ArticleBone marrow transplantation2014
Superselective intra-arterial umbilical cord blood administration to BM in experimental animals.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of Intra-Arterial Injection With Tumor-Activated T Cells to the Rabbit Brain Evaluated by MRI and SPECT/CT.Cell transplantation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Umbilical cord blood (UCB) as a source of hematopoietic stem cells for transplantation is limited by the low number of cells and delayed engraftment. UCB cells are infused i.v. for transplantation, although only a proportion of the cells reach the BM. We investigated whether UCB could be administered safely using superselective intra-arterial (i.a.) injection. We injected human UCB (5 × 10(6)) into the aorta in rats, into the iliac artery in mice and into the femoral nutrient artery (FNA) in rabbits. We used angiography, immunohistochemistry, intravital microscopy and qPCR to assess safety end points and the distribution of injected cells. All animals showed normal behavior. No evidence of organ infarction was noted. UCB injected into the FNA of rabbits did not change the flow rates, measured by angiography. By qPCR, we found significantly higher fold-change values in the injected BM compared with i.v. injection (P=0.0087). Using intravital microscopy we visualized the mouse capillary bed during i.a. injection without cellular congestion. In summary, we show that i.a. infusion of UCB is safe and reaches an eightfold increase in engraftment in the BM compared with i.v. infusion. These studies lay the foundation for clinical trials.
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.