SynthesiseLife2022
Comparison of freshly cultured versus cryopreserved mesenchymal stem cells in animal models of inflammation: A pre-clinical systematic review.
Synthesis in eLife, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cellular immunotherapy for COVID-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome: Results of the CIRCA-19 phase 1 safety and phase 2 randomized controlled trials.Stem cell reports · 2026Trial
- Single-cell RNA sequencing identifies M2-like macrophage polarization associated with mesenchymal stem cell treatment in a murine sepsis model.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2026Article
- Directly Thawed Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Retain Mechanism of Action and Support Bone Clinical Translation.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Article
- Research advances in cryopreserved preparations of mesenchymal stem cells: technical innovations, application challenges, and quality control.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Phenotype disruption of umbilical cord derived MSC by cyclic mechanical stretch and hyperoxia mediated by p21.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Potential and Mechanisms of Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Coronary Artery Disease: Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Mesenchymal stromal cell therapy: Progress to date and future outlook.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Review
- Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells as a therapeutic for sepsis: a review on where do we stand?Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- Targeting Neuroinflammation in Preterm White Matter Injury: Therapeutic Potential of Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Derived Exosomes.Cellular and molecular neurobiology · 2025Review
- Preclinical efficacy assessment of umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell therapy for acute liver failure.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2025Article
- Upstream Process Protocol for MSCs Isolated from Different Human-Based Tissue Origins.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Mesenchymal Stem Cells-based Cell-free Therapy Targeting Neuroinflammation.Aging and disease · 2024Review
- Real-world data suggest effectiveness of the allogeneic mesenchymal stromal cells preparation MSC-FFM in ruxolitinib-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Current perspectives on mesenchymal stromal cell therapy for graft versus host disease.Cellular & molecular immunology · 2023Review
- The Evolving Landscape of Potency Assays.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are multipotent cells that demonstrate therapeutic potential for the treatment of acute and chronic inflammatory-mediated conditions. Although controversial, some studies suggest that MSCs may lose their functionality with cryopreservation which could render them non-efficacious. Hence, we conducted a systematic review of comparative pre-clinical models of inflammation to determine if there are differences in in vivo measures of pre-clinical efficacy (primary outcomes) and in vitro potency (secondary outcomes) between freshly cultured and cryopreserved MSCs. Methods: A systematic search on OvidMEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Web of Science (until January 13, 2022) was conducted. The primary outcome included measures of in vivo pre-clinical efficacy; secondary outcomes included measures of in vitro MSC potency. Risk of bias was assessed by the SYRCLE 'Risk of Bias' assessment tool for pre-clinical studies. Results: Eighteen studies were included. A total of 257 in vivo pre-clinical efficacy experiments represented 101 distinct outcome measures. Of these outcomes, 2.3% (6/257) were significantly different at the 0.05 level or less; 2 favoured freshly cultured and 4 favoured cryopreserved MSCs. A total of 68 in vitro experiments represented 32 different potency measures; 13% (9/68) of the experiments were significantly different at the 0.05 level or less, with seven experiments favouring freshly cultured MSC and two favouring cryopreserved MSCs. Conclusions: The majority of preclinical primary in vivo efficacy and secondary in vitro potency outcomes were not significantly different (p<0.05) between freshly cultured and cryopreserved MSCs. Our systematic summary of the current evidence base may provide MSC basic and clinical research scientists additional rationale for considering a cryopreserved MSC product in their pre-clinical studies and clinical trials as well as help identify research gaps and guide future related research. Funding: Ontario Institute for Regenerative Medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.