoda C. Bone regeneration using adipose-derived stem cells with fibronectin in dehiscence-type defects associated with dental implants: an experimental study in a dog model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. (2017) 32:e97–e106. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5169

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

210. Bellei E, Dalla F, Masetti L, Pisoni L, Joechler M. Surgical therapy in chronic feline gingivostomatitis (FCGS). Vet Res Commun. (2008) 32(Suppl. 1):S231–4. doi: 10.1007/s11259-008-9153-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

211. Hennet PR, Camy GA, McGahie DM, Albouy MV. Comparative efficacy of a recombinant feline interferon omega in refractory cases of calicivirus-positive cats with caudal stomatitis: a randomised, multi-centre, controlled, double-blind study in 39 cats. J Feline Med Surg. (2011) 13:577–87. doi: 10.1016/j.jfms.2011.05.012

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

212. Lommer MJ. Efficacy of cyclosporine for chronic, refractory stomatitis in cats: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical study. J Vet Dent. (2013) 30:8–17. doi: 10.1177/089875641303000101

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

213. Druet I, Hennet P. Relationship between feline calicivirus load, oral lesions, and outcome in feline chronic gingivostomatitis (caudal stomatitis): retrospective study in 104 cats. Front Vet Sci. (2017) 4:209. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00209

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

214. Winer JN, Arzi B, Verstraete FJ. Therapeutic management of feline chronic gingivostomatitis: a systematic review of the literature. Front Vet Sci. (2016) 3:54. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2016.00054

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

215. Arzi B, Mills-Ko E, Verstraete FJ, Kol A, Walker NJ, Badgley MR, et al. Therapeutic efficacy of fresh, autologous mesenchymal stem cells for severe refractory gingivostomatitis in cats. Stem Cells Transl Med. (2016) 5:75–86. doi: 10.5966/sctm.2015-0127

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

216. Arzi B, Clark KC, Sundaram A, Spriet M, Verstraete FJM, Walker NJ, et al. Therapeutic efficacy of fresh, allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells for severe refractory feline chronic gingivostomatitis. Stem Cells Transl Med. (2017) 6:1710–22. doi: 10.1002/sctm.17-0035

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

217. Arzi B, Peralta S, Fiani N, Vapniarsky N, Taechangam N, Delatorre U, et al. A multicenter experience using adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell therapy for cats with chronic, non-responsive gingivostomatitis. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2020) 11:115. doi: 10.1186/s13287-020-01623-9

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

218. Cerquetella M, Spaterna A, Laus F, Tesei B, Rossi G, Antonelli E, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease in the dog: differences and similarities with humans. World J Gastroenterol. (2010) 16:1050–6. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i9.1050

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

219. Perez-Merino EM, Uson-Casaus JM, Duque-Carrasco J, Zaragoza-Bayle C, Marinas-Pardo L, Hermida-Prieto M, et al. Safety and efficacy of allogeneic adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of dogs with inflammatory bowel disease: Endoscopic and histological outcomes. Vet J. (2015) 206:391–7. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.07.023

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

220. Webb TL, Webb CB. Stem cell therapy in cats with chronic enteropathy: a proof-of-concept study. J Feline Med Surg. (2015) 17:901–8. doi: 10.1177/1098612X14561105

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

221. Matsuda T, Takami T, Sasaki R, Nishimura T, Aibe Y, Paredes BD, et al. A canine liver fibrosis model to develop a therapy for liver cirrhosis using cultured bone marrow-derived cells. Hepatol Commun. (2017) 1:691–703. doi: 10.1002/hep4.1071

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

222. Gardin C, Ferroni L, Bellin G, Rubini G, Barosio S, Zavan B. Therapeutic potential of autologous adipose-derived stem cells for the treatment of liver disease. Int J Mol Sci. (2018) 19:4064. doi: 10.3390/ijms19124064

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

223. Nam A, Han SM, Go DM, Kim DY, Seo KW, Youn HY. Long-term management with adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells and conventional treatment in a dog with hepatocutaneous syndrome. J Vet Intern Med. (2017) 31:1514–9. doi: 10.1111/jvim.14798

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

224. Adin CA, Gregory CR, Kyles AE, Cowgill L. Diagnostic predictors of complications and survival after renal transplantation in cats. Vet Surg. (2001) 30:515–21. doi: 10.1053/jvet.2001.28418

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

225. Quimby JM, Webb TL, Gibbons DS, Dow SW. Evaluation of intrarenal mesenchymal stem cell injection for treatment of chronic kidney disease in cats: a pilot study. J Feline Med Surg. (2011) 13:418–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jfms.2011.01.005

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

226. Vidane AS, Pinheiro AO, Casals JB, Passarelli D, Hage M, Bueno RS, et al. Transplantation of amniotic membrane-derived multipotent cells ameliorates and delays the progression of chronic kidney disease in cats. Reprod Domest Anim. (2017) 52(Suppl. 2):316–26. doi: 10.1111/rda.12846

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

227. Quimby JM, Webb TL, Habenicht LM, Dow SW. Safety and efficacy of intravenous infusion of allogeneic cryopreserved mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of chronic kidney disease in cats: results of three sequential pilot studies. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2013) 4:48. doi: 10.1186/scrt198

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

228. Quimby JM, Webb TL, Randall E, Marolf A, Valdes-Martinez A, Dow SW. Assessment of intravenous adipose-derived allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of feline chronic kidney disease: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial in eight cats. J Feline Med Surg. (2016) 18:165–71. doi: 10.1177/1098612X15576980

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

229. Wernly B, Mirna M, Rezar R, Prodinger C, Jung C, Podesser BK, et al. Regenerative cardiovascular therapies: stem cells and beyond. Int J Mol Sci. (2019) 20:1420. doi: 10.3390/ijms20061420

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

230. Hoffman AM, Dow SW. Concise review: stem cell trials using companion animal disease models. Stem Cells. (2016) 34:1709–29. doi: 10.1002/stem.2377

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

231. Pogue B, Estrada AH, Sosa-Samper I, Maisenbacher HW, Lamb KE, Mincey BD, et al. Stem-cell therapy for dilated cardiomyopathy: a pilot study evaluating retrograde coronary venous delivery. J Small Anim Pract. (2013) 54:361–6. doi: 10.1111/jsap.12098

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

232. Hensley MT, Tang J, Woodruff K, Defrancesco T, Tou S, Williams CM, et al. Intracoronary allogeneic cardiosphere-derived stem cells are safe for use in dogs with dilated cardiomyopathy. J Cell Mol Med. (2017) 21:1503–12. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.13077

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

233. Fox PR. Pathology of myxomatous mitral valve disease in the dog. J Vet Cardiol. (2012) 14:103–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jvc.2012.02.001

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

234. Petchdee S, Sompeewong S. Intravenous administration of puppy deciduous teeth stem cells in degenerative valve disease. Vet World. (2016) 9:1429–34. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2016.1429-1434

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

235. Barussi FC, Bastos FZ, Leite LM, Fragoso FY, Senegaglia AC, Brofman PR, et al. Intratracheal therapy with autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells reduces airway inflammation in horses with recurrent airway obstruction. Respir Physiol Neurobiol. (2016) 232:35–42. doi: 10.1016/j.resp.2016.07.002

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

236. Hao Y, Ran Y, Lu B, Li J, Zhang J, Feng C, et al. Therapeutic effects of human umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells on canine radiation-induced lung injury. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. (2018) 102:407–16. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.068

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

237. Trzil JE, Masseau I, Webb TL, Chang CH, Dodam JR, Liu H, et al. Intravenous adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell therapy for the treatment of feline asthma: a pilot study. J Feline Med Surg. (2016) 18:981–90. doi: 10.1177/1098612X15604351

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

238. Besalti O, Aktas Z, Can P, Akpinar E, Elcin AE, Elcin YM. The use of autologous neurogenically-induced bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of paraplegic dogs without nociception due to spinal trauma. J Vet Med Sci. (2016) 78:1465–73. doi: 10.1292/jvms.15-0571

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

239. Penha EM, Meira CS, Guimaraes ET, Mendonca MV, Gravely FA, Pinheiro CM, et al. Use of autologous mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow for the treatment of naturally injured spinal cord in dogs. Stem Cells Int. (2014) 2014:437521. doi: 10.1155/2014/437521

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

240. Bhat IA, T BS, Somal A, Pandey S, Bharti MK, Panda BSK, et al. An allogenic therapeutic strategy for canine spinal cord injury using mesenchymal stem cells. J Cell Physiol. (2019) 234:2705–18. doi: 10.1002/jcp.27086

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

241. Bach FS, Rebelatto CLK, Fracaro L, Senegaglia AC, Fragoso FYI, Daga DR, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of surgical decompression alone and combined with canine adipose tissue-derived stem cell transplantation in dogs with acute thoracolumbar disk disease and spinal cord injury. Front Vet Sci. (2019) 6:383. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00383

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

242. Steffen F, Smolders LA, Roentgen AM, Bertolo A, Stoyanov J. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells as autologous therapy in dogs with naturally occurring intervertebral disc disease: feasibility, safety, and preliminary results. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. (2017) 23:643–51. doi: 10.1089/ten.tec.2017.0033

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

243. Wu GH, Shi HJ, Che MT, Huang MY, Wei QS, Feng B, et al. Recovery of paralyzed limb motor function in canine with complete spinal cord injury following implantation of MSC-derived neural network tissue. Biomaterials. (2018) 181:15–34. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.07.010

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

244. Ojeh N, Pastar I, Tomic-Canic M, Stojadinovic O. Stem cells in skin regeneration, wound healing, and their clinical applications. Int J Mol Sci. (2015) 16:25476–501. doi: 10.3390/ijms161025476

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

245. Pratheesh MD, Dubey PK, Gade NE, Nath A, Sivanarayanan TB, Madhu DN, et al. Comparative study on characterization and wound healing potential of goat (Capra hircus) mesenchymal stem cells derived from fetal origin amniotic fluid and adult bone marrow. Res Vet Sci. (2017) 112:81–8. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2016.12.009

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

246. Martinello T, Gomiero C, Perazzi A, Iacopetti I, Gemignani F, DeBenedictis GM, et al. Allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells improve the wound healing process of sheep skin. BMC Vet Res. (2018) 14:202. doi: 10.1186/s12917-018-1527-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

247. Textor JA, Clark KC, Walker NJ, Aristizobal FA, Kol A, LeJeune SS, et al. Allogeneic stem cells alter gene expression and improve healing of distal limb wounds in horses. Stem Cells Transl Med. (2018) 7:98–108. doi: 10.1002/sctm.17-0071

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

248. Johnson V, Webb T, Norman A, Coy J, Kurihara J, Regan D, et al. Activated mesenchymal stem cells interact with antibiotics and host innate immune responses to control chronic bacterial infections. Sci Rep. (2017) 7:9575. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-08311-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

249. Lanci A, Merlo B, Mariella J, Castagnetti C, Iacono E. Heterologous Wharton's Jelly derived mesenchymal stem cells application on a large chronic skin wound in a 6-month-old filly. Front Vet Sci. (2019) 6:9. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00009

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

250. Hall MN, Rosenkrantz WS, Hong JH, Griffin CE, Mendelsohn CM. Evaluation of the potential use of adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells in the treatment of canine atopic dermatitis: a pilot study. Vet Ther. (2010) 11:E1–14.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

251. Villatoro AJ, Hermida-Prieto M, Fernandez V, Farinas F, Alcoholado C, Rodriguez-Garcia MI, et al. Allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell therapy in dogs with refractory atopic dermatitis: clinical efficacy and safety. Vet Rec. (2018) 183:654. doi: 10.1136/vr.104867

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

252. Davis AB, Schnabel LV, Gilger BC. Subconjunctival bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cell therapy as a novel treatment alternative for equine immune-mediated keratitis: a case series. Vet Ophthalmol. (2019) 22:674–82. doi: 10.1111/vop.12641

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

253. Saldinger LK, Nelson SG, Bellone RR, Lassaline M, Mack M, Walker NJ, et al. Horses with equine recurrent uveitis have an activated CD4+ T-cell phenotype that can be modulated by mesenchymal stem cells in vitro. Vet Ophthalmol. (2020) 23:160–70. doi: 10.1111/vop.12704

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

254. Villatoro AJ, Claros S, Fernandez V, Alcoholado C, Farinas F, Moreno A, et al. Safety and efficacy of the mesenchymal stem cell in feline eosinophilic keratitis treatment. BMC Vet Res. (2018) 14:116. doi: 10.1186/s12917-018-1413-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

255. Villatoro AJ, Fernandez V, Claros S, Rico-Llanos GA, Becerra J, Andrades JA. Use of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells in keratoconjunctivitis sicca in a canine model. Biomed Res Int. (2015) 2015:527926. doi: 10.1155/2015/527926

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

256. Sgrignoli MR, Silva DA, Nascimento FF, Sgrignoli DAM, Nai GA, da Silva MG, et al. Reduction in the inflammatory markers CD4, IL-1, IL-6 and TNFα in dogs with keratoconjunctivitis sicca treated topically with mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cell Res. (2019) 39:101525. doi: 10.1016/j.scr.2019.101525

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

257. Grady ST, Watts AE, Thompson JA, Penedo MCT, Konganti K, Hinrichs K. Effect of intra-ovarian injection of mesenchymal stem cells in aged mares. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2019) 36:543–56. doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1371-6

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

258. Papa PM, Guasti PN, De Vita B, Nakazato NG, Maia L, Freitas Dell'Aqua CP, et al. Clinical safety of intratesticular transplantation of allogeneic bone marrow multipotent stromal cells in stallions. Reprod Domest Anim. (2020) 55:429–37. doi: 10.1111/rda.13624

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

259. Qamar AY, Fang X, Kim MJ, Cho J. Improved post-thaw quality of canine semen after treatment with exosomes from conditioned medium of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Animals. (2019) 9:865. doi: 10.3390/ani9110865

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

260. Lara E, Rivera N, Cabezas J, Navarrete F, Saravia F, Rodriguez-Alvarez L, et al. Endometrial stem cells in farm animals: potential role in uterine physiology and pathology. Bioengineering. (2018) 5:75. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering5030075

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

261. Miernik K, Karasinski J. Porcine uterus contains a population of mesenchymal stem cells. Reproduction. (2012) 143:203–9. doi: 10.1530/REP-11-0202

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

262. Cabezas J, Lara E, Pacha P, Rojas D, Veraguas D, Saravia F, et al. The endometrium of cycling cows contains populations of putative mesenchymal progenitor cells. Reprod Domest Anim. (2014) 49:550–9. doi: 10.1111/rda.12309

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

263. Letouzey V, Tan KS, Deane JA, Ulrich D, Gurung S, Ong YR, et al. Isolation and characterisation of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in the ovine endometrium. PLoS ONE. (2015) 10:e0127531. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127531

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

264. Tamadon A, Mehrabani D, Zarezadeh Y, Rahmanifar F, Dianatpour M, Zare S. Caprine endometrial mesenchymal stromal stem cell: multilineage potential, characterization, and growth kinetics in breeding and anestrous stages. Vet Med Int. (2017) 2017:5052801. doi: 10.1155/2017/5052801

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

265. Cabezas J, Rojas D, Navarrete F, Ortiz R, Rivera G, Saravia F, et al. Equine mesenchymal stem cells derived from endometrial or adipose tissue share significant biological properties, but have distinctive pattern of surface markers and migration. Theriogenology. (2018) 106:93–102. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2017.09.035

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

266. Mambelli LI, Winter GH, Kerkis A, Malschitzky E, Mattos RC, Kerkis I. A novel strategy of mesenchymal stem cells delivery in the uterus of mares with endometrosis. Theriogenology. (2013) 79:744–50. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2012.11.030

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

267. Cahuascanco B, Bahamonde J, Huaman O, Jervis M, Cortez J, Palomino J, et al. Bovine fetal mesenchymal stem cells exert antiproliferative effect against mastitis causing pathogen Staphylococcus aureus. Vet Res. (2019) 50:25. doi: 10.1186/s13567-019-0643-1

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

268. Costa CRM, Feitosa MLT, Rocha AR, Bezerra DO, Leite YKC, Argolo Neto NM, et al. Adipose stem cells in reparative goat mastitis mammary gland. PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0223751. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223751

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

269. EMA. Questions and Answers on Allogeneic Stem Cell-Based Products for Veterinary Use: Specific Questions on Extraneous Agents. (2019). Available online at: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/questions-answers-allogeneic-stem-cell-based-products-veterinary-use-specific-questions-sterility_en.pdf (accessed February 15, 2020).

Google Scholar

270. FDA. Veterinary Regenerative Medicine & Animal Cell-Based Products. (2020). Available online at: https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/development-approval-process/veterinary-regenerative-medicine-animal-cell-based-products~ (accessed February 15, 2020).

Google Scholar