SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2014
Discrepancies in autologous bone marrow stem cell trials and enhancement of ejection fraction (DAMASCENE): weighted regression and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01901523 (Phase II Study of Response of Medical Journal Editorial Boards to Notification of Serious Discrepancies in Published Clinical Trials in Human Patients.), which is not on this map. Cited by 93 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Phase II Study of Response of Medical Journal Editorial Boards to Notification of Serious Discrepancies in Published Clinical Trials in Human Patients.
Who cites it
93 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of the processes used to link clinical trial registrations to their published results.Systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Adult Stem Cell Therapy and Heart Failure, 2000 to 2016: A Systematic Review.JAMA cardiology · 2016Pooled it
- Stem cell treatment for acute myocardial infarction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Adult Bone Marrow Cell Therapy for Ischemic Heart Disease: Evidence and Insights From Randomized Controlled Trials.Circulation research · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Stem-cell therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with reduced ejection fraction: A multicenter, double-blind randomized trial.Clinical cardiology · 2018Trial
- Pluripotent stem cell-based approaches for heart repair and the potential of genetic modifications.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Review
- Current status and new horizons in stem cell therapy in cardiovascular regenerative medicine (CaVaReM): an update.European journal of medical research · 2025Review
- A Bias-Corrected Bayesian Nonparametric Model for Combining Studies With Varying Quality in Meta-Analysis.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025Article
- N-CADHERINStem cell research & therapy · 2024Article
- Human Endothelial Colony-Forming Cells.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2022Article
- Resident vascular endothelial progenitor definition and function: the age of reckoning.Angiogenesis · 2022Review
- [Cardiac cell therapy-Lost in translation?]Zeitschrift fur Herz-, Thorax- und Gefasschirurgie · 2022Review
- Clinical mesenchymal stem cell therapy in ischemic cardiomyopathy.JTCVS open · 2021Article
- Stem cell therapies in cardiac diseases: Current status and future possibilities.World journal of stem cells · 2021Review
- Benefits and obstacles to cell therapy in neonates: The INCuBAToR (Innovative Neonatal Cellular Therapy for Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia: Accelerating Translation of Research).Stem cells translational medicine · 2021Review
- Therapeutic Applications of Stem Cells and Extracellular Vesicles in Emergency Care: Futuristic Perspectives.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2021Review
- Human mesenchymal stromal cells and derived extracellular vesicles: Translational strategies to increase their proangiogenic potential for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.Stem cells translational medicine · 2020Review
- Heart Regeneration by Endogenous Stem Cells and Cardiomyocyte Proliferation: Controversy, Fallacy, and Progress.Circulation · 2020Article
- Key Success Factors for Regenerative Medicine in Acquired Heart Diseases.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2020Review
33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate whether discrepancies in trials of use of bone marrow stem cells in patients with heart disease account for the variation in reported effect size in improvement of left ventricular function.
designIdentification and counting of factual discrepancies in trial reports, and sample size weighted regression against therapeutic effect size. Meta-analysis of trials that provided sufficient information. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase from inception to April 2013. ELIGIBILITY FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of autologous bone marrow stem cells for heart disease on mean left ventricular ejection fraction.
resultsThere were over 600 discrepancies in 133 reports from 49 trials. There was a significant association between the number of discrepancies and the reported increment in EF with bone marrow stem cell therapy (Spearman's r=0.4, P=0.005). Trials with no discrepancies were a small minority (five trials) and showed a mean EF effect size of -0.4%. The 24 trials with 1-10 discrepancies showed a mean effect size of 2.1%. The 12 with 11-20 discrepancies showed a mean effect of size 3.0%. The three with 21-30 discrepancies showed a mean effect size of 5.7%. The high discrepancy group, comprising five trials with over 30 discrepancies each, showed a mean effect size of 7.7%.
conclusionsAvoiding discrepancies is difficult but is important because discrepancy count is related to effect size. The mechanism is unknown but should be explored in the design of future trials because in the five trials without discrepancies the effect of bone marrow stem cell therapy on ejection fraction is zero.
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.