ArticleTissue engineering. Part A2014
Stem cell trials for cardiovascular medicine: ethical rationale.
Article in Tissue engineering. Part A, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03042572 (Allogeneic Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Angiogenesis and Neovascularization in No-option Ischemic Limbs; A Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Allogeneic Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Angiogenesis and Neovascularization in No-option Ischemic Limbs; A Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Who should be included in first-in-human trials? A systematic review of reasons.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Review
- Creation and use of organoids in biomedical research and healthcare: the bioethical and metabioethical issues.Cell adhesion & migration · 2021Article
- Regenerative Medicine for the Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease; Status and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
- Cell Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Stem cells translational medicine · 2018Article
- Concise Review: Fat and Furious: Harnessing the Full Potential of Adipose-Derived Stromal Vascular Fraction.Stem cells translational medicine · 2017Review
- Ethical considerations in the translation of regenerative biofabrication technologies into clinic and society.Biofabrication · 2016Review
- Position Paper of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group Cellular Biology of the Heart: cell-based therapies for myocardial repair and regeneration in ischemic heart disease and heart failure.European heart journal · 2016Review
- Autologous, allogeneic, induced pluripotent stem cell or a combination stem cell therapy? Where are we headed in cartilage repair and why: a concise review.Stem cell research & therapy · 2015Review
- Article
- The future of stem cell therapy in hernia and abdominal wall repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2015Review
- Ethical issues in stem cell research and therapy.Stem cell research & therapy · 2014Review
- Regenerative and molecular therapies for myocardial repair (Review).Medicine internationalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stem cell-based interventions provide new treatment prospects for many disease conditions, including cardiovascular disorders. Clinical trials are necessary to collect adequate evidence on (long-term) safety and efficacy of novel interventions such as stem cells, but the design and launch of clinical trials, from first-in-human studies to larger randomized controlled trials (RCTs), is scientifically and ethically challenging. Stem cells are different from traditional pharmaceuticals, surgical procedures, and medical devices in the following ways: the novelty and complexity of stem cells, the invasiveness of the procedures, and the novel aim of regeneration. These specifics, combined with the characteristics of the study population, will have an impact on the design and ethics of RCTs. The recently closed JUVENTAS trial will serve as an example to identify the (interwoven) scientific and ethical challenges in the design and launch of stem cell RCTs. The JUVENTAS trial has investigated the efficacy of autologous bone marrow cells in end-stage vascular patients, in a double-blind sham-controlled design. We first describe the choices, considerations, and experiences of the JUVENTAS team. Subsequently, we identify the main ethical and scientific challenges and discuss what is important to consider in the design of future stem cell RCTs: assessment of risks and benefits, the choice for outcome measures, the choice for the comparator, the appropriate selection of participants, and adequate informed consent. Additionally, the stem cell field is highly in the spotlight due to the (commercial) interests and expectations. This warrants a cautious pace of translation and scrupulous set up of clinical trials, as failures could put the field in a negative light. At the same time, knowledge from clinical trials is necessary for the field to progress. We conclude that in the scientifically and ethically challenging field of stem cell RCTs, researchers and clinicians have to maneuver between the Skylla of hyper accelerated translation without rigorously conducted RCTs and the Charybdis of the missed opportunity of valuable knowledge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.