ReviewFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2014
Fate of graft cells: what should be clarified for development of mesenchymal stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke?
Review in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stem cells in patients with acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis.BMC neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Glia-Like Cells from Late-Passage Human MSCs Protect Against Ischemic Stroke Through IGFBP-4.Molecular neurobiology · 2019Article
- The long-term fate of mesenchymal stem cells labeled with magnetic resonance imaging-visible polymersomes in cerebral ischemia.International journal of nanomedicine · 2017Article
- Astroglial Activation by an Enriched Environment after Transplantation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells Enhances Angiogenesis after Hypoxic-Ischemic Brain Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Article
- Involvement of calpains in adult neurogenesis: implications for stroke.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2015Article
- Editorial: Stem cells and progenitor cells in ischemic stroke-fashion or future?Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2015Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are believed to be promising for cell administration therapy after ischemic stroke. Because of their advantageous characteristics, such as ability of differentiation into neurovascular lineages, avoidance of immunological problems, and abundance of graft cells in mesodermal tissues, studies regarding MSC therapy have increased recently. However, several controversies are yet to be resolved before a worldwide consensus regarding a standard protocol is obtained. In particular, the neuroprotective effects, the rate of cell migration to the lesion, and differentiation direction differ depending on preclinical observations. Analyses of these differences and application of recent developments in stem cell biology or engineering in imaging modality may contribute to identification of criteria for optimal stem cell therapy in which reliable protocols, which control cell quality and include safe administration procedures, are defined for each recovery phase after cerebral ischemia. In this mini review, we examine controversies regarding the fate of grafts and the prospects for advanced therapy that could be obtained through recent developments in stem cell research as direct conversion to neural cells.
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.