This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

I'm trying to gather info about stem cell treatments using MSC's derived from Cord Tissue and Placenta, as opposed to Bone-Marrow or Adipose Tissue derived MSC's. CTCI in Tel-Aviv - Prof. Slavin - now offers such an alternative, with the same cell expansion phase. But is it better, the same, more risky...?!?
It seems to me that more research / clinical trials concentrate on the latter than the former and I haven't been able, so far, to find any precise information as to the differences between them (beyond the obvious one that they are not autologous adult stem cells )
Does anyone know somebody who had that treatment ? Or know of any data on potential chances of result ? Differences in MSC's from those different sources ?
I would be very thankful for any information on the subject !

Thanks and be well !!!

Hi girl69,

as far as I know there are quite a few places in the world where they are using cord blood to derive stem cells for treatment. Whether it is better or not that bone marrow or adipose derived stem cells, I do not know. However, I have just got response from dr Slavin, but he did not mention these two options to me. Only bone marrow and adipose derives MSCs. I have more on this issue on a different thread.

It is older article, but might be useful:

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) represent a promising tool for new clinical concepts in supporting cellular therapy. Bone marrow (BM) was the first source reported to contain MSCs. However, for clinical use, BM may be detrimental due to the highly invasive donation procedure and the decline in MSC number and differentiation potential with increasing age. More recently, umbilical cord blood (UCB), attainable by a less invasive method, was introduced as an alternative source for MSCs. Another promising source is adipose tissue (AT). We compared MSCs derived from these sources regarding morphology, the success rate of isolating MSCs, colony frequency, expansion potential, multiple differentiation capacity, and immune phenotype. No significant differences concerning the morphology and immune phenotype of the MSCs derived from these sources were obvious. Differences could be observed concerning the success rate of isolating MSCs, which was 100% for BM and AT, but only 63% for UCB. The colony frequency was lowest in UCB, whereas it was highest in AT. However, UCB-MSCs could be cultured longest and showed the highest proliferation capacity, whereas BM-MSCs possessed the shortest culture period and the lowest proliferation capacity. Most strikingly, UCB-MSCs showed no adipogenic differentiation capacity, in contrast to BM- and AT-MSCs. Both UCB and AT are attractive alternatives to BM in isolating MSC: AT as it contains MSCs at the highest frequency and UCB as it seems to be expandable to higher numbers.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... -0342/full

You rock, Liberation ! Thank you very much, just the kind of article I was looking for ! Now I need to study the text well...
Adipogenic differentiation capacity ?!? Research is in order

Hi Girl69,
if you come to any conclusion on which source of MSC is more effective and safe, please let me know

I talked to a European professor (neurobiologist, stem cell) who spent some time in China, at Beike and he said the umbilical cord is used there with safty. They completed Phase 1, but as treatment was allowed there even beforehand, already 8,000 patients got this treatment. No major complaints are known.

Do you know anything about CTCI or Hadassah in Israel? Which clinics have you considered?