Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34532844›Full record

ReviewStem cell reviews and reports2022

Review of the Current Trends in Clinical Trials Involving Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.

Jennifer Yejean Kim, Yoojun Nam, Yeri Alice Rim, Ji Hyeon Ju

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
–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

65 citing papers in PubMed.

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

5 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

4 authors.

Jennifer Yejean Kim *Department of Biology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Yoojun Nam *CiSTEM Laboratory, Catholic iPSC Research Center, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Yeri Alice RimCiSTEM Laboratory, Catholic iPSC Research Center, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Ji Hyeon JuCiSTEM Laboratory, Catholic iPSC Research Center, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea. juji@catholic.ac.kr.ORCID 0000-0002-1381-5466

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2006, the induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) was presented to the world, paving the way for the development of a magnitude of novel therapeutic alternatives, addressing a diverse range of diseases. However, despite the immense cell therapy potential, relatively few clinical trials evaluating iPSC-technology have actually translated into interventional, clinically applied treatment regimens. Herein, our aim was to determine trends in globally conducted clinical trials involving iPSCs. Data were derived both from well-known registries recording clinical trials from across the globe, and databases from individual countries. Comparisons were firstly drawn between observational and interventional studies before the latter was further analyzed in terms of therapeutic and nontherapeutic trials. Our main observations included global distribution, purpose, target size, and types of disorder relevant to evaluated trials. In terms of nontherapeutic trials, the USA conducted the majority, a large average number of participants-187-was included in the trials, and studies on circulatory system disorders comprised a slightly higher proportion of total studies. Conversely, Japan was the frontrunner in terms of conducting therapeutic trials, and the average number of participants was much lower, at roughly 29. Disorders of the circulatory, as well as nervous and visual systems, were all studied in equal measure. This review highlights the impact that iPSC-based cell therapies can have, should development thereof gain more traction. We lastly considered a few companies that are actively utilizing iPSCs in the development of therapies for various diseases, for whom the global trends in clinical trials could become increasingly important.

Indexed as

Induced Pluripotent Stem CellsCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyClinical Trials as TopicHumansJapanAllogeneicAutologousCell therapyClinical trialsInduced pluripotent stem cellsInterventionalNontherapeuticTherapeutic

Identifiers

PMID34532844
PMCPMC8445612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.