The aim of this study is to investigate the role of ginsenoside-Rg1 in the microenvironment-dependent endothelial differentiation of human MSCs (hMSCs) in vitro. The endothelial differentiation environment was established by co-culturing hMSCs with mature endothelial cells (human umbilical vein endothelial cells) indirectly in vitro. Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction analysis and fluorescence immunocytochemistry showed a strong expression of endothelial-specific markers such as CD31, Von Willebrand factor, and VE-cadherin. Nepicastat Electron microscopy showed the endothelial characteristic Weibel-Palade bodies of differentiated hMSCs. The increased expression of CD31 demonstrated that Rg1

promoted the endothelial differentiation of hMSCs. The findings here show the differentiation of hMSCs into cells with phenotypic features of endothelial cells using indirect co-culture with mature endothelial cells and provide the evidence that ginsenoside-Rg1 can promote the milieu-dependent endothelial differentiation of hMSCs in vitro.”
“Objective: A “”review of reviews”" was undertaken to assess methodological issues in studies evaluating nondrug rehabilitation interventions in stroke patients.

Study Design and Setting: MEDLINE, ACY-241 Epigenetics inhibitor CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from January 2000 to January

2008 within the stroke rehabilitation setting. Electronic searches were supplemented by reviews of reference lists and citations identified by experts. Eligible studies were Crenolanib datasheet systematic reviews; excluded citations were narrative reviews or reviews of reviews.

Review characteristics and criteria for assessing methodological quality of primary studies within them were extracted.

Results: The search yielded 949 English-language citations. We included a final set of 38 systematic reviews. Cochrane reviews, which have a standardized methodology, were generally of higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. Most systematic reviews used standardized quality assessment criteria for primary studies, but not all were comprehensive. Reviews showed that primary studies had problems with randomization, allocation concealment, and blinding. Baseline comparability, adverse events, and cointervention or contamination were not consistently assessed. Blinding of patients and providers was often not feasible and was not evaluated as a source of bias.

Conclusions: The eligible systematic reviews identified important methodological flaws in the evaluated primary studies, suggesting the need for improvement of research methods and reporting. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.”
“A 30-year-old manufacturing process for the biologic product l-asparaginase from the plant pathogen Erwinia chrysanthemi was rigorously qualified and validated, with a high level of agreement between validation data and the 6-year process database.