New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

For which diseases or conditions is umbilical cord blood stem-cell therapy most effective?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Gregory Hale, assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Kentucky College of Medicine, is a bone marrow transplant expert. He also has an appointment with the Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation at the Markey Cancer Center. He provides the following answer.

Blood that remains in the human umbilical cord and placenta after birth supplies doctors with a rich source of hematopoietic progenitor cells (stem cells), the precursors of all other blood cells. Bone marrow from donors has traditionally been used as a source of stem cells for restoration of diseased bone marrow, but researchers have demonstrated that cord blood provides an excellent alternative source. Thus, cord blood is utilized for the treatment of many diseases--such as leukemia, sickle cell anemia and Hodgkin's disease--that are typically remedied by bone marrow transplants (see table).

Treating Disease With Stem Cells

Malignant Diseases
  • Acute lymphoblastic leukemia
  • Acute myeloblastic leukemia
  • Chronic myelogenous leukemia
  • Hodgkin's disease
  • Multiple myeloma
  • Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
  • Nonmalignant Diseases
  • Aplastic anemia
  • Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome
  • X-linked lymphoproliferative syndrome
  • Hunter's syndrome
  • Hurler's syndrome
  • Lesch Nyhan syndrome
  • Beta thalassemia
  • Sickle cell anemia
  • Blackfan-diamond syndrome
  • Globoid cell leukodystrophy
  • Severe combined immunodeficiency
  • Osteopetrosis

  • On supporting science journalism

    If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


    All of these diseases have been treated with allogeneic cord blood transplants--cases where blood has been collected from a familial or unrelated donor, as opposed to autologous transplants, in which the patient's own blood is utilized. Transplantation is nonsurgical; the infusion of stem cells is similar to receiving a blood transfusion.

    In many bone marrow transplant cases, the search for an appropriate donor can prove difficult at best. There appear to be several advantages to using stem cells from umbilical cord blood, including rapid availability, potential to expand the ethnic diversity of the donor pool (minorities are vastly underrepresented in bone marrow donor pools), no donor risk, less likelihood of viral contamination and less risk of graft-versus-host disorder (GVHD).

    GVHD is a significant consideration because stem cells from a donor's bone marrow often recognize the host as foreign, resulting in complications after transplantation. Cord blood stem cells are potentially less immunologically active and may pose less risk of GVHD than stem cells from bone marrow.

    One consideration to physicians, however, is the direct relationship between the number of stem cells needed and the weight of the patient. The volume of umbilical blood collected at birth averages 80 to 100 milliliters; thus, the majority of transplants have been pediatric cases. By using bone marrow, the doctor has a large supply of stem cells. Researchers are diligently seeking methods to increase the number of cord blood stem cells for use in larger adult patients. Other areas under investigation include the degree to which human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-mismatched grafts can be utilized and the use of gene therapy in cord blood stem cells.

    The future holds great promise for the use of umbilical cord blood stem cells. In the transplantation discipline, collection of data from clinical trials will continue to improve knowledge, thereby helping to increase survival rates.

    Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

    Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

    When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

    Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

    Thank you,

    Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

    Subscribe