Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Review

Stem Cells and Infertility: A Review of Clinical Applications and Legal Frameworks

Altmetrics

Downloads

174

Views

96

Comments

0

A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.

Submitted:

10 October 2023

Posted:

11 October 2023

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
Infertility” is a condition defined by the failure to establish a clinical pregnancy after 12 months of regular, unprotected sexual intercourse or due to an impairment of a person’s capacity to reproduce either as an individual or with his/her partner’. The authors have set out to succinctly investigate, explore and assess infertility treatments harnessing the potential of stem cells to effectively and safely treat infertility, in addition to the legal and regulatory complexities at the heart of stem cell research, with an overview of the legislative state of affairs in six major European countries. In couples who cannot benefit from assisted reproductive technologies (ART) to treat their infertility, stem cells-based approaches have been shown to be a highly promising approach. Nonetheless, lingering ethical and immunological uncertainties require more conclusive findings and data before such treatment avenues can become mainstream and applied large scale. The isolation of human embryonic stem cells (ESCs) is ethically controversial, since their collection involves the destruction of human embryonic tissue. Overall, stem cell research has resulted in important new breakthroughs in the treatment of infertility. The effort to untangle the complex web of ethical and legal issues associated with such therapeutic approaches will have to rely on evidence-based, broadly shared standards, guidelines and best practices to make sure that the procreative rights of patients can be effectively reconciled with the core values at the heart of medical ethics.
Keywords: 
Subject: Medicine and Pharmacology  -   Obstetrics and Gynaecology

1. Introduction

With the term “infertility” we refer to ‘a disease characterized by the failure to establish a clinical pregnancy after 12 months of regular, unprotected sexual intercourse or due to an impairment of a person’s capacity to reproduce either as an individual or with his/her partner’. There are several risk factors connected with this condition, first woman’s age. Other potential risk factors are lifestyle (drugs, smoking, alcohol), sexually transmitted diseases, pelvic inflammatory disease, obesity, PCOS, diabetes. Also tubal, ovarian, uterine diseases can contribute to female infertility (endometriosis for example). Finally, infertility may be connected to endocrinological diseases or genetic disorders (Turner syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, etc.). Infertility has an etiology which is linked to female causes in 40% of cases, and to male ones in 40%, while 10-20% involve both and 10% is idiopathic [1]. Conventional treatments include improvement of sperm quality, surgical treatment of varicocele, administration of gonadotropins or antioxidants [2,3] if we refer to male infertility. As far as female infertility, there are several possible treatments: gonadotropins, GnRH, FSH, LH as ovulation – inducing drugs; clomiphene citrate or letrozole in case of PCOS; bromocriptine or cabergoline to treat hyperprolactinemia. After the administration of these different treatment, chosen in correlation to patient, regular follicular monitoring is necessary with ultrasonography [4-6]. Currently, the most widespread assisted reproductive technologies (ART) are intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic injection (ICSI). But if a gamete deficiency is proved, because of genetic defects, ART is not the best choice. In these terms, stem cells show new hopes. The aim of this review is the evaluation of stem cells, their efficacy and safety, in infertility treatment.

2. Materials and Methods

A broad-ranging search was performed in PubMed/MedLine, Web of Science (WoS), Cochrane Database to retrieve studies that analyze the application of stem cells as a therapeutic option for infertility. The search string for the clinical applications of stem cells in infertility treatments included the combination of the key words “stem cells” and “infertility – IVF”, whereas the ethical, legislative and regulatory research comprised the string “stem cell research ethics”, “legal and regulatory frameworks”, “stem cell research guidelines and best practices”. All studies were analyzed and selected for their relevance and data quality. Ultimately, 106 sources were included, spanning the 1988-2023 time period.

3. Results

3.1. stem cells variants:
Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that, if necessary, can self-renew and differentiate. They can repair damaged tissues. Like Sarama Saha et al [7]. describe in their paper, there are several kinds of stem cells. Table 1 summarizes and succinctly elaborates on the stem cells used in infertility treatments, their distinctive traits and current therapeutic applications in reproductive medicine:
To generate PGCs (primordial germ cells, precursors of sperm and egg cells) and induce iPSCs, adult stem cells from male and female gonads and pluripotent stem cells such as ESCs were used [30]. Although, different papers reported the attempt of generating blastocyst-like structures from stem cells. In their systematic review, Saha et al [7] describe the use of stem cells in various disorders such as Asherman Syndrome, a condition characterized by amenorrhea following uterine cavity injury. The resulting adhesions give rise to infertility, abortion and chronic pelvic pain [31]. The main cause has been reported to be postpartum endometrial courettage [32]. Several clinical studies have shown improvement of fertility in animal models through bone marrow stem cells, menstrual blood and mesenchymal ones [33]. That makes their use in human infertility treatments rather promising. Saha et al [7] reported another important cause of infertility: premature ovarian insufficiency (POI). Several papers show the efficacy of ovarian stem cells with stimulation of the AKT pathway to improve fertility in this condition [34-36]. There is another disorder linked to irregular menstruation, obesity, atypical hair growth and infertility: polycystic ovarian syndrome [37]. Stem cells could be used to keep at bay PCOS clinical symptoms, suppressing inflammation and producing anti inflammatory cytokines. Finally, different studies are testing the use of stem cells in endometriosis and azoospermia with promising results. Saha et al [7] in their paper, have elaborated on the future prospects for stem cells and infertility. They cite Very Small Embryonic Like Stem Cells (VSELs) found also in human bone marrow [38] with capacity to be differentiated into germinal cells and into different organs cells during embryonic development. They also repair any organ damage [39]. On the other hand, Saha et al [Error! Bookmark not defined.] describe Micro RNA and Stem Cell-Based Therapy. miRNA plays an important role in genetic expression of stem cells and in mRNA stability [40]. For example, miR-10 and miR-146a isolated in stem cells, they improve ovarian function in mice and prevent granulosa cells apoptosis [41].

3.2. Ethics and legal implications

Ethics and moral implications arising from embryonic stem cells have obviously a lot to do with how the legal and moral status of the embryo is assessed, and whether, and to what extent, it is deemed worthy of protection. It is therefore quite different a scenario from the one involving induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and adult stem cells, which are unrelated to embryo status [42]. Ethics and legal assessment standards for such types of stem cells necessarily revolve around the possible risks linked to stem cell interventions, what kind of damage could arise from still underresearched and inadequately validated stem cell procedures, how the informed consent process should be structured in order for such procedures to be sound from a medicolegal perspective, and lingering questions involving ownership and confidentiality of donor information [42].
Ethical considerations are of utmost importance to all medicine, and eminently relevant in the practice of reproductive medicine, endocrinology and infertility care as well. In addition, when treatments relying on stem cells are applied to medically-assisted reproduction, the ethics and legal quandaries arising from the latter should be taken into account as well [43-46]. It is no wonder that several countries allow for conscience-based refusal from healthcare professionals who feel that such practices conflict with their deeply-held moral beliefs [47-49], yet it is of utmost importance to find viable ways to reconcile such a right with the reproductive rights of couples [50,51]. Such complexities need to be governed by unequivocal standards and criteria that are both evidence-based and as broadly shared as possible at the international level, especially as fast-developing technological advancements seem to outpace our ability to devise tenable, well-balanced and evidence-based guidelines and best practices to maximize effectiveness while at the same time safeguarding the core values that shape medical ethics [52-56]. Embryonic stem cells are undifferentiated pluripotent cells that can indefinitely grow in vitro. They are derived from the inner mass of early embryos. Because of their ability to differentiate into all three embryonic germ layers, and finally into specialized somatic cell types, human embryonic stem cells certainly constitute a valuable element for research focused on developmental biology and cell replacement therapy. They are usually isolated from excess human IVF-embryos [57,58]. Research centered around stem cells and their use in the creation of human embryos is viewed by many as challenging and controversial, if not outright untenable, from the bioethics perspective. The lack of a clean cut consensus is reflected in the different legislative and regulatory approaches put in place by national lawmakers. Yet the unavailability and illegality of a therapeutic option in a given countries may drive those who seek such treatments, and can afford it, to travel o countries where such practices are legal. That poses an element of access inequality and financial discrimination, as it happens for instance with “procreative tourism” [43,44,59]. European countries have varying degrees of restrictions affecting the way and extent to which stem cell research can be lawfully undertaken. Table 2 briefly summarizes the legal and regulatory scenarios in 6 major European countries, selected as meaningful samples in terms of population size.
It is worth remarking that when stem cells are isolated, embryos are not fully killed: at least one embryonic cell, that is a stem cell, does survive. The life of stem cells cannot be qualified as independent. Nevertheless, the embryo's life is not completely destroyed and continues in a primitive way of life, hence there is no outright destruction in the strict sense [76]. In the United States, the 2016 Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation (ISSCR), updated in 2021 based the prohibition of research on embryoids after 14 days on a “broad international consensus that such experiments lack a compelling scientific rationale, raise substantial ethical concerns and/or are illegal in many jurisdictions”[77]. Nicolas P et al. [78] pointed to the need to start a public debate involving all stakeholders, scientists, research policy experts, bioethicists, and community members in order to weigh an extension of the 14-day rule and possibly revise the Dickey-Wicker Amendment which prohibits the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from using appropriated funds for the creation of human embryos for research purposes or for research in which human embryos are destroyed. In 2001, under the George W. Bush administration, such guidelines were amended, limiting federal funds to only the stem cell lines existing as of August 9, 2001, which was then estimated at approximately 60 cell lines; however, many of those lines eventually proved unusable [79].

4. Discussion

One of the main cornerstones of reproductive biology is that women have a finite ovarian reserve, which is set from the very time they are born. This theory has been questioned recently by the discovery of ovarian stem cells which are purported to have the ability to form new oocytes under specific conditions post-natally. Almost a decade after their discovery, ovarian, or oogonial, stem cells (OSCs) have been isolated in mice and humans but remain the subject of much debate. The ideal fertility preservation approach would prevent delays in commencing life-saving treatment and avoid transplanting malignant cells back into a woman after treatment: OSCs can be a viable route to such an end [80]. Based on the recent encouraging results of studies [81] conducted on OTC, particularly several involving patients with oncological or autoimmune conditions predisposing them to premature ovarian insufficiency and/or infertility, OTC and its subsequent transplantation could be proposed as an alternative to HRT [82,83].
Menstrual stem cells (hMensSCs) increased the ovarian weight, plasma E2 levels, and follicle numbers in mice [84]. Amniotic fluid stem cells can differentiate into granulosa cells, which inhibit follicular atresia and maintain healthy follicles [85]. Wang J al. [10] found that hESC-derived endometrial cells can support endometrial repair and functional recovery [86]. ESCs (Embryonic stem cells) were obtained from cloned blastocysts, themselves obtained from somatic cell nuclear transfers (SCNTs) (the resulting embryonic stem cells were called Kitw/Kitwv, ntESCs) [87]. Marinaro F.et al. demonstrated that extracellular vesicles derived from endometrial mesenchymal stem cells (EV-endMSCs) can elicit an antioxidant effect and be helpful when used as IVF coadjutants. In this work, endMSCs were isolated from human menstrual blood and characterized according to multipotentiality and surface marker expression prior EV-endMSCs isolation, so they suggested that the increased developmental competence of the embryos could be partly mediated by the EV-endMSCs’ ROS scavenger activity [88]. The Endometrial Side Population (ESP) constitute mixed population, mostly made up of precursors of endothelial cells [89]. Adequate uterine vascularity and the regulating cells/factors are necessary preconditions at the time of implantation, while inappropriate endometrial angiogenesis and immunity can result in reproductive failure, especially in recurrent miscarriage and recurrent implantation failure (RIF) [90].
Tersoglio et al. have accounted for endometrial changes before and after the transfer of endometrial mesenchymal stem cells (enMSCs) in a population of thinned endometrium women, with absence or hypo-responsiveness to estrogen and RIF; a substantially high level of increase in endometrial thickness was ultimately reported following the inoculation of enMSCs, pointing to the considerable regenerative potential of such an approach [91].
Although it is not yet a well-established technology, oocyte cryopreservation has been getting increasingly widespread in assisted reproductive technologies in response to the growing demands of patients' sociological and pathological conditions. Oocyte mitochondria are critical cellular organisms that regulate the potentiality of embryo development. Has been reported that human and animal oocytes’ mitochondrial structure and function are seriously diminished following cryopreservation [92,93]. Kankanam Gamage US et al. demonstrated how a supplementation of adipose stem cell mitochondria can positively affect the declined embryo development caused by cryopreservation-mediated cellular stresses and damages, and thus live birth rates [94].
As far as male fertility is concerned, spermatogenesis is known to be a gradual, orderly cascade process which comes to fruition through the precise regulation of genes, proteins, and various cytokines [95].
The protective effects of MSCs (Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells) are likely associated with their ability to secrete various cytokines which participate in testis development and hormone synthesis, improve spermatogenesis and the sperm maturation micro-environment, and affect sperm quality and male fertility [96]. Nagano M et al. provide a mechanism to evaluate the status of the stem cell population in selected infertile male patients that had shown how a xenogeneic transplantation of human germ cells using mice as recipients is feasible and could be used as a biological assay system to further characterize human spermatogonial stem cells [97].
Chemotherapeutic drugs can cause reproductive damage due its gonadotoxyc effects on sperm quality and other aspects of male fertility. Zhang Y et al. focus their study showing how stem cells are thought to alleviate the damage caused by chemotherapy drugs and to play roles in reproductive protection and treatment [98], in order to investigate whether exosomes derived from human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (hucMSC-derived exosomes) can repair injured endometrial epithelial cells (EECs) and reduce their death, and exhibit an anti-inflammatory effect against OGD/R (oxygen and glucose deprivation/reoxygenation) [99]. As reported in 2016 by multiple groups, scientists developed the ability to culture human embryos for 12 or 13 days [100], ethicists have also called for the policy to be revisited, and some have suggested that research should be allowed until the 21st or 28th day after fertilization [101].
Fertility preservation (FP) emerged as a treatment aiming to preserve future reproductive capacity of individuals facing therapies that could potentially affect their gonads [102] or if needed to perform a fertility sparing surgery treatments in case of diagnosis of malignancies and especially in reproductive age [103,104,105,106,107]. The majority being patients diagnosed with cancer, cryopreservation of oocytes or embryos by vitrification [108] is the most common way to preserve fertility and for future needed especially at the parentinghood time. Stress reduction through relaxation training or behavioral treatment has been demonstrated to improve conception rates, especially by virtue of the beneficial psychological support it can provide [109].

5. Conclusions

In couples who cannot benefit from ART to treat their infertility, stem cells-based approaches can constitute a highly promising option, despite lingering ethical quandaries and immunological uncertainties that require more conclusive scientific data to be viable for mainstream use. The isolation of human ESCs (embryonic stem cells) is ethically controversial. Although ESCs are genetically unrelated to patients, their collection does entail the destruction of human embryonic tissue.
Overall, stem cell research has brought about important new breakthroughs in the treatment of infertility. The common efforts towards untangling the complex web of ethical issues associated with this therapy need to be continued and expanded. International consensus will be vital, in order to avoid that citizens of countries where a given technique is illegal will have to travel to a country where it is not, which would discriminate against those who cannot afford such an option. The ultimate purpose is the devising a well-balanced set of guidelines and evidence-based standards to harness the full potential of stem cells-based therapeutic approaches, in an ethically and legally tenable fashion, for the sake of all those in need for help in the exercise of their reproductive rights.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., V.B. and S.Z..; methodology, G.C., G.G., E.C. and G.N.; validation, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., V.B. and S.Z..; formal analysis, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., G.N. and S.Z..; investigation, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., V.B. and S.Z..; resources, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., V.B. and S.Z..; data curation, G.G., G.N. and S.Z..; writing—original draft preparation, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., V.B. and S.Z..; writing—review and editing, G.G., E.C., G.N. and S.Z..; visualization, G.C., G.G., E.C., A.P., V.B. and S.Z..; supervision, G.G., G.N. and S.Z.; All authors have read an agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

None.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Boulet, S.L.; Mehta, A.; Kissin, D.M.; Warner, L.; Kawwass, J.F.; Jamieson, D.J. Trends in Use of and Reproductive Outcomes Associated with Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection. JAMA 2015, 313, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kroese, A.C.J.; de Lange, N.M.; Collins, J.; Evers, J.L.H. Surgery or Embolization for Varicoceles in Subfertile Men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, 10, CD000479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Attia, A.M.; Abou-Setta, A.M.; Al-Inany, H.G. Gonadotrophins for Idiopathic Male Factor Subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013, CD005071. [CrossRef]
  4. Steiner, N.; Ruiter-Ligeti, J.; Frank, R.; Al Shatti, M.; Badeghiesh, A.; Rotshenker-Olshinka, K.; Buckett, W.; Dahan, M.H. Do Oral Ovulation Induction Agents Offer Benefits in Women 38 to 43 Years of Age Undergoing Insemination Cycles? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2021, 258, 273–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Wang, A.T.; Mullan, R.J.; Lane, M.A.; Hazem, A.; Prasad, C.; Gathaiya, N.W.; Fernández-Balsells, M.M.; Bagatto, A.; Coto-Yglesias, F.; Carey, J.; et al. Treatment of Hyperprolactinemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Syst Rev 2012, 1, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Dodson, W.C.; Haney, A.F. Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation and Intrauterine Insemination for Treatment of Infertility. Fertil Steril 1991, 55, 457–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Saha, S.; Roy,P. ;Corbitt,C.; Kakar, S.S. Application of Stem Cell Therapy for Infertility. Cells 2021, 10, 1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Desai, N.; Rambhia, P.; Gishto, A. Human Embryonic Stem Cell Cultivation: Historical Perspective and Evolution of Xeno-Free Culture Systems. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2015, 13, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kehler, J.; Hübner, K.; Garrett, S.; Schöler, H.R. Generating oocytes and sperm from embryonic stem cells. Semin. Reprod. Med. 2005, 23, 222–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Wang, J.; Liu, C.; Fujino, M.; Tong, G.; Zhang, Q.; Li, X.-K.; Yan, H. Stem cells as a resource for treatment of infertility-related diseases. Curr. Mol. Med. 2019, 19, 539–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Takahashi, K.; Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 2006, 126, 663–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Fang, F.; Li, Z.; Zhao, Q.; Li, H.; Xiong, C. Human induced pluripotent stem cells and male infertility: An overview of current progress and perspectives. Hum. Reprod. 2018, 33, 188–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Hou, J.; Yang, S.; Yang, H.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Hai, Y.; Chen, Z.; Guo, Y.; Gong, Y.; Gao, W.-Q. Generation of male differentiated germ cells from various types of stem cells. Reproduction 2014, 147, R179–R188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Lee, Y.; Kang, E. Stem Cells and Reproduction. BMB Rep 2019, 52, 482–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Dominici, M.; Le Blanc, K.; Mueller, I.; Slaper-Cortenbach, I.; Marini, F.; Krause, D.; Deans, R.; Keating, A.; Prockop, D.; Horwitz, E. Minimal Criteria for Defining Multipotent Mesenchymal Stromal Cells. The International Society for Cellular Therapy Position Statement. Cytotherapy 2006, 8, 315–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chen, P.-M.; Yen, M.-L.; Liu, K.-J.; Sytwu, H.-K.; Yen, B.-L. Immunomodulatory properties of human adult and fetal multipotent mesenchymal stem cells. J. Biomed. Sci. 2011, 18, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Owen M, Friedenstein A. Stromal stem cells: Marrow-derived osteogenic precursors. Ciba Found. Symp. 1988, 136, 42–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jing Z, Qiong Z, Yonggang W, Yanping L. Rat bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells improve regeneration of thin endometrium in rat. Fertil. Steril. 2014, 101, 587–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, J.; Ju, B.; Pan, C.; Gu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, L.; Zhang, B.; Zhang, Y. Application of Bone Marrow-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells in the Treatment of Intrauterine Adhesions in Rats. Cell Physiol Biochem 2016, 39, 1553–1560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, T.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Qin, W.; Chi, H.; Chen, J.; Yu, Z.; Chen, C. Transplantation of Human Menstrual Blood Stem Cells to Treat Premature Ovarian Failure in Mouse Model. Stem Cells Dev 2014, 23, 1548–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Xie, Q.; Xiong, X.; Xiao, N.; He, K.; Chen, M.; Peng, J.; Su, X.; Mei, H.; Dai, Y.; Wei, D.; et al. Mesenchymal Stem Cells Alleviate DHEA-Induced Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) by Inhibiting Inflammation in Mice. Stem Cells Int 2019, 2019, 9782373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Xiao, G.-Y.; Liu, I.-H.; Cheng, C.-C.; Chang, C.-C.; Lee, Y.-H.; Cheng, W.T.-K.; Wu, S.-C. Amniotic Fluid Stem Cells Prevent Follicle Atresia and Rescue Fertility of Mice with Premature Ovarian Failure Induced by Chemotherapy. PLoS One 2014, 9, e106538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yin, N.; Wang, Y.; Lu, X.; Liu, R.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, W.; Yuan, W.; Luo, Q.; Wu, H.; Luan, X.; et al. hPMSC Transplantation Restoring Ovarian Function in Premature Ovarian Failure Mice Is Associated with Change of Th17/Tc17 and Th17/Treg Cell Ratios through the PI3K/Akt Signal Pathway. Stem Cell Res Ther 2018, 9, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Sun, M.; Wang, S.; Li, Y.; Yu, L.; Gu, F.; Wang, C.; Yao, Y. Adipose-Derived Stem Cells Improved Mouse Ovary Function after Chemotherapy-Induced Ovary Failure. Stem Cell Res Ther 2013, 4, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Bhartiya, D.; Sharma, D. Ovary Does Harbor Stem Cells - Size of the Cells Matter! J Ovarian Res 2020, 13, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Johnson, J.; Canning, J.; Kaneko, T.; Pru, J.K.; Tilly, J.L. Germline Stem Cells and Follicular Renewal in the Postnatal Mammalian Ovary. Nature 2004, 428, 145–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. White, Y.A.R.; Woods, D.C.; Takai, Y.; Ishihara, O.; Seki, H.; Tilly, J.L. Oocyte Formation by Mitotically Active Germ Cells Purified from Ovaries of Reproductive-Age Women. Nat Med 2012, 18, 413–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Subash, S.K.; Kumar, P.G. Spermatogonial Stem Cells: A Story of Self-Renewal and Differentiation. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed) 2021, 26, 163–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kita, K.; Watanabe, T.; Ohsaka, K.; Hayashi, H.; Kubota, Y.; Nagashima, Y.; Aoki, I.; Taniguchi, H.; Noce, T.; Inoue, K.; et al. Production of Functional Spermatids from Mouse Germline Stem Cells in Ectopically Reconstituted Seminiferous Tubules. Biol Reprod 2007, 76, 211–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Aguilar-Gallardo, C.; Poo, M.; Gomez, E.; Galan, A.; Sanchez, E.; Marques-Mari, A.; Ruiz, V.; Medrano, J.; Riboldi, M.; Valbuena, D.; et al. Derivation, Characterization, Differentiation, and Registration of Seven Human Embryonic Stem Cell Lines (VAL-3, -4, -5, -6M, -7, -8, and -9) on Human Feeder. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim 2010, 46, 317–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Asherman, J.G. Traumatic Intra-Uterine Adhesions. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp 1950, 57, 892–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Schenker, J.G.; Margalioth, E.J. Intrauterine Adhesions: An Updated Appraisal. Fertil Steril 1982, 37, 593–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Domnina, A.; Novikova, P.; Obidina, J.; Fridlyanskaya, I.; Alekseenko, L.; Kozhukharova, I.; Lyublinskaya, O.; Zenin, V.; Nikolsky, N. Human mesenchymal stem cells in spheroids improve fertility in model animals with damaged endometrium. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2018, 9, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Kawamura, K.; Cheng, Y.; Suzuki, N.; Deguchi, M.; Sato, Y.; Takae, S.; Ho, C.; Kawamura, N.; Tamura, M.; Hashimoto, S.; et al. Hippo Signaling Disruption and Akt Stimulation of Ovarian Follicles for Infertility Treatment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2013, 110, 17474–17479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Suzuki, N.; Yoshioka, N.; Takae, S.; Sugishita, Y.; Tamura, M.; Hashimoto, S.; Morimoto, Y.; Kawamura, K. Successful Fertility Preservation Following Ovarian Tissue Vitrification in Patients with Primary Ovarian Insufficiency. Hum Reprod 2015, 30, 608–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Zhai, J.; Yao, G.; Dong, F.; Bu, Z.; Cheng, Y.; Sato, Y.; Hu, L.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, J.; Dai, S.; et al. In Vitro Activation of Follicles and Fresh Tissue Auto-Transplantation in Primary Ovarian Insufficiency Patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2016, 101, 4405–4412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Legro, R.S.; Arslanian, S.A.; Ehrmann, D.A.; Hoeger, K.M.; Murad, M.H.; Pasquali, R.; Welt, C.K. ; Endocrine Society Diagnosis and Treatment of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013, 98, 4565–4592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Ratajczak, M.Z.; Kucia, M.; Majka, M.; Reca, R.; Ratajczak, J. Heterogeneous populations of bone marrow stem cells–are we spotting on the same cells from the different angles? Folia Histochem. Et Cytobiol. 2004, 42, 139–146. [Google Scholar]
  39. Bhartiya, D.; Unni, S.; Parte, S.; Anand, S. Very Small Embryonic-like Stem Cells: Implications in Reproductive Biology. Biomed Res Int 2013, 2013, 682326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Zhang, C. The Roles of Different Stem Cells in Premature Ovarian Failure. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther 2020, 15, 473–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Xiao, G.-Y.; Cheng, C.-C.; Chiang, Y.-S.; Cheng, W.T.-K.; Liu, I.-H.; Wu, S.-C. Exosomal miR-10a Derived from Amniotic Fluid Stem Cells Preserves Ovarian Follicles after Chemotherapy. Sci Rep 2016, 6, 23120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Assen, L.S.; Jongsma, K.R.; Isasi, R.; Tryfonidou, M.A.; Bredenoord, A.L. Recognizing the Ethical Implications of Stem Cell Research: A Call for Broadening the Scope. Stem Cell Reports 2021, 16, 1656–1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Piersanti, V.; Consalvo, F.; Signore, F.; Del Rio, A.; Zaami, S. Surrogacy and “Procreative Tourism”. What Does the Future Hold from the Ethical and Legal Perspectives? Medicina (Kaunas) 2021, 57, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Torres, G.; Shapiro, A.; Mackey, T.K. A Review of Surrogate Motherhood Regulation in South American Countries: Pointing to a Need for an International Legal Framework. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019, 19, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Marinelli, S.; Del Rio, A.; Straccamore, M.; Negro, F.; Basile, G. The Armed Conflict in Ukraine and the Risks of Inter-Country Surrogacy: The Unsolved Dilemma. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2022, 26, 5646–5650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Zaami, S.; Del Rio, A.; Negro, F.; Varone, M.C.; Marinelli, S.; Montanari Vergallo, G. The March 2021 Italian Constitutional Court Ruling on Surrogacy: A Prelude to Common European Legislation for the Sake of Reproductive Health? Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2022, 27, 61–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fry-Bowers, E.K. A Matter of Conscience: Examining the Law and Policy of Conscientious Objection in Health Care. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 2020, 21, 120–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Montanari Vergallo, G.; Zaami, S.; Di Luca, N.M.; Marinelli, E. The Conscientious Objection: Debate on Emergency Contraception. Clin Ter 2017, 168, e113–e119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Morrell, K.M.; Chavkin, W. Conscientious Objection to Abortion and Reproductive Healthcare: A Review of Recent Literature and Implications for Adolescents. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2015, 27, 333–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Zampas, C.; Andión-Ibañez, X. Conscientious Objection to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services: International Human Rights Standards and European Law and Practice. Eur J Health Law 2012, 19, 231–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Rallo, G.; Negro, F.; Consalvo, F.; Piersanti, V.; Marinelli, S. Medically Assisted Procreation in Times of COVID-19: What Impact on Health Care System Organization and the Reproductive Rights of Couples? Acta Biomed 2021, 92, e2021275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tang, L.; Li, J.; Fantus, S. Medical Artificial Intelligence Ethics: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies. Digit Health 2023, 9, 20552076231186064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Medenica, S.; Zivanovic, D.; Batkoska, L.; Marinelli, S.; Basile, G.; Perino, A.; Cucinella, G.; Gullo, G.; Zaami, S. The Future Is Coming: Artificial Intelligence in the Treatment of Infertility Could Improve Assisted Reproduction Outcomes-The Value of Regulatory Frameworks. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022, 12, 2979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Rolfes, V.; Bittner, U.; Gerhards, H.; Krüssel, J.-S.; Fehm, T.; Ranisch, R.; Fangerau, H. Artificial Intelligence in Reproductive Medicine - An Ethical Perspective. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2023, 83, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Varone, M.C.; Napoletano, G.; Negro, F. Decellularization and Tissue Engineering: Viable Therapeutic Prospects for Transplant Patients and Infertility? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2021, 25, 6164–6166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Cobb, L.N.; Ke, R.W. Ethical Considerations in the Field of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Minerva Endocrinol 2018, 43, 80–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. de Miguel-Beriain, I. The Ethics of Stem Cells Revisited. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2015, 82–83, 176–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Negro, F.; Napoletano, G.; Piersanti, V. Research on Supernumerary Embryos: The Challenge of Reconciling Opposing Interests and Fast-Evolving Technologies. Clin Ter 2021, 358–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org Cross-Border Reproductive Care: An Ethics Committee Opinion. Fertil Steril 2022, 117, 954–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Law 40, enacted on 24th February 2004, Regulation of Medically Assisted Human Reproduction (Legge 24 Febbraio 2004, n. 40, Norme in materia di procreazione medicalmente assistita, G. U. N. 45 24-2-2004). Available online: https://www.parlamento.it/parlam/leggi/04040l.htm (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  61. Ricci, G.; Campanozzi, L.L.; Marinelli, S.; Midolo, E.; Ruggeri, L. The Human Embryo, Subjectivity and Legal Capacity. Notes in the Light of Art. 1 of the Italian Law on “Medically Assisted Procreation.” Clin Ter 2019, 170, e102–e107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. LOI n° 2011-814 du 7 juillet 2011 relative à la bioéthique. Available online: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000024323102 (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  63. French Public Health Code (article L1121-1) Available online:. Available online: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000046125746 (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  64. Act for the Protection of Embryos, Gesetz zum Schutz von Embryonen Embryonenschutzgesetz (ESchG- The Embryo Protection Act), 13 December 1990. Available online: www.gesetze-im-internet.de/eschg/BJNR027460990.html (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  65. Act ensuring Protection of Embryos in connection with the importation and use of human embryonic stem cells, Stammzellgesetz (StZG- Stem Cell Act), 28 June 2002. Available online: http://bundesrecht.juris.de/stzg/index.html (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  66. Act ensuring Protection of Embryos in connection with the importation and use of human embryonic stem cells, Gesetz zur Sicherstellung des Embryonenschutzes im Zusammenhang mit Einfuhr und Verwendung menschlicher embryonaler Stammzellen Stammzellgesetz (StZG- Stem Cell Act), 14 August 2008. Available online: http://bundesrecht.juris.de/stzg/index.html (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  67. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Available online: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/37 (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  68. Human Tissue Act 2004. Available online: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/30/contents (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  69. Human Tissue (Quality and Safety for Human Application) Regulations. Available online: https://www.odt.nhs.uk/odt-structures-and-standards/regulation/human-tissue-quality-and-safety-for-human-application-regulations (accessed on 5 October 2023).
  70. LEY 14/2007, de 3 de julio, de Investigación biomédica. Available online: https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2007/07/04/pdfs/A28826-28848.pdf (accessed on 7 October 2022).
  71. Real Decreto 1527/2010 de 15 de noviembre, por el que se regulan la Comisión de Garantías para la Donación y Utilización de Células y Tejidos Humanos y el Registro de Proyectos de Investigación. Available online: http://www.boe.es/buscar/doc.php?id=BOE-A-2010-18654 (accessed on 7 October 2022).
  72. Real Decreto 42/2010 de 15 de enero, por el que se regula la Comisión Nacional de Reproducción Humana Asistida. Available online: http://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2010-1705 (accessed on 7 October 2022).
  73. Lei n.º 32/2006 - Procriação medicamente assistida, Law N.º 32/2006, of 26 July, on medically assisted procreation. (with the amendments made by Law n.º 58/2017, de 25/07; Law n.º 25/2016, de 22/08; Law n.º 17/2016, de 20/06; and Law n.º 59/2007, de 04/09); Law n.º 12/2009, of March 26. Available online: http://www.fd.unl.pt/docentes_docs/ma/tpb_ma_4022.pdf (accessed on 7 October 2022).
  74. Lei n.º 12/2009, de 26 de março. Available online: https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/lei/12-2009-603264 (accessed on 7 October 2022).
  75. Law, No. 21/2014, of April 16 (Clinical Investigation Law). Available online: https://files.dre.pt/1s/2014/04/07500/0245002465.pdf (accessed on 7 October 2022).
  76. Bongaerts, G.P.A.; Severijnen, R.S.V.M. Stem Cells from Residual IVF-Embryos - Continuation of Life Justifies Isolation. Med Hypotheses 2007, 69, 478–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Lovell-Badge, R.; Anthony, E.; Barker, R.A.; Bubela, T.; Brivanlou, A.H.; Carpenter, M.; Charo, R.A.; Clark, A.; Clayton, E.; Cong, Y.; et al. ISSCR Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation: The 2021 Update. Stem Cell Reports 2021, 16, 1398–1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Nicolas, P.; Etoc, F.; Brivanlou, A.H. The Ethics of Human-Embryoids Model: A Call for Consistency. J Mol Med (Berl) 2021, 99, 569–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wertz, D.C. Did Eugenics Ever Die? Nat Rev Genet 2002, 3, 408–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Dunlop, C.E.; Telfer, E.E.; Anderson, R.A. Ovarian Stem Cells--Potential Roles in Infertility Treatment and Fertility Preservation. Maturitas 2013, 76, 279–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Kawwass, J.F.; Shandley, L.M.; Boulet, S.L.; Hipp, H.S. Oncologic Oocyte Cryopreservation: National Comparison of Fertility Preservation between Women with and without Cancer. J Assist Reprod Genet 2020, 37, 883–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Anderson, R.A.; Fauser, B. Ovarian Tissue Transplantation for Hormone Replacement. Reprod Biomed Online 2018, 37, 251–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Gullo, G.; Etrusco, A.; Cucinella, G.; Basile, G.; Fabio, M.; Perino, A.; De Tommasi, O.; Buzzaccarini, G.; Morreale, C.; Marchi, L.; et al. Ovarian Tissue Cryopreservation and Transplantation in Menopause: New Perspective of Therapy in Postmenopausal Women and the Importance of Ethical and Legal Frameworks. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2022, 26, 9107–9116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Liu, T.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Qin, W.; Chi, H.; Chen, J.; Yu, Z.; Chen, C. Transplantation of Human Menstrual Blood Stem Cells to Treat Premature Ovarian Failure in Mouse Model. Stem Cells Dev 2014, 23, 1548–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Xiao, G.-Y.; Cheng, C.-C.; Chiang, Y.-S.; Cheng, W.T.-K.; Liu, I.-H.; Wu, S.-C. Exosomal miR-10a Derived from Amniotic Fluid Stem Cells Preserves Ovarian Follicles after Chemotherapy. Sci Rep 2016, 6, 23120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Aghajanova, L.; Shen, S.; Rojas, A.M.; Fisher, S.J.; Irwin, J.C.; Giudice, L.C. Comparative Transcriptome Analysis of Human Trophectoderm and Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Trophoblasts Reveal Key Participants in Early Implantation. Biol Reprod 2012, 86, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. El-Shazly, S.; Okano, S.; Asano, A.; Watanabe, T. Developmental Study of the Different Effects on the Hybrid Sterility of Kit and KitW-v Alleles Paired with Kit from Mus Spretus. Dev Growth Differ 2001, 43, 611–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Marinaro, F.; Pericuesta, E.; Sánchez-Margallo, F.M.; Casado, J.G.; Álvarez, V.; Matilla, E.; Hernández, N.; Blázquez, R.; González-Fernández, L.; Gutiérrez-Adán, A.; et al. Extracellular Vesicles Derived from Endometrial Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improve IVF Outcome in an Aged Murine Model. Reprod Domest Anim 2018, 53 (Suppl 2), 46–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Masuda, H.; Maruyama, T.; Gargett, C.E.; Miyazaki, K.; Matsuzaki, Y.; Okano, H.; Tanaka, M. Endometrial Side Population Cells: Potential Adult Stem/Progenitor Cells in Endometrium. Biol Reprod 2015, 93, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Chen, X.; Man, G.C.W.; Liu, Y.; Wu, F.; Huang, J.; Li, T.C.; Wang, C.C. Physiological and Pathological Angiogenesis in Endometrium at the Time of Embryo Implantation. Am J Reprod Immunol 2017, 78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Tersoglio, A.E.; Tersoglio, S.; Salatino, D.R.; Castro, M.; Gonzalez, A.; Hinojosa, M.; Castellano, O. Regenerative Therapy by Endometrial Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Thin Endometrium with Repeated Implantation Failure. A Novel Strategy. JBRA Assist Reprod 2020, 24, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Amoushahi, M.; Salehnia, M.; Mowla, S.J. Vitrification of Mouse MII Oocyte Decreases the Mitochondrial DNA Copy Number, TFAM Gene Expression and Mitochondrial Enzyme Activity. J Reprod Infertil 2017, 18, 343–351. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  93. Palmerini, M.G.; Antinori, M.; Maione, M.; Cerusico, F.; Versaci, C.; Nottola, S.A.; Macchiarelli, G.; Khalili, M.A.; Antinori, S. Ultrastructure of Immature and Mature Human Oocytes after Cryotop Vitrification. J Reprod Dev 2014, 60, 411–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Kankanam Gamage, U.S.; Hashimoto, S.; Miyamoto, Y.; Nakano, T.; Yamanaka, M.; Koike, A.; Satoh, M.; Morimoto, Y. Mitochondria Transfer from Adipose Stem Cells Improves the Developmental Potential of Cryopreserved Oocytes. Biomolecules 2022, 12, 1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Oduwole, O.O.; Peltoketo, H.; Huhtaniemi, I.T. Role of Follicle-Stimulating Hormone in Spermatogenesis. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2018, 9, 763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Hsiao, C.-H.; Ji, A.T.-Q.; Chang, C.-C.; Chien, M.-H.; Lee, L.-M.; Ho, J.H.-C. Mesenchymal Stem Cells Restore the Sperm Motility from Testicular Torsion-Detorsion Injury by Regulation of Glucose Metabolism in Sperm. Stem Cell Res Ther 2019, 10, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Nagano, M.; Patrizio, P.; Brinster, R.L. Long-Term Survival of Human Spermatogonial Stem Cells in Mouse Testes. Fertil Steril 2002, 78, 1225–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Teng, Z.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, P.; Wang, Z.; Liu, F.; Liu, X. Human Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells (hUC-MSCs) Alleviate Paclitaxel-Induced Spermatogenesis Defects and Maintain Male Fertility. Biol Res 2023, 56, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Liang, L.; Wang, L.; Zhou, S.; Li, J.; Meng, L.; Zhang, H.; Cui, C.; Zhang, C. Exosomes Derived from Human Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells Repair Injured Endometrial Epithelial Cells. J Assist Reprod Genet 2020, 37, 395–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Shahbazi, M.N.; Jedrusik, A.; Vuoristo, S.; Recher, G.; Hupalowska, A.; Bolton, V.; Fogarty, N.M.E.; Campbell, A.; Devito, L.G.; Ilic, D.; et al. Self-Organization of the Human Embryo in the Absence of Maternal Tissues. Nat Cell Biol 2016, 18, 700–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Deglincerti, A.; Croft, G.F.; Pietila, L.N.; Zernicka-Goetz, M.; Siggia, E.D.; Brivanlou, A.H. Self-Organization of the in Vitro Attached Human Embryo. Nature 2016, 533, 251–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Zaami, S.; Stark, M.; Signore, F.; Gullo, G.; Marinelli, E. Fertility Preservation in Female Cancer Sufferers: (Only) a Moral Obligation? Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2022, 27, 335–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Piergentili, R.; Gullo, G.; Basile, G.; Gulia, C.; Porrello, A.; Cucinella, G.; Marinelli, E.; Zaami, S. Circulating miRNAs as a Tool for Early Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer-Implications for the Fertility-Sparing Process: Clinical, Biological, and Legal Aspects. Int J Mol Sci 2023, 24, 11356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Gullo, G.; Cucinella, G.; Chiantera, V.; Dellino, M.; Cascardi, E.; Török, P.; Herman, T.; Garzon, S.; Uccella, S.; Laganà, A.S. Fertility-Sparing Strategies for Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: Stepping towards Precision Medicine Based on the Molecular Fingerprint. Int J Mol Sci 2023, 24, 811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Mutlu, L.; Manavella, D.D.; Gullo, G.; McNamara, B.; Santin, A.D.; Patrizio, P. Endometrial Cancer in Reproductive Age: Fertility-Sparing Approach and Reproductive Outcomes. Cancers (Basel) 2022, 14, 5187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Cavaliere, A.F.; Perelli, F.; Zaami, S.; Piergentili, R.; Mattei, A.; Vizzielli, G.; Scambia, G.; Straface, G.; Restaino, S.; Signore, F. Towards Personalized Medicine: Non-Coding RNAs and Endometrial Cancer. Healthcare (Basel) 2021, 9, 965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Giampaolino, P.; Cafasso, V.; Boccia, D.; Ascione, M.; Mercorio, A.; Viciglione, F.; Palumbo, M.; Serafino, P.; Buonfantino, C.; De Angelis, M.C.; et al. Fertility-Sparing Approach in Patients with Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer Grade 2 Stage IA (FIGO): A Qualitative Systematic Review. Biomed Res Int 2022, 2022, 4070368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Gullo, G.; Perino, A.; Cucinella, G. Open vs. Closed Vitrification System: Which One Is Safer? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2022, 26, 1065–1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Burgio, S.; Polizzi, C.; Buzzaccarini, G.; Laganà, A.S.; Gullo, G.; Perricone, G.; Perino, A.; Cucinella, G.; Alesi, M. Psychological Variables in Medically Assisted Reproduction: A Systematic Review. Prz Menopauzalny 2022, 21, 47–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Stem cells variants with potential use in reproductive medicine.
Table 1. Stem cells variants with potential use in reproductive medicine.
Stem cell type Distinctive features Reproductive application
Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) They are capable of self-renewal and can differentiate into different tissues (ectoderm, endoderm, mesoderm) [7]. They originate from blastocysts and express factor Oct 4 [8]. Even if hES cells can give rise to all somatic tissues, they cannot form all of the other ‘extraembryonic’ needed for thorough development, e.g. the placenta and membranes, hence they cannot form a whole new human being. Such features differentiates them from ‘totipotent’ fertilized oocyte and blastomere cells, which originate from the first cleavage divisions. They can yield male and female gametes [9] through meiosis. ESCs play a key role in endometrial restoration [10].
Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) As described by Takahashi and Yamanaka [11]in 2006, such cells express different transcription factors such as Oct 4, klf 4, sox 2, c – myc. They originate from adult cells, thus are not as ethically controversial as ESCs, which originate from embryos. In addition, they are developed from patient’ somatic cells, avoiding immune reaction [12,13], while the main drawback is genetic instability is [14].
Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCs) They have plastic – adhesion quality, they express CD105, CD73, CD90 as markers and they can give origin to osteoblast, adipocytes and chondroblasts [15,16]. The principal kinds of MSCs are documented by Saha et al [7] in their review:

  • ✓ Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells: they were studied by Owen et al [17] for the first time in 1988. The injection of this kind of stem cells has been reported to improve endometrial thickness by a 2014 study by Jing et al [18]. On the other hand, Wang et al [19] used bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells to increase endometrial estrogen receptors in mice.
  • ✓ Menstrual Blood Mesenchymal Stem Cells: Liu et al [20] demonstrated these cells improving ovarian function in mice, thanks to the transcription factor OCT-4.
  • ✓ Endometrial Stem Cells.
  • ✓ Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells: easily obtainable, and with low immunological risk; can support ovarian function, reduce inflammatory cytokines and improve fertility [21].
  • ✓ Amniotic Fluid Stem Cells: thanks to VEGF, EGF, BMP they can increase ovarian function, preventing atresia [22].
  • ✓ Amnion-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells
  • ✓ Placenta-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells: they can improve folliculogenesis, thanks to the pathway PI3K/Akt [23].
  • ✓ Adipose-Tissue-Derived Stem Cells: in mice, they increase neovascularization and follicle proliferation [24].
 These cells can be beneficial in ovarian and endometrial dysfunction by reaching ovarian tissue and restore its function via several cytokines and growth factors. MSCs are able to create new vessels, inhibit apoptosis and fibrosis [7]. Among these cells, fetal ones can reportedly rely on better telomerase activity and longer survival. They can be found in blood, bone marrow, liver, cordon blood, Wharton’s Jelly, amnion and placenta [16].
Ovarian Stem Cells (OSCs) They include pluripotent, very small embryonic-like stem cells (VSELs) and larger OSCs which are easily visualized in smears by scraping the ovarian surface. The potential of OSCs to differentiate into oocyte-like structures in vitro has been reported [25]. Johnson et al [26] observed OSCs ability to induce follicle synthesis in mouse’s ovaries. In 2012, White et al [27] used specific VASA markers to isolate ovarian stem cells from human ovarian cortex [18].
Spermatogonial Stem Cells (SSCs) SSCs develop to form spermatozoa. During testicular homeostasis, SSCs self-renew to maintain the stem cell pool or differentiate to constitute a progeny of germ cells which sequentially transform into spermatozoa [28]. They play a key role in unlimited spermatogenesis in seminiferorous tubules [29].
Table 2. Legislative and regulatory state of affairs in major European countries.
Table 2. Legislative and regulatory state of affairs in major European countries.
Country Legislation currently in place Relevant Legislative Provisions Bioethics oversight
Italy Law 40, enacted on 24th February 2004, Regulation of Medically Assisted Human Reproduction [60]. The current legislative situation in the country is the outcome of a heated and drawn-out debate between supporters and opponents of embryonic stem cell research and ART. In 2005 the law was challenged in Italy’s highest court, the Constitutional Court, by opponents who included scientists seeking a review of the ban on the use of embryos for research. The Court allowed a referendum on several parts of the law, including on whether or not the prohibition on embryo research could be relaxed. The referendum was held in 2005 but failed to reach the minimum 50% voter turnout. A 2009 Ministerial Decree that confined research funding to tissue (adult) stem cell research, so excluding embryonic stem cell research, has so far been unsuccessfully challenged by a number of Italian scientists following several appeal cases before the Italian courts. The Italian National Ethics Committee instituted in 1990 to deal with the ethical legal and social implications linked to scientific research and technological applications on persons. The committee is made up of government-appointed scientists, physicians and bioethicists. The Committee has published many reports on embryo research and other related issues, but these have no binding authority. Other committees have recommended opposing opinions on some issues, including embryonic stem cell research [61].
France Law on Bioethics, LOI n° 2011-814 [62] ; French Public Health Code (article L1121-1) [63] ;
Research on human participants need to meet specific standards (a protocol must be submitted in writing including the information document and the consent form).
Specific criteria govern the collection of human material, including biobanking.

According to article L1121-1 of the French Public Health Code, three research classes are deemed to involve human subjects:
  • ✓ Interventional study (clinical trial)
  • ✓ Interventional study (clinical trial) with minimal risk study
  • ✓ Non-interventional study (clinical trial) [63].

The 2011 law on bioethics as amended in 2013 allows for research on human embryos and embryonic stem cells, provided that the following conditions are met:
- Scientific relevance is acknowledged.
- The research has a medical objective.
- The research cannot be conducted otherwise, i.e. without relying on human embryos or embryonic stem cells.
- The research project meets the ethical standards for research on embryos and embryonic stem cells.
-Moreover, embryos used for research must come from IVF, and no longer be part of a family project. Informed consent must be obtained from the donors’ couple, to be renewed after three months and revocable at any time.		 Local Ethics Committee (“Comité de Protection des Personnes”) for ethical approval of the research project.
French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM) for authorization of interventional studies and to be informed in case of other studies (interventional study with minimal risk and non-interventional study)

French Ministry of Research and Health Regional Agency (“Agence Régionale de Santé”):
The French Biomedicine Agency (“Agence de la Biomédicine”) authorizes research on human embryos and embryonic stem cells [62,63].
Germany Embryo Protection Act (Embryonenschutzgesetz) 1991 [64]; 2002 Stem Cell Act (Stammzellgesetz) [65];
2008 Act ensuring Protection of Embryos in connection with the importation and use of human embryonic stem cells [66].
 The use of embryos for research is heavily restricted in Germany: the derivation of embryonic stem cell lines is in fact a crime. The German Constitution (Grundgesetz) itself enshrines embryo protection by stating that “human dignity is inviolable” and “everyone has the right to life and inviolability of his person.” At the same time the freedom to pursue scientific research is also upheld.

For research purposes, German law prioritizes adult stem cells under the 2002 Stem Cell Act (Stammzellgesetz) [65]. Embryonic stem cell lines can however be imported under strict conditions outlined by parliament. The 2002 Act included a ‘cut-off date’ of 1 January 2002 – imported ES cell lines must have been derived before that date. The cut-off point was moved to 1 May 2007. In addition to these criteria, embryonic stem cell lines can only be used for research if they are vital in developing new medical and scientific knowledge.		 The importation of stem cell lines for research must be approved by the Central Ethics Commission for Stem Cell Research (ZES), made up of scientists, physicians and bioethicists. The German National Ethics Council (Geschäftsselle des Nationalen Ethikrat), instituted in 2007, provides guidance to policy- and law-makers and the public on scientific and medical issues that affect society and human health.
United Kingdom Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, Schedule 2 [67]. Human Tissue Act 2004, Section 1 (9) [68];
Human Tissue (Quality and Safety for Human Application) Regulations 2007 [69]. 		An ethical approval is required for specific research projects. Human tissue held for a specific research project needs approval by a recognized Research Ethics Committee (REC) (or where approval is pending). Research on embryos and human embryonic stem cells is legal under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, Schedule 2 [67].


 The ethical approval is delivered by a Research Ethics Committee (REC) and it must be applied for using the guidance provided by National Research Ethics Service (NRES) at the Health Research Authority. Tissue banks that have been approved by a REC can provide human tissues to researchers, who do not need to store them under a Human Tissue Authority licence during the period of the research project, subject to certain requirements. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) is in charge of regulating the storage of gametes and embryos. It also grants licenses for research projects involving human embryos where the following conditions are met
Spain Law on Biomedical Research (Law 14/2007) [70]. Spanish law expressly bans the creation of human pre-embryos (i.e. an embryo formed in vitro by a group of cells resulting from the progressive division of the egg cell, from the time it is fertilized until 14 days after) and embryos exclusively for experimentation purposes. In keeping with the gradualist perspective on the protection of human life outlined by Constitutional Court rulings 53/1985, 212/1996 and 116/1999. Still, techniques aimed at collecting embryonic stem cells for therapeutic or research purposes, without the creation of a pre-embryo or of an embryo exclusively for this purpose, are legal, in compliance with legislative standards. Guarantees Commission for the Donation and Use of Human Cells and Tissues, established under the Real Decreto 1527/2010 [71]
National Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction, established under Real Decreto 42/2010 [72].
Portugal No specific legislation in Portugal currently governs stem cell research. Law n.º 32/2006, enacted on July 26, which regulates the use of medically assisted procreation [73], establishes the legal framework relative to quality and safety standards governing donation, collection, analysis, processing, preservation, storage, distribution and application of human tissues and cells [74];
Law No. 21/2014, of April 16 (Clinical Investigation Law) [75]. 		The creation of embryos through MAP for research purposes is banned. Still, the scientific investigation of embryos for prevention, diagnosis or therapeutic purposes, or to improve MAP procedures is allowed under supervision. Legally usable embryos are:
  • ✓ Cryopreserved, surplus embryos not part of a parental project (depends on prior, express, informed and conscious consent of the intended beneficiaries);
  • ✓ Embryos not viable for transfer or cryopreservation;
  • ✓ Embryos with major genetic abnormalities, in the case of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (on informed consent of those for which they were intended);
  • ✓ Embryos obtained without fertilisation by spermatozoa.
 The use of embryos for scientific research purposes, limited to embryos produced for other purposes, always depends on the authorization of the experimentation by the National Council for Medically Assisted Procreation (CNPMA), established by Law 32/2006, of 26 July [73], which is charged with passing judgement on the ethical, social and legal issues of the medically assisted procreation.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated