Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Based Therapy for Allergic Rhinitis

Sun, Liwei; Sha, Jichao; Meng, Cuida; Zhu, Dongdong

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2367524

Stem Cells International

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conflicts of Interest Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

Current Status and Perspectives of Human Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy 2020

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2020 | Article ID 2367524 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2367524

Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Based Therapy for Allergic Rhinitis

Liwei Sun,¹Jichao Sha,¹Cuida Meng,¹and Dongdong Zhu¹

Academic Editor: Hui Yin Nam

Received25 Feb 2020

Revised12 May 2020

Accepted28 May 2020

Published10 Jun 2020

Abstract

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disorder that causes a significant and often underestimated health burden for individuals and society. The current drug treatment cannot essentially deal with the regulation of the allergic reaction, while the allergic symptoms could be alleviated. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) bear a variety of properties, such as the ability to differentiate into various cell lineages, to secrete soluble factors crucial for cell survival and proliferation, to migrate to the exact site of injury, and to modulate the immune response. Clinical studies have been extensively conducted in MSCs as the models for varieties of diseases such as neurological diseases. Due to their immunomodulatory properties, the MSCs have gradually been believed to become one of the promising strategies for AR treatments although so far the MSCs-mediated treatment for AR is still at animal experiments stage. Fully understanding the roles and mechanisms of MSCs immunomodulatory effects serves as the prerequisite that will be beneficial to the application of MSCs-based AR clinical treatment methods. In this review article, we highlighted the recent research advances and give a brief perspective in the future study of the MSCs-mediated therapeutic application in AR treatments.

1. Introduction

Characterized by the presence of one or more nasal symptoms, including sneezing, itching, nasal discharge, and nasal congestion, allergic rhinitis (AR) has been identified as a noninfectious chronic inflammatory disease of the nasal mucosa. Pathologically, the AR is associated with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated immune responses against environmental allergens [1]. The epidemiological studies show that the prevalence of AR is gradually increasing in more developed countries, currently affecting 10%-40% of adults and 2%-25% of children worldwide [2–5]. Atopy is characterized by the production of allergen-specific IgE against environmental allergens. Atopy individuals are sensitive to allergens via activating dendritic cells (DCs) and T lymphocytes (T cells). It is well known that the DCs are located on the surface of the nasal mucosa capture allergens and could present allergen peptides to T cells in the draining lymph nodes to cause a T-helper 2(Th2)-type allergic reaction. Consequently, the release of Th2-related cytokines enhances the IgE production by B-lymphocytes (B cells) and promotes the recruitment of eosinophils in nasal tissue. More specifically, the IgE molecules are released into the blood and bind to high-affinity receptors on the surface of tissue mast cells and circulating basophils. Pathophysiologically, allergens bind to allergen-specific IgE on the surface of mast cells, leading to the rapid release of preformed mediators (such as histamine) and consequently causing early symptoms such as sneezing, nasal itching, and rhinorrhoea. Histamine and tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α), as well as newly generated lipid mediators such as leukotriene C4 and prostaglandin D2, all contribute to the influx of inflammatory cells such as eosinophils, basophils, and CD4+ T cells by stimulating the expression of adhesion molecules on endothelial cells, causing late symptom such as nasal congestion [6–8]. At present, regular drug treatment could alleviate the allergic symptoms, but could not interfere the allergic reactions. The recurrence of symptoms and side effects of the drugs applied for treatments confer the significant drug resistance to the patients, severely affecting patients’ quality of life. On the other hand, however, this situation inspires the related medical scientists to look for more effective strategies for AR treatments.

MSCs are identified to be pluripotent, nonhematopoietic, stromal precursor cells in adult, and neonatal tissues. The most common sources of MSCs are bone marrow, adipose tissue, and umbilical cord [9]. Bearing the potentiality for self-renewal and multidirectional differentiation, the MSCs are thought to function as tissue repair and increasingly believed to be regulators of the immune response. Given their immunosuppressive properties, tissue repair capacity, and secretion of various biological factors, the MSCs are being considered as a promisingly potential source for the AR treatment. The clinical study has been conducted for a variety of diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, neurological diseases, bone and cartilage disease, liver, lung, and kidney injury, organ transplantation, chronic inflammatory, and autoimmune diseases [10]. However, long way is expected to go for the clinical study in AR patients. In this review, the current status of MSCs in AR treatments was highlighted particularly the immunomodulatory properties of MSCs and their therapeutic potential in animal models of AR. As a perspective, we discuss the study directions in the future as well as the challenges to be overcome for the MSCs-based clinical AR therapy.

2. Overview of the Current Therapeutic Strategies

Generally speaking, the current approaches for the AR therapy include prevention of allergen or irritant contact, pharmacotherapy, specific immunotherapy, and surgery. However, almost all these strategies are symptoms—alleviating based passive approaches. Whether selected by patients themselves or prescribed by medical personnel, pharmacotherapy serves as the main approach to control the symptoms of AR. There are numerous options for oral or systemic use, topical intranasal application, and alternative therapies that can be considered. Pharmacotherapy includes mast cell stabilizers, antihistamines, glucocorticosteroids (GCSs), leukotriene receptor antagonists, and nasal decongestants [11]. The AR pharmacotherapy could simply control the symptoms, being unable to reverse the state of immune imbalance. However, not all the patients could get benefit from the partially pharmacotherapy-based relief of the symptoms. It was reported that pharmacotherapy could confer the partial or poor relief to the one-third of children and almost two-thirds of adults AR patients [12]. Although the specific immunotherapy can desensitize patients and prevent disease progression, its overwhelming shortcomings limit clinical applications, such as long treatment cycle, poor patient compliance, and lacks long-term observation of large sample efficacy. In addition, specific immunotherapy is allergen-specific instead of allergen versatile. Surgery is less applied due to its controversy. Thus, to cure the AR patients effectively and fundamentally, new therapeutic strategies are indispensable.

3. AR and MSCs

3.1. Immunomodulatory Properties of MSCs

It is well known that the MSCs lead to a shift from Th2 to Th1 responses in AR and can regulate the functions of regulatory T cells (Tregs) as well [13, 14]. Although the basic mechanisms of MSCs immunomodulation remain to be elusive, it is plausible to speculate that the immunomodulation conferred by the MSCs might be mediated by soluble factors and direct cell-to-cell contact. Indeed, the MSCs can target several subsets of lymphocytes, including CD4+ Th cells, CD8+ cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTLs), natural killer (NK) cells, NKT cells, B cells, DCs, and Tregs [15]. What is more, the MSCs regulate the adaptive and innate immune system by suppression of T cells and maturation of DCs, reducing the activation and proliferation of B cells, inhibiting the proliferation and cytotoxicity of NK cells and promoting the generation of Tregs by soluble factors or cell-cell contact mechanisms [16–18].

The capacity of MSCs that alter phenotype and function of immune cells largely attributes to the production of soluble factors. MSCs produce and release various soluble factors that are accountable for the immunosuppression function, including prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) [19–21], indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) [20–22], transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) [21, 23], interleukin (IL)-10 [22, 24], nitric oxide (NO) [25], TNF-stimulated gene 6 (TSG-6) [26], IL-6 [27], leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) [28], human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-G5 [14], and interleukin 1 receptor antagonist (IL1RA) [29] (Table 1). MSCs could interact with immune cells by secreting multiple soluble factors to exert immunosuppression effects (Figure 1).

Han et al. [30] found that MSCs suppressed the survival as well as the proliferation of T cells by mainly the contact-dependent mechanisms and resulted expansion of Tregs. Similarly, Fu et al. found that MSCs derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are capable of modulating T-cell phenotypes towards Th2 suppression through inducing Tregs expansion, which was associated with cell contact and PGE2 production [31]. Further, Dorronsoro et al. believed that Human MSCs modulated T-cell responses through TNF-α-mediated activation of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) [32].

In contrast to the suppressive activity on activated T cells, MSCs promoted the proliferation and activation of T cells in the quiescent state. Fan et al. reported that iPSC-MSCs balanced biased Th1/Th2 cytokine levels via promoting the proliferation of resting lymphocytes, activating CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and upregulating Tregs without any additional stimulation. The further study demonstrated that cell-to-cell contact could be a mechanism possibly involved in the immunomodulation, while the NF-κB was identified to play an important role in the immunomodulatory effects of iPSC-MSCs on quiescent T cells [33].

MSCs had immunosuppressive effect on activated T cells but could promote the responses of quiescent T cells, which suggested different immunomodulatory functions of MSCs according to the phases of diseases.

However, Desai et al. investigated the immune effects of MSCs on allergen-stimulated lymphocytes from AR subjects and found that in contrast to subjects with allergic asthma, MSCs caused a significant increase in the proliferation of antigen challenged lymphocytes from AR subjects. In their opinion, the increase in lymphocyte proliferation was caused by the MSCs presenting the allergens to CD4+ T cells, which was correlated with increased production of inflammatory cytokines from T cells, and increased expressions of major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-II and CD86 on MSCs [34]. These contradictory findings suggest that further research is needed to clarify the immunomodulatory function and mechanism of MSCs in AR.

3.2. Potential of the MSCs for AR Therapy

Currently, emerging evidences are addressing the potential of MSCs for immunomodulatory mechanism in an animal model of AR (Table 2) and indicated that different tissues derived MSCs functioned similar immunomodulatory effects.

3.2.1. The Adipose- Derived MSCs

It was reported that in the mouse model of AR, adipose-derived MSC could migrate to the nasal mucosa and inhibit eosinophilic inflammation partially via shifting to a Th1 from a Th2 immune response to allergens [35]. Ebrahim et al. compared the immunomodulatory effects conferred by the adipose-derived MSCs versus montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, in the ovalbumin(OVA)-induced AR rat model. It was found that both the montelukast and the MSCs could significantly reduce allergic symptoms and the OVA-specific IgE, IgG1, IgG2a, and histamine accordingly, while increased PGE2. Furthermore, the significant suppression was observed in the induction of nasal innate cytokines, such as IL-4 and TNF-α, and chemokines, such as C-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 11 (CCL11) and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1(VCAM-1). However, the TGF-β induction was upregulated in both the MSCs and the montelukast groups with a more significant effect in the MSCs-treated group. More interestingly, the adipose tissue-derived MSCs-treated group demonstrated more restoring effects on the structure of the nasal mucosa [36].

3.2.2. The Tonsil- Derived MSCs

The MSCs derived from human tonsil could effectively reduce allergic symptoms, Th2 cytokines, and OVA-specific IgE secretion from B cells in a mouse model of AR. Moreover, the levels of the innate cytokine (IL-25 and IL-33) and eotaxin mRNA were decreased in the nasal mucosa, suggesting this mechanism contributing to the reduced allergic inflammation [37].

3.2.3. The Nasal Mucosa-Derived MSCs

Yang et al. reported that the nasal mucosa-derived MSCs from mice could migrate to nasal mucosa via tail vein injection in the OVA-sensitized mice. More importantly, these MSCs were proved to be regulators that balanced the Th1 and Th2 immune responses by upregulating IgG2a and interferon (IFN)-γ and downregulating IgE, IgG1, IL-4, IL-5, and IL-10 [38].

3.2.4. The Bone Marrow-Derived MSCs

Zhao et al. demonstrated that intravenous injection of the bone marrow-derived MSCs in the mouse model of AR significantly alleviated allergic symptoms and reduced the eosinophil infiltration, OVA-specific IgE, Th2 cytokine profile (IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13), and regulatory cytokines (IL-10). Accordingly, the level of Th1 (IFN-γ) increased significantly after MSCs treatment [39]. A similar discovery was made in a separate study. It was found that bone marrow-derived MSCs migrated to the nasal and lung tissues following intraperitoneal delivery and ameliorated to the airway remodeling and airway inflammation both in the upper and lower airways via the inhibition of Th2 immune response in the mouse model of AR [40].

3.2.5. The Umbilical Cord-Derived MSCs

Li et al. found that human umbilical cord-derived MSCs ameliorate acute AR in rats likely via its regulation of the related cytokines secretion from macrophages during the acute AR. The physiological evidences included the MSCs-conferred reduction of IL-4, TNF-α, and IgE levels in the serum, as well as the MSCs-mediated inhibition of histamine and the recruitment of macrophages in the nasal mucosa [41].

Although up to date, the MSCs-mediated effects on the AR therapy were observed in animal models only; it shed light on the promising future to come for the potential therapeutic applications in the MSCs-based AR treatments.

4. Perspectives

The studies on the MSCs-based therapy in AR animal models could provide an alternative and very promising strategy for more effectively and essentially benefiting the AR patients who cannot be cured with traditional therapies. However, it still has a long way to go from the current studies in the AR animal models to the final clinical application for the AR therapy safely, effectively, and routinely due to some big challenges we are facing as detailed below.

Technically, the current methods for the MSCs generation are lacking in efficiency and high quality. (1) It is unclear how to develop high-quality clinical-grade MSCs products. (2) Quality control for the MSCs generated so far is a big concern because the MSCS generated from the different tissues and by different labs were based on their own protocols. (3) Significant variations in preparation, adaptability, and functionality of the MSCs due to tissue sources, culture methods, and propagation levels [42] add more uncertainty to the study and the clinical application. (4) Although the MSCs-based therapy could confer the significant therapeutic effects on AR symptoms in animal models, the potential cellular changes during the generation of MSCs might occur and bring the unknown influences for the clinical therapy. (5) So far in almost all the cases, the MSCs are generated and propagated under in vitro conditions instead of the normal physiological in vivo conditions, possibly affecting the biological properties of the generated MSCs. More specifically, some potential risks in MSCs generation and propagation under the nonphysiological conditions, such as oxygen level, cell density, culture medium ingredient and quality, number of passages, and proliferative senescence. All these uncertainties may significantly alter the MSCs’ quality and properties [43].

Biologically, it is essential to further investigate the mechanism of how the MSCs regulate the immunomodulation to cure the AR symptoms immunologically. Clinically, to make the translation happen safely, ethically, and effectively, it is indispensable to accumulate the clinical efficacy and long-term safety data. More specifically, for the clinical trials, the information on the MSCs dosage and application methods serves as the prerequisite for bringing the MSC-based therapy in AR animal models into the clinic.

Recent studies have revealed that extracellular vesicles (EVs) derived from MSCs (MSC-EVs) might carry similar immunomodulatory properties of MSCs [44, 45]. EVs are bilayer membrane structures carrying various biomolecules, such as RNAs and proteins. Compared with whole-cell therapy, MSC-EVs have significant advantages, such as low immunogenicity, high biosafety, and convenient storage. Therefore, MSC-EVs have been identified as novel and promising cell-free therapeutic agents. However, there are few studies on the treatment of AR with MSC-EVs. Fang et al. demonstrated that MSC-EVs were able to prevent allergic airway inflammation through the delivery of miR-146a-5p, suggesting that MSC-EVs could be a novel strategy for the treatment of AR [46]. A variety of further investigations are required to precisely elucidate the efficacy and underlying mechanisms of EVs-based therapy in AR.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81870701), the Program of Jilin Provincial Finance Department (2018scz042), Jilin Province Health Science and Technology Talent Project (2019scz004) and Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Development Plan Outstanding Young Talent Fund Project (20190103097JH).

References

J. Bousquet, N. Khaltaev, A. A. Cruz et al., “Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) 2008,” Allergy, vol. 63, Supplement 86, pp. 8–160, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. O. Meltzer, M. S. Blaiss, R. M. Naclerio et al., “Burden of allergic rhinitis: allergies in America, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific adult surveys,” Allergy and Asthma Proceedings, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 113–S141, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Bauchau and S. R. Durham, “Prevalence and rate of diagnosis of allergic rhinitis in Europe,” The European Respiratory Journal, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 758–764, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. I. Asher, S. Montefort, B. Björkstén et al., “Worldwide time trends in the prevalence of symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and eczema in childhood: ISAAC Phases One and Three repeat multicountry cross-sectional surveys,” Lancet, vol. 368, no. 9537, pp. 733–743, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhang and L. Zhang, “Increasing prevalence of allergic rhinitis in China,” Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 156–169, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. N. Greiner, P. W. Hellings, G. Rotiroti, and G. K. Scadding, “Allergic rhinitis,” Lancet, vol. 378, no. 9809, pp. 2112–2122, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. O. Eifan and S. R. Durham, “Pathogenesis of rhinitis,” Clinical & Experimental Allergy, vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 1139–1151, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. R. Leaker, V. A. Malkov, R. Mogg et al., “The nasal mucosal late allergic reaction to grass pollen involves type 2 inflammation (IL-5 and IL-13), the inflammasome (IL-1β), and complement,” Mucosal Immunology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 408–420, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Hass, C. Kasper, S. Böhm, and R. Jacobs, “Different populations and sources of human mesenchymal stem cells (MSC): a comparison of adult and neonatal tissue-derived MSC,” Cell Communication and Signaling: CCS, vol. 9, no. 1, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Squillaro, G. Peluso, and U. Galderisi, “Clinical trials with mesenchymal stem cells: an update,” Cell Transplantation, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 829–848, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Klimek, A. Sperl, S. Becker, R. Mösges, and P. V. Tomazic, “Current therapeutical strategies for allergic rhinitis,” Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 83–89, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. M. Wheatley and A. Togias, “Allergic rhinitis,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 372, no. 5, pp. 456–463, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Goodwin, V. Sueblinvong, P. Eisenhauer et al., “Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells inhibit Th2-mediated allergic airways inflammation in mice,” Stem Cells, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 1137–1148, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Selmani, A. Naji, I. Zidi et al., “Human leukocyte antigen-G5 secretion by human mesenchymal stem cells is required to suppress T lymphocyte and natural killer function and to induce CD4+CD25highFOXP3+ regulatory T cells,” Stem cells, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 212–222, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Volarevic, M. Gazdic, B. Simovic Markovic, N. Jovicic, V. Djonov, and N. Arsenijevic, “Mesenchymal stem cell-derived factors: immuno-modulatory effects and therapeutic potential,” Bio Factors, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 633–644, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Gao, S. M. Chiu, D. A. L. Motan et al., “Mesenchymal stem cells and immunomodulation: current status and future prospects,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 7, no. 1, p. e2062, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Yagi, A. Soto-Gutierrez, B. Parekkadan et al., “Mesenchymal stem cells: mechanisms of immunomodulation and homing,” Cell Transplantation, vol. 19, no. 6-7, pp. 667–679, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Q. Sun, M. X. Deng, J. He et al., “Human pluripotent stem cell-derived mesenchymal stem cells prevent allergic airway inflammation in mice,” Stem Cells, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 2692–2699, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Yañez, A. Oviedo, M. Aldea, J. A. Bueren, and M. L. Lamana, “Prostaglandin E2 plays a key role in the immunosuppressive properties of adipose and bone marrow tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells,” Experimental Cell Research, vol. 316, no. 19, pp. 3109–3123, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. M. Spaggiari, A. Capobianco, H. Abdelrazik, F. Becchetti, M. C. Mingari, and L. Moretta, “Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit natural killer-cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, and cytokine production: role of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and prostaglandin E2,” Blood, vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 1327–1333, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Li, X. Sun, X. Kuang, Y. Liao, H. Li, and D. Luo, “Mesenchymal stem cells suppress CD8+T cell-mediated activation by suppressing natural killer group 2, member D protein receptor expression and secretion of prostaglandin E2, indoleamine 2, 3-dioxygenase and transforming growth factor-β,” Clinical and Experimental Immunology, vol. 178, no. 3, pp. 516–524, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. H. Yang, M. J. Park, I. H. Yoon et al., “Soluble mediators from mesenchymal stem cells suppress T cell proliferation by inducing IL-10,” Experimental & Molecular Medicine, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 315–324, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. M. Melief, E. Schrama, M. H. Brugman et al., “Multipotent stromal cells induce human regulatory T cells through a novel pathway involving skewing of monocytes toward anti-inflammatory macrophages,” Stem Cells, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1980–1991, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Qu, X. Liu, K. Cheng, R. Yang, and R. C. H. Zhao, “Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit Th17 cell differentiation by IL-10 secretion,” Experimental Hematology, vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 761–770, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Sato, K. Ozaki, I. Oh et al., “Nitric oxide plays a critical role in suppression of T-cell proliferation by mesenchymal stem cells,” Blood, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 228–234, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Liu, Z. Yin, R. Zhang et al., “MSCs inhibit bone marrow-derived DC maturation and function through the release of TSG-6,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 450, no. 4, pp. 1409–1415, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Djouad, L. M. Charbonnier, C. Bouffi et al., “Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit the differentiation of dendritic cells through an interleukin-6-dependent mechanism,” Stem Cells, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 2025–2032, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Najar, G. Raicevic, H. I. Boufker et al., “Adipose-tissue-derived and Wharton’s jelly-derived mesenchymal stromal cells suppress lymphocyte responses by secreting leukemia inhibitory factor,” Tissue Engineering Part A, vol. 16, no. 11, pp. 3537–3546, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Luz-Crawford, F. Djouad, K. Toupet et al., “Mesenchymal stem cell-derived interleukin 1 receptor antagonist promotes macrophage polarization and inhibits B cell differentiation,” Stem Cells, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 483–492, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. H. Han, H. Ro, J. H. Hong et al., “Immunosuppressive mechanisms of embryonic stem cells and mesenchymal stem cells in alloimmune response,” Transplant Immunology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 7–15, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. L. Fu, Y. Y. Chow, S. J. Sun et al., “Mesenchymal stem cells derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells modulate T-cell phenotypes in allergic rhinitis,” Allergy, vol. 67, no. 10, pp. 1215–1222, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Dorronsoro, I. Ferrin, J. M. Salcedo et al., “Human mesenchymal stromal cells modulate T-cell responses through TNF-α-mediated activation of NF-κB,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 480–488, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. L. Fan, Q. X. Zeng, X. Li et al., “Induced pluripotent stem cell-derived mesenchymal stem cells activate quiescent T cells and elevate regulatory T cell response via NF-κB in allergic rhinitis patients,” Stem Cell Research & Therapy, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 170, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. B. Desai, T. Gavrilova, J. Liu et al., “Pollen-induced antigen presentation by mesenchymal stem cells and T cells from allergic rhinitis,” Clinical & Translational Immunology, vol. 2, no. 10, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K.-S. Cho, H. K. Park, H. Y. Park et al., “IFATS collection: immunomodulatory effects of adipose tissue-derived stem cells in an allergic rhinitis mouse model,” Stem Cells, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 259–265, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Ebrahim, Y. Mandour, A. Farid et al., “Adipose Tissue-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Modulates the Immune Response of Allergic Rhinitis in a Rat Model,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 20, no. 4, p. 873, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Samivel, E. H. Kim, Y. J. Chung, and J. H. Mo, “Immunomodulatory effect of tonsil-derived mesenchymal stem cells in a mouse model of allergic rhinitis,” American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 262–267, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Yang, J. Li, H. Lin, K. Zhao, and C. Zheng, “Nasal mucosa derived-mesenchymal stem cells from mice reduce inflammation via modulating immune responses,” PloS one, vol. 10, no. 3, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Zhao, Y. Liu, H. Liang, and X. Jiang, “Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells reduce immune reaction in a mouse model of allergic rhinitis,” American Journal of Translational Research, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 5628–5636, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Işık, M. Karaman, A. Adan et al., “Intraperitoneal mesenchymal stem cell administration ameliorates allergic rhinitis in the murine model,” European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, vol. 274, no. 1, pp. 197–207, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Li, Y. Fu, Y. Wang et al., “Mesenchymal stromal cells ameliorate acute allergic rhinitis in rats,” Cell Biochemistry and Function, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 420–425, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X.-L. Fan, Z. Zhang, C. Y. Ma, and Q. L. Fu, “Mesenchymal stem cells for inflammatory airway disorders: promises and challenges,” Bioscience Reports, vol. 39, no. 1, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Drela, L. Stanaszek, A. Nowakowski, Z. Kuczynska, and B. Lukomska, “Experimental Strategies of Mesenchymal Stem Cell Propagation: Adverse Events and Potential Risk of Functional Changes,” Stem Cells International, vol. 2019, Article ID 7012692, 10 pages, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Seo, H. S. Kim, and I. S. Hong, “Stem Cell-Derived Extracellular Vesicles as Immunomodulatory Therapeutics,” Stem Cells International, vol. 2019, Article ID 5126156, 10 pages, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. O. Gomzikova, V. James, and A. A. Rizvanov, “Therapeutic application of mesenchymal stem cells derived extracellular vesicles for immunomodulation,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 10, p. 2663, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. B. Fang, H. Y. Zhang, C. Wang et al., “Small extracellular vesicles derived from human mesenchymal stromal cells prevent group 2 innate lymphoid cell-dominant allergic airway inflammation through delivery of miR-146a-5p,” Journal of Extracellular Vesicles, vol. 9, no. 1, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2020 Liwei Sun et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

2127

Downloads

1152

Citations