Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36425647›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Insights and future directions for the application of perinatal derivatives in eye diseases: A critical review of preclinical and clinical studies.

María Norte-Muñoz, Maria Filomena Botelho, Andreina Schoeberlein, João Chaves, Joaquim Neto Murta, Peter Ponsaerts, Marta Agudo-Barriuso, Esmeralda Costa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

María Norte-MuñozExperimental Ophthalmology Group, IMIB-Arrixaca, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Maria Filomena BotelhoInstitute of Biophysics and Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Andreina SchoeberleinDepartment of Obstetrics and Feto-maternal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
João ChavesOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Joaquim Neto MurtaCenter for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB), University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Peter PonsaertsLaboratory of Experimental Hematology, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute (Vaxinfectio), University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Marta Agudo-BarriusoExperimental Ophthalmology Group, IMIB-Arrixaca, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Esmeralda CostaCenter for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB), University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perinatal derivatives (PnD) are gaining interest as a source for cell-based therapies. Since the eye is easily accessible to local administration, eye diseases may be excellent candidates to evaluate novel therapeutic approaches. With this work, we performed a systematic review of published preclinical and clinical studies addressing PnD in the treatment of ocular diseases. We have set two specific objectives: (i) to investigate the current level of standardization in applied technical procedures in preclinical studies and (ii) to assess clinical efficacy in clinical trials. Hereto, we selected studies that applied amniotic membrane (hAM) and mesenchymal stromal cells derived from amniotic membrane (hAMSC), placenta (hPMSC), umbilical cord (hUC-MSC) and Wharton's Jelly (hUC-WJ-MSC), excluding those where cells were not transplanted individually, following a systematic PubMed search for preclinical studies and consultation of clinical studies on https://clinicaltrials.gov and https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/. Our bibliographic search retrieved 26 pre-clinical studies and 27 clinical trials. There was a considerable overlap regarding targeted ocular structures. Another common feature is the marked tendency towards (i) locally administered treatments and (ii) the PnD type. In the cornea/ocular surface, hAM was preferred and usually applied directly covering the ocular surface. For neuroretinal disorders, intra-ocular injection of umbilical or placental-derived cells was preferred. In general, basic research reported favourable outcomes. However, due to lack of standardization between different studies, until now there is no clear consensus regarding the fate of administered PnD or their mode of action. This might be accountable for the low index of clinical translation. Regarding clinical trials, only a minority provided results and a considerable proportion is in "unknown status". Nevertheless, from the limited clinical evidence available, hAM proved beneficial in the symptomatic relief of bullous keratopathy, treating dry eye disease and preventing glaucoma drainage device tube exposure. Regarding neuroretinal diseases, application of Wharton's Jelly MSC seems to become a promising future approach. In conclusion, PnD-based therapies seem to be beneficial in the treatment of several ocular diseases. However, much is yet to be done both in the pre-clinical and in the clinical setting before they can be included in the daily ophthalmic practice.

Indexed as

clinical trials and database searchmesenchymal stromal cellsophthalmologyperinatal derivatespreclinical models

Identifiers

PMID36425647
PMCPMC9679153

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.