Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30904542›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology2019

Assessing "Cell Therapy" Clinics Offering Treatments of Ocular Conditions using Direct-to-Consumer Marketing Websites in the United States.

Rajinder S Nirwan, Thomas A Albini, Jayanth Sridhar, Harry W Flynn, Ajay E Kuriyan

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Retinal stem cell transplantation: Balancing safety and potential.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2020
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Adult Stem Cell Therapeutics in Diabetic Retinopathy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rajinder S NirwanFlaum Eye Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Thomas A AlbiniBascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Jayanth SridharBascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Harry W FlynnBascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Ajay E KuriyanFlaum Eye Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York. Electronic address: Ajay.kuriyan@gmail.com.
University of Miami · USUniversity of Rochester · US

Funding

VISUAL SCIENCE RESEARCH CTR SUPPORTP30EY001319 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI MICHELE RUCCI · 1985 to 2026
$17.5M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY001319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose"Cell therapy" is becoming increasingly available to the public via online direct-to-consumer advertisement within the United States (U.S.). The current study investigates the scope of "cell therapy" clinics across the U.S. that advertise and offer "cell therapy" for ocular conditions based on information provided on their websites.

designCross-sectional study.

participantsThe study included companies that are U.S.-based, participate in direct-to-consumer online marketing, have websites that can be data-mined with content analysis, and advertise therapy for ocular conditions.

methodsUsing a systematic, extensive keyword-based Internet search, content analysis of company websites was utilized to identify, document, and analyze U.S. businesses marketing "cell therapy" for ocular conditions as of September 16, 2017.

main outcome measuresClinic locations, source of stem cells used, route of administration, marketed ocular conditions, and cost of treatment.

resultsForty companies with 76 clinics use "cell therapy" to treat ocular conditions. California (23), Florida (12), and Illinois (10) contain the most clinics. All 40 companies specified sources of cells, which included autologous adipose-derived stem cells (35; 67%), autologous bone marrow-derived stem cells (8; 15%), amniotic stem cells (2; 4%), peripheral blood-derived stem cells (2; 4%), umbilical cord blood stem cells (2; 4%), allogenic bone marrow-derived stem cells (1; 2%), placental stem cells (1; 2%), and xenocells (1; 2%). The most commonly marketed ocular conditions included macular degeneration (35), optic neuritis (18), retinitis pigmentosa (17), and diabetic retinopathy (16). The most common routes of administration were intravenous (22) and "unspecified" (12); however, other companies listed more ocular-specific routes such as intravitreal injections (2), retrobulbar injections (2), eye injections (2), retrofundal injection (1), sub-Tenon injection (1), intraocular injection with vitrectomy (1), and eye drops (1). The cost of advertised "cell therapy" ranged from $4000 to $10 500.

conclusions"Cell therapy" for ocular conditions is readily available via direct-to-consumer marketing strategies across the United States. The "cells" are harvested from numerous sources and administered through different methods for multiple ocular conditions at these "cell therapy" clinics. Limited data for these treatments necessitates advocating caution to physicians and patients about treatments offered at commercial "cell therapy" clinics.

Indexed as

Cell- and Tissue-Based TherapyDirect-to-Consumer AdvertisingAmbulatory Care FacilitiesCross-Sectional StudiesEye DiseasesHumansInternetUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30904542
PMCPMC6754792
OpenAlexW2923525935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.