The functional mechanisms of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have become a research focus in recent years. Accumulating evidence supports the notion that MSCs act in a paracrine manner. Therefore, the biological factors in conditioned medium, including exosomes and soluble factors, derived from MSC cultures are being explored extensively. The results from most investigations show that MSC-conditioned medium or its components mediate some biological functions of MSCs. Several studies have reported that MSC-derived exosomes have functions similar to those of MSCs, such as repairing tissue damage, suppressing inflammatory responses, and modulating the immune system. However, the mechanisms are still not fully understood and the results remain controversial. Compared with cells, exosomes are more stable and reservable, have no risk of aneuploidy, a lower possibility of immune rejection following in vivo allogeneic administration, and may provide an alternative therapy for various diseases. In this review, we summarize the properties and biological functions of MSC-derived exosomes and discuss the related mechanisms.

We previously demonstrated that mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) ameliorated experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis (EAU) in rats. Recently, MSC-derived exosomes (MSC-Exo) were thought to carry functions of MSCs. In this study, we tested the effect of local administration of human MSC-Exo on established EAU in the same species. Rats with EAU induced by immunization with interphotoreceptor retinol-binding protein 1177–1191 peptide were treated by periocular injections of increasing doses of MSC-Exo starting at the disease onset for 7 consecutive days. The in vitro effects of MSC-Exo on immune cell migration and responder T cell proliferation were examined by chemotactic assays and lymphocyte proliferation assays, respectively. We found that MSC-Exo greatly reduced the intensity of ongoing EAU as their parent cells by reducing the infiltration of T cell subsets, and other inflammatory cells, in the eyes. Furthermore, the chemoattractive effects of CCL2 and CCL21 on inflammatory cells were inhibited by MSC-Exo. However, no inhibitory effect of MSC-Exo on IRBP-specific T cell proliferation was observed. These results suggest that MSC-Exo effectively ameliorate EAU by inhibiting the migration of inflammatory cells, indicating a potential novel therapy of MSC-Exo for uveitis.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of visual impairment and blindness worldwide. Since DR was first recognized as an important complication of diabetes, there have been many attempts to accurately classify the severity and stages of disease. These historical classification systems evolved as understanding of disease pathophysiology improved, methods of imaging and assessing DR changed, and effective treatments were developed. Current DR classification systems are effective, and have been the basis of major research trials and clinical management guidelines for decades. However, with further new developments such as recognition of diabetic retinal neurodegeneration, new imaging platforms such as optical coherence tomography and ultra wide-field retinal imaging, artificial intelligence and new treatments, our current classification systems have significant limitations that need to be addressed. In this paper, we provide a historical review of different classification systems for DR, and discuss the limitations of our current classification systems in the context of new developments. We also review the implications of new developments in the field, to see how they might feature in a future, updated classification.

Although accumulated evidence supports the notion that mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) act in a paracrine manner, the mechanisms are still not fully understood. Recently, MSC-derived exosomes (MSC-Exos), a type of microvesicle released from MSCs, were thought to carry functional proteins and RNAs to recipient cells and play therapeutic roles. In the present study, we intravitreally injected MSCs derived from either mouse adipose tissue or human umbilical cord and their exosomes to observe and compare their functions in a mouse model of laser-induced retinal injury. We found that both MSCs and their exosomes reduced damage, inhibited apoptosis and suppressed inflammatory responses to obtain better visual function to nearly the same extent in vivo. Obvious down-regulation of monocyte chemotactic protein (MCP)-1 in the retina was found after MSC-Exos injection. In vitro, MSC-Exos also down-regulated MCP-1 mRNA expression in primarily cultured retinal cells after thermal injury. It was further demonstrated that intravitreal injection of an MCP-1-neutralizing antibody promoted the recovery of retinal laser injury, whereas the therapeutic effect of exosomes was abolished when MSC-Exos and MCP-1 were administrated simultaneously. Collectively, these results suggest that MSC-Exos ameliorate laser-induced retinal injury partially through down-regulation of MCP-1.

This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness and safety of dexamethasone (DEX) implant and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME). The PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov website and Cochrane Library databases were comprehensively searched for studies comparing DEX implant with anti-VEGF in patients with DME. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST) and adverse events were extracted from the final eligible studies. Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 for Mac was used to analyze the data and GRADE profiler were used to access the quality of outcomes. Based on four randomized clinical trials assessing a total of 521 eyes, the DEX implant can achieve visual acuity improvement for DME at rates similar to those achieved via anti-VEGF treatment (mean difference [MD] = − 0.43, P = 0.35), with superior anatomic outcomes at 6 months (MD = − 86.71 μm, P = 0.02), while requiring fewer injections, in comparison to anti-VEGF treatment. Although the mean reduction in CST did not showed significant difference at 12 months (MD = − 33.77 μm, P = 0.21), the significant in BCVA from baseline to 12 months supported the anti-VEGF treatment (MD = − 3.26, P < 0.00001). No statistically significant differences in terms of the serious adverse events. However, use of the DEX implant has higher risk of intraocular pressure elevation and cataract than anti-VEGF treatment. Compared with anti-VEGF, DEX implant improved anatomical outcomes significantly. However, this did not translate to improved visual acuity, which may be due to the progression of cataract. Therefore, the DEX implant may be recommended as a first chioce for select cases, such as for pseudophakic eyes, anti-VEGF-resistant eyes, or patients reluctant to receive intravitreal injections frequently.