Abstract
Endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) nomenclature remains ambiguous and there is a general lack of concordance in the stem cell field with many distinct cell subtypes continually grouped under the term "EPC." It would be highly advantageous to agree standards to confirm an endothelial progenitor phenotype and this should include detailed immunophenotyping, potency assays, and clear separation from hematopoietic angiogenic cells which are not endothelial progenitors. In this review, we seek to discourage the indiscriminate use of "EPCs," and instead propose precise terminology based on defining cellular phenotype and function. Endothelial colony forming cells and myeloid angiogenic cells are examples of two distinct and well-defined cell types that have been considered EPCs because they both promote vascular repair, albeit by completely different mechanisms of action. It is acknowledged that scientific nomenclature should be a dynamic process driven by technological and conceptual advances; ergo the ongoing "EPC" nomenclature ought not to be permanent and should become more precise in the light of strong scientific evidence. This is especially important as these cells become recognized for their role in vascular repair in health and disease; and, in some cases, progress toward use in cell therapy.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Stem cells translational medicine |
| Early online date | 10 Mar 2017 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Early online date - 10 Mar 2017 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Editorial
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Endothelial Progenitors: A Consensus Statement on Nomenclature'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver