Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31949442›Full record

ReviewStem cells international2019

Autologous Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Sclerosis: A Meta-Analysis.

Yang Zhou, Xin Zhang, Hang Xue, Lingling Liu, Jie Zhu, Tao Jin

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. [Research progress of hydrogel combined with mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of spinal cord injury].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Yang ZhouDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Xin ZhangDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Hang XueDepartment of Neurotraumatic Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Lingling LiuDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Jie ZhuDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4910-2828
Tao JinDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7028-3419
Jilin University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is considered to be a central nervous system (CNS) chronic inflammatory demyelinating disease, affecting more than 2 million individuals worldwide. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of autologous mesenchymal stem cells (aMSCs) in treating MS patients. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Clinical Trial databases were searched in September 2019. The analysis was conducted for three endpoints: transplant-related mortality (TRM), rate of disease progression, and no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) status. RevMan and the metaprop command of the meta package in R was used in assessing the efficacy and safety of aMSCs. Subgroup analyses were performed for exploration of heterogeneity regarding outcomes. Nine studies comprising 133 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate of TRM was 0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0%-0.3%). The rate of progression was 16% at 6 months (95% CI 10%-27%) and 35% at 1 year (95% CI 27%-46%). Lower 6-month and 1-year progression rates were significantly associated with intrathecal injection (

Identifiers

PMID31949442
PMCPMC6942905
OpenAlexW2995925710

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.