Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30070053›Full record

ReviewStem cells translational medicine2018

Concise Review: Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Based Drug Delivery: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Promise.

Timothy E G Krueger, Daniel L J Thorek, Samuel R Denmeade, John T Isaacs, W Nathaniel Brennen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells translational medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 142 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
142citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

142 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

82 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Timothy E G KruegerDepartment of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Daniel L J ThorekDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Samuel R DenmeadeDepartment of Oncology at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (SKCCC) at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
John T IsaacsDepartment of Oncology at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (SKCCC) at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
W Nathaniel BrennenDepartment of Oncology at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (SKCCC) at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9807-7433

Funding

Translational Research Central ServicesP30CA006973 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAM George NELSON · 1985 to 2026
$208.6M
TRANSGENIC MODELS FOR PROSTATE CANCER AND AUTOIMMUNITYP50CA058236 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DENMEADE, SAMUEL R · 1992 to 2020
$43.9M
Kallikrein-Targeted Alpha-Particle Therapy of Late-Stage Prostate CancerR01CA201035 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI THOREK, DANIEL LYNDON JAFFE · 2017 to 2020
$1.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006973NCI NIH HHS P50 CA058236NCI NIH HHS R01 CA201035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) as cell-based drug delivery vectors for numerous clinical indications, including cancer, has significant promise. However, a considerable challenge for effective translation of these approaches is the limited tumor tropism and broad biodistribution observed using conventional MSCs, which raises concerns for toxicity to nontarget peripheral tissues (i.e., the bad). Consequently, there are a variety of synthetic engineering platforms in active development to improve tumor-selective targeting via increased homing efficiency and/or specificity of drug activation, some of which are already being evaluated clinically (i.e., the good). Unfortunately, the lack of robust quantification and widespread adoption of standardized methodologies with high sensitivity and resolution has made accurate comparisons across studies difficult, which has significantly impeded progress (i.e., the ugly). Herein, we provide a concise review of active and passive MSC homing mechanisms and biodistribution postinfusion; in addition to in vivo cell tracking methodologies and strategies to enhance tumor targeting with a focus on MSC-based drug delivery strategies for cancer therapy. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2018;1-13.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsDrug CarriersHumansImmunomodulationMesenchymal Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationNeoplasmsOncolytic VirotherapyProdrugsAntineoplastic AgentsDrug CarriersProdrugsCell-based therapyCell sizeDrug deliveryHomingIn vivo cell trackingMesenchymal stem cell

Identifiers

PMID30070053
PMCPMC6127224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.