Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28854961›Full record

SynthesisStem cell research & therapy2017

Safety and effectiveness of stem cell therapies in early-phase clinical trials in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Anjali Nagpal, Fong Chan Choy, Stuart Howell, Susan Hillier, Fiona Chan, Monica A Hamilton-Bruce, Simon A Koblar

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Stem cell research & therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Stem cell transplantation for ischemic stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Mesenchymal stem cells therapy for chronic ischemic stroke-a systematic review.Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anjali NagpalStroke Research Programme, The University of Adelaide School of Medicine, Level 6 South, SAHMRI, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. anjali.nagpal@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-2711-445X
Fong Chan ChoyStroke Research Programme, The University of Adelaide School of Medicine, Level 6 South, SAHMRI, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Stuart HowellData, Design and Statistics Service, Adelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Susan HillierResearch, Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Fiona ChanNeurology Department, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Central Adelaide Local Health Network (CALHN), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Monica A Hamilton-BruceStroke Research Programme, The University of Adelaide School of Medicine, Level 6 South, SAHMRI, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Simon A KoblarStroke Research Programme, The University of Adelaide School of Medicine, Level 6 South, SAHMRI, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stem cells have demonstrated encouraging potential as reparative therapy for patients suffering from post-stroke disability. Reperfusion interventions in the acute phase of stroke have shown significant benefit but are limited by a narrow window of opportunity in which they are beneficial. Thereafter, rehabilitation is the only intervention available. The current review summarises the current evidence for use of stem cell therapies in stroke from early-phase clinical trials. The safety and feasibility of administering different types of stem cell therapies in stroke seem to be reasonably proven. However, the effectiveness needs still to be established through bigger clinical trials with more pragmatic clinical trial designs that address the challenges raised by the heterogeneous nature of stroke per se, as well those due to unique characteristics of stem cells as therapeutic agents.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHumansPublication BiasRisk AssessmentStem Cell TransplantationStrokeTreatment OutcomeClinical designOutcomesRegenerative medicineStem cellsStroke

Identifiers

PMID28854961
PMCPMC5577822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.