Mesenchymal stem cells have awakened a great deal of interest in regenerative medicine due to their plasticity, and immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties. They are high-yield and can be acquired through noninvasive methods from adult tissues. Moreover, they are nontumorigenic and are the most widely studied. On the other hand, induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells can be derived directly from adult cells through gene reprogramming. The new iPS technology avoids the embryo destruction or manipulation to generate pluripotent cells, therefore, are exempt from ethical implication surrounding embryonic stem cell use. The pre-differentiation of iPS cells ensures the safety of future approaches. Both mesenchymal stem cells and iPS cells can be used for autologous cell transplantations without the risk of immune rejection and represent a great opportunity for future alternative therapies. In this review we discussed the therapeutic perspectives using mesenchymal and iPS cells.

BackgroundThe repair of large bone defects is a major orthopedic challenge because autologous bone grafts are not available in large amounts and because harvesting is often associated with donor-site morbidity. Considering that bone marrow stromal cells (BMSC) are responsible for the maintenance of bone turnover throughout life, we investigated bone repair at a site of a critically sized segmental defect in sheep tibia treated with BMSCs loaded onto allografts. The defect was created in the mid-portion of the tibial diaphysis of eight adult sheep, and the sheep were treated with ex-vivo expanded autologous BMSCs isolated from marrow aspirates and loaded onto cortical allografts (n = 4). The treated sheep were compared with control sheep that had been treated with cell-free allografts (n = 4) obtained from donors of the same breed as the receptor sheep.ResultsThe healing response was monitored by radiographs monthly and by computed tomography and histology at six, ten, fourteen, and eighteen weeks after surgery. For the cell-loaded allografts, union was established more rapidly at the interface between the host bone and the allograft, and the healing process was more conspicuous. Remodeling of the allograft was complete at 18 weeks in the cell-treated animals. Histologically, the marrow cavity was reestablished, with intertrabecular spaces being filled with adipose marrow and with evidence of focal hematopoiesis.ConclusionsAllografts cellularized with AOCs (allografts of osteoprogenitor cells) can generate great clinical outcomes to noncellularized allografts to consolidate, reshape, structurally and morphologically reconstruct bone and bone marrow in a relatively short period of time. These features make this strategy very attractive for clinical use in orthopedic bioengineering.

Methods: This is a retrospective analysis (May 2005-Aug 2012) of SCI patients (mean age-28 years) treated with hESC therapy. Therapy schedule had four treatment phases (T1, T2, T3, T4) lasting 4-6 weeks separated with gap phases (4-8 months). hESCs in an injectable form were administered at a dose of 0.25 ml (<4 million cells) (cultured and maintained in-house in a xeno product free patented technology) intramuscularly twice daily, 1 ml hESCs (<16 million cells) every 10 days through i.v route and 1-5 ml hESCs every 5-7 days by any of the supplemental routes. The patients with bowel and bladder problems were graded based on their symptoms.Results: Overall, 200 (81.5% patients had no bowel sensation of fullness or evacuation) and 204 (77.5% had no bladder sensation of filling or voiding) subjects had bowel and bladder sensation problems, respectively; while, 203 (81.5% had no bowel control), and 209 (92.3% had no bladder control) subjects had bowel and bladder control problems, respectively. At the end of therapy, 7 (3.5%) patients reached bowel sensation normalcy, 7 (3.4%) patients reached bladder sensation normalcy, 135 (67.5%) had mild, partial or full sensation of bowel fullness and 155 (76%) patients had mild, partial and full sensation of bladder filling.

IntroductionOwing to their similarity with humans, rabbits are useful for multiple applications in biotechnology and translational research from basic to preclinical studies. In this sense, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are known for their therapeutic potential and promising future in regenerative medicine. As many studies have been using rabbit adipose-derived MSCs (ASCs) as a model of human ASCs (hASCs), it is fundamental to compare their characteristics and understand how distinct features could affect the translation to human medicine.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to comparatively characterize rabbit ASCs (rASCs) and hASCs to further uses in biotechnology and translational studies.Materials and methodsrASCs and hASCs were isolated and characterized by their immunophenotype, differentiation potential, proliferative profile, and nuclear stability in vitro.Results and discussionBoth ASCs presented differentiation potential to osteocytes, chondrocytes, and adipocytes and shared similar immunophenotype expression to CD105+, CD34−, and CD45−, but rabbit cells expressed significantly lower CD73 and CD90 than human cells. In addition, rASCs presented greater clonogenic potential and proliferation rate than hASCs but no difference in nuclear alterations.ConclusionThe distinct features of rASCs and hASCs can positively or negatively affect their use for different applications in biotechnology (such as cell reprogramming) and translational studies (such as cell transplantation, tissue engineering, and pharmacokinetics). Nevertheless, the particularities between rabbit and human MSCs should not prevent rabbit use in preclinical models, but care should be taken to interpret results and properly translate animal findings to medicine.

Cyanobacterial communities on the phyllosphere of 4 plant species inhabiting the endangered Brazilian Atlantic Forest biome were evaluated using cultivation-independent molecular approaches. Total genomic DNA was extracted from cells detached from the surface of leaves of Euterpe edulis, Guapira opposita, Garcinia gardneriana, and Merostachys neesii sampled in 2 Brazilian Atlantic Forest locations along an elevational gradient, i.e., lowland and montane forest. The DNA fingerprinting method PCR-DGGE revealed that the cyanobacterial phyllosphere community structures were mainly influenced by the plant species; geographical location of the plant had little effect. The 16S rRNA gene sequences obtained by clone libraries showed a predominance of nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria of the order Nostocales, even though the majority of retrieved operational taxonomic units (∼60% of the sequences) showed similarity only to uncultured cyanobacteria phylotypes. The leaf surface of Guapira opposita had the highest richness and diversity of cyanobacteria, whereas the M. neesii (bamboo) had the largest number of copies of cyanobacterial 16S rRNA gene per cm of leaf. This study investigated cyanobacteria diversity and its distribution pattern in Atlantic forest phyllosphere. The results indicated that plant species is the main driver of cyanobacteria community assemblage in the phyllosphere and that these communities are made up of a high diversity of cyanobacterial taxa that need to be discovered.

No abstract

No abstract

Glivec was the first tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) approved for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treatment and its efficacy has been demonstrated in a large number of trials. Generic formulations have been used recently as a more cost effective treatment, but there are few studies that have prospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of these drugs.Aims: The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of generic imatinib in CP-CML in first line therapy. Methods: This is a multicenter, observational, cohort-type study. The prospective cohort consisted of patients who initiated treatment with generic imatinib between January 2015 and September 2017; whereas the retrospective cohort was treated with Glivec between January 2010 and December 2011. All patients started imatinib in CP, less than six months from diagnosis. Patients were managed according to European Leukemia Net (ELN) 2009 and 2013 recommendations. The definition of the responses followed the ELN 2013 criteria. Adverse events were assessed based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0.3, 2010. Event-free survival (EFS) was measured from starting date of treatment until loss of complete hematologic response, loss of major cytogenetic response, progression to accelerated (AP) or blast crisis (BC) or death from any cause at any time during initial therapy or discontinuation of imatinib by any cause. Patients that switched from Glivec to generic where censored. Overall survival (OS) was measured from starting date of imatinib until to the date of death from any cause while on therapy or last seen. Progression-free survival (PFS) was measured from starting date of imatinib to transformation to AP or BC or deaths while on therapy. Survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Cox regression was used with Backward Wald Method. SPSS version 21.0 was used applying the chi-square and t-test, when adequate. All analysis considered p-value <0.05 as significant. Results: A total of 445 patients were analyzed (Glivec=285; Generic=160). The median age was 54 years (18-87) in Glivec and 50 (18-89) in the Generic group (P=0.027). Sokal score stratification in Glivec and generic groups, was respectively: low risk 14.4%/25.7%; intermediate risk 42.3%/38.2% and high risk 43.3%/36.1% (P=0.02). B3a2 frequency was 51.5% vs. 37.7% in Glivec and Generic group, respectively, and b2a2 41.4% vs. 53.8% (P=0.017). There was no significant difference in gender, Hasford, EUTOS scores and ECOG. The median follow-up was 25 months (0-71) and 11 months (0-31) for Glivec and Generic groups, respectively (P<0.0001). The median time between diagnosis and imatinib starting was 18 days (0-119) in Glivec and 27 days (0-168) in the Generic group (P= 0.015). The rate of treatment failure at 3 months according to the ELN 2013 criteria was 6.6% and 14.7% in Glivec vs. Generic (P=0.04); whereas at 6 months there were no significant differences (12.3% vs. 18.9%; P=0.09). There was no significant difference in grade 3 and 4 hematological and non-hematological toxicity during the follow-up. There were 5 and 3 cases of progression in the Glivec and Generic group, respectively. In the Cox regression multivariate analysis, the independent factors for EFS were age at diagnosis (HR=1.03; CI95% 1.00-1.07; P=0.039) and toxicity grade 3-4 (HR 3.37; CI95% 1.08-10.4; P=0.036). The initial therapy was discontinued for the following reasons, in Glivec and generic group respectively: resistance (19.7% vs. 47.5%), intolerance (15.3% vs. 23.7%), non-adherence (4.4% vs. 3.4%), death (2.0% vs. 6.8%), clinical trial (0.5% vs. 10.2%), progression (2.0% vs. 5.0%), pregnancy (0 vs. 3.4%), switch from Glivec to generic (56.1%). OS, PFS and EFS at 24 months were higher in Glivec group in comparison to Generic (99% vs. 96%, P=0.016), (98% vs. 95%, P= 0.026) and (73% vs. 58%; P<0.0001 respectively. Conclusion: The group treated with generic imatinib presented higher rate of failure at 3 months and lower OS, PFS and EFS at 24 months. Differences between the groups included a longer time to initiate treatment in the Generic group, a higher proportion of patients with b2a2 transcripts, which were related to an inferior rate of molecular responses and survival in other studies. There was no difference in the safety profile. The long-term impact in prognosis will be evaluated after a longer follow-up. Disclosures Pagnano: Shire: Other: Lecture; Abbvie: Consultancy; EMS: Other: Financial support for participation in congress; Novartis: Consultancy. Magalhaes:Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Lecture. Clementino:EMS: Other: Financial support for congress. Gaidano:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Centrone:EMS: Other: Financial support for congress, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Meiers-Squibb: Other: Financial support for congress, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Financial support for congress, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: Financial support for congress, Speakers Bureau. Fogliatto:Novartis: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Giai:Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Bortolheiro:Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanoffi: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.