The history of mesenchymal stem cells, 1968 to today
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) were first described in 1968, by Friedenstein, and named in 1991, by Caplan at Case Western. South Korea approved the first MSC products from 2010, Canada approved Prochymal in 2012, and the U.S. approved its first in 2024; there is no approved MSC product anywhere in the world for IV infusion in osteoarthritis, autoimmune disease, anti-aging, or longevity.
The history matters because the marketing doesn't reflect it. The actual field is much older, much more boring, and much more rigorous than the marketing suggests.
Who discovered mesenchymal stem cells, and when?
Mesenchymal stem cells were named in 1991. The cells themselves were described in 1968.
Sixty years in five chapters. The eras below aren't arbitrary: each marks a structural change in how the cells were defined, made, regulated, or used. The discipline began as cell biology, drifted into bone-marrow-transplant medicine, and only became a manufacturing-and-regulatory enterprise in the last fifteen years.
-
Discovery era
1968 to 1990
- 1968Friedenstein describes fibroblast-like cells from bone marrow.
- 1976Cells shown to form colonies (CFU-F), first quantifiable assay.
- 1988Owen & Friedenstein describe the marrow stromal cell.
-
Naming & expansion
1991 to 2003
- 1991Caplan coins "mesenchymal stem cell" at Case Western.
- 1995First human MSC trial, bone-marrow stromal cells, hematologic indication.
- 1999Pittenger paper shows tri-lineage differentiation in vitro.
-
Trial era
2004 to 2012
- 2006ISCT publishes the minimal-criteria definition still in use.
- 2009Prochymal Phase III misses primary endpoint in steroid-refractory GvHD.
- 2012Canada approves Prochymal for pediatric GvHD. South Korea approves Cartistem and Cupistem.
-
Manufacturing era
2013 to 2020
- 2015Temcell approved in Japan for acute GvHD.
- 2018Alofisel approved by EMA for perianal fistula in Crohn's.
- 2020India clears Stempeucel for commercial launch, made under cGMP.
-
Hybrid era
2021 to present
- 2021Japan approves Alofisel for perianal fistula in Crohn's.
- 2023Remestemcel-L goes back to the U.S. FDA for review (approved 2024).
- NowApproved products in several jurisdictions; in the U.S., IV use beyond pediatric GvHD is still trials-only.
Twelve papers that built the field
You don't need to read all twelve. Nobody's going to quiz you. But you should know they exist. Most of the cheap end of this market acts as if MSC biology is settled science with strong clinical evidence in every indication. It isn't. It's a real field with real papers and real failures, and the failures matter as much as the successes, especially the 2009 Prochymal Phase III, which is the moment the discipline became serious about manufacturing variability.
-
1968
Friedenstein et al.
Heterotopic transplants of bone marrow, first description of plastic-adherent stromal cells.
FoundationalThe paper everyone cites and few people read. Establishes the cells exist; doesn't yet call them stem cells.
-
1991
Caplan, A.I.
"Mesenchymal stem cells." J Orthop Res 9(5):641–650.
FoundationalThe naming paper. Coins the term and frames the cells as a therapeutic target, not just a research curiosity.
-
1999
Pittenger et al.
Multilineage potential of adult human MSCs. Science 284:143–147.
FoundationalShowed bone, fat, cartilage differentiation in vitro. Triggered a decade of investment that mostly produced trials, not products.
Read moreShow less
-
2004
Le Blanc et al.
HLA-mismatched MSC infusion suppresses severe acute GvHD. Lancet 363:1439–1441.
ClinicalA single case report that fueled the GvHD program, and ultimately produced the first MSC product approved for GvHD, in 2012.
-
2006
Dominici et al. (ISCT)
Minimal criteria for defining multipotent MSCs.
RegulatoryThe definition still in use. Plastic-adherence, CD73/CD90/CD105 positive, CD45, CD34, CD14 or CD11b, CD79α or CD19 and HLA-DR negative, tri-lineage potential.
-
2009
Osiris/Prochymal team.
Phase III of remestemcel-L in steroid-refractory acute GvHD, primary endpoint missed.
ClinicalThe failure that reset the field. Triggered the manufacturing-variability conversation. U.S. approval took another 15 years.
-
2012
Health Canada approval.
Prochymal for pediatric steroid-refractory acute GvHD.
RegulatoryThe first MSC product approved for GvHD, and the first approved outside South Korea. Indication is narrow; precedent is large.
-
2013
Galipeau, J.
The mesenchymal stromal cells dilemma, does a negative Phase III result kill the field? Cytotherapy 15(1):2–8.
ManufacturingHonest post-mortem. Argues the field's problem isn't the cells, it's potency assay heterogeneity across manufacturers.
-
2015
PMDA (Japan).
Approval of Temcell HS for acute GvHD.
RegulatoryFirst allogeneic cell product approved in Japan, with a full approval. Japan's conditional, time-limited pathway was first used for an MSC product in 2018, for Stemirac.
-
2018
EMA approval.
Alofisel (darvadstrocel) for perianal fistula in Crohn's disease.
RegulatoryFirst MSC product approved in the EU. Local injection, not systemic IV. Withdrawn from the EU market in December 2024 after a confirmatory trial did not show a benefit over placebo.
-
2019
Viswanathan et al. (ISCT).
Mesenchymal stromal cell nomenclature working-group consensus.
ManufacturingSettles the "stem" vs. "stromal" debate in favor of careful language. MSC = mesenchymal stromal cells unless stemness is shown.
-
2024
U.S. FDA approval.
Remestemcel-L (Ryoncil) for pediatric steroid-refractory acute GvHD.
RegulatoryFirst MSC product approved in the U.S., 15 years after the same product missed its Phase III endpoint. Vindicates manufacturing-side fixes.
The 2009 failure is the most important thing in the timeline
Prochymal's missed Phase III is what produced the cGMP-era seriousness about manufacturing variability. The discipline got better at making cells reproducibly because of that loss.
The regulatory wins of the 2010s came after the manufacturing wins. Cells were known; the problem was reproducibly making the same cells twice. The cGMP era is what fixed that, and it is the reason an infusion today is structurally different from a 2005 one, even if the cell type on paper looks identical.
How has MSC therapy changed since 2005?
The most misleading thing about the cheap end of this market is that it implies the field is the same as it was in 2005: same cells, same technique, same evidence base. The discipline has changed under it.
Definition
"Mesenchymal stem cells"
Loose; lab-specific.
ISCT minimal criteria
Plastic-adherence, CD73+/CD90+/CD105+, CD45, CD34, CD14 or CD11b, CD79α or CD19 and HLA-DR negative, tri-lineage capable. International consensus since 2006.
Source
Umbilical cord, allogeneic
From neonatal tissue, donor-screened, batch-released. Higher potency, lower variability, decoupled from patient age.
Manufacturing
Academic-lab grade
Researcher discretion.
cGMP, batch-released
Sterility, identity, viability, potency, endotoxin and mycoplasma on every lot.
Read moreShow less
Dosing
"Cell volume"
Often estimated.
Cells per kg
Counted on flow cytometer; viability confirmed by 7-AAD or comparable; documented on the CoA.
Regulation
Almost no approved products
Trials and academic compassionate use.
About 12 approved products
Across South Korea, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the EU, India, Iran and the U.S. (pediatric). National regulators have functional pathways.
Marketing
"Stem cells for everything"
Anti-aging clinics. ~2007–2015 boom.
Two markets coexist
The trial-and-approved track in major jurisdictions; the same 2007-style cheap market still operating elsewhere. The cells aren't the same anywhere they're sold.
Which MSC products are approved, and where?
An "approved product" means a national regulator has reviewed the manufacturing, the clinical data, and the labeling, and authorized commercial sale for at least one indication. It's the highest bar in this discipline. The list is short.
-
Prochymal / Remestemcel-L
2012, 2024
Canada · New Zealand · Japan · United States
Indication: Pediatric steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease. Allogeneic bone-marrow-derived MSCs. Approved in Canada and New Zealand (2012), in Japan (2015, as Temcell), and finally in the U.S. (Dec 2024, as Ryoncil).
-
Alofisel (darvadstrocel)
2018
European Union (withdrawn 2024) · Switzerland · Japan
Indication: Complex perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease. Allogeneic adipose-derived MSCs, locally injected. First MSC product approved by EMA. The company withdrew it from the EU market in December 2024.
Read moreShow less
-
Cartistem
2012
South Korea
Indication: Cartilage defects in osteoarthritis of the knee. Allogeneic MSCs from umbilical cord blood, surgically applied. The first cord-blood-derived MSC product approved anywhere.
-
Cupistem / Cuepistem
2012
South Korea
Indication: Crohn's-related fistulas. Autologous adipose-derived MSCs. Domestic-only product.
-
Stempeucel
2016
India
Indication: Critical limb ischemia in Buerger's disease. Allogeneic bone-marrow-derived MSCs. Limited approval from India's drug regulator in 2016; cleared for commercial launch in 2020.
-
Stemirac
2018
Japan
Indication: Spinal-cord injury. Autologous bone-marrow-derived MSCs. Approved under Japan's conditional/time-limited pathway; under post-market surveillance.
About 12 MSC products worldwide have been approved by a national regulator for at least one indication; six are shown above. In the U.S. the only one is Ryoncil, for pediatric GvHD. More than 1,200 MSC trials had been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov by May 2021: an approximate count, drifting upward.
None of these products are what you receive at a clinic offering self-pay infusions (those operate under different regulatory frames), but they are the existence proof that MSC therapeutics can clear the highest gates.
What's missing from the list
There is no approved MSC product anywhere in the world for IV infusion in osteoarthritis, autoimmune disease, anti-aging, or longevity.
- Osteoarthritis
- Autoimmune disease
- Anti-aging
- Longevity
That's the market our program operates in. We're not pretending it's something else. The honest framing is that we are using a real, regulated, manufactured biological product, in a clinical context, for indications where the evidence is suggestive but not yet at the standard required for a commercial approval. That's true everywhere this kind of clinic exists, including ours.
An MSC infusion in an unapproved indication is not by itself illegitimate; it is a legitimate biological product being used at the edge of where it has been formally validated. The honest version of this market says that. The dishonest version implies the approval boundary doesn't exist.
Friedenstein 1968 → Caplan 1991 → Prochymal 2012 → Ryoncil 2024. That's the field.
This isn't a new field. Friedenstein's first paper is 1968, and the cheap end talks as if the discipline is fifteen years old. Five eras, twelve landmark papers, six of the approved products, one Phase-III failure that mattered more than most of the wins, and a manufacturing discipline that has changed under the marketing.
What you receive at any clinic in this market is rooted in this history, and how a clinic talks about that history tells you which version of it they are operating in.
The point isn't to oversell what's possible; it's to put what we offer inside the right frame, so the question stops being "is this real?" and starts being "is the version you're getting real?"