ReviewApplied microbiology and biotechnology2023
Mesenchymal and induced pluripotent stem cell-based therapeutics: a comparison.
Review in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expansion of induced pluripotent stem cells under consideration of bioengineering aspects: part 2.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Expansion in Stirred Tank Bioreactors.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Cell retention in scalable, perfusion-based mesenchymal stem cell expansion processes: a proof of concept.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Review
- Synthetic Gene Circuits for Regulation of Next-Generation Cell-Based Therapeutics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Spheroid trilineage differentiation model of primary mesenchymal stem/stromal cells under hypoxia and serum-free culture conditions.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stem cell-based cell therapeutics and especially those based on human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) are said to have enormous developmental potential in the coming years. Their applications range from the treatment of orthopedic disorders and cardiovascular diseases to autoimmune diseases and even cancer. However, while more than 27 hMSC-derived therapeutics are currently commercially available, hiPSC-based therapeutics have yet to complete the regulatory approval process. Based on a review of the current commercially available hMSC-derived therapeutic products and upcoming hiPSC-derived products in phase 2 and 3, this paper compares the cell therapy manufacturing process between these two cell types. Moreover, the similarities as well as differences are highlighted and the resulting impact on the production process discussed. Here, emphasis is placed on (i) hMSC and hiPSC characteristics, safety, and ethical aspects, (ii) their morphology and process requirements, as well as (iii) their 2- and 3-dimensional cultivations in dependence of the applied culture medium and process mode. In doing so, also downstream processing aspects are covered and the role of single-use technology is discussed. KEY POINTS: • Mesenchymal and induced pluripotent stem cells exhibit distinct behaviors during cultivation • Single-use stirred bioreactor systems are preferred for the cultivation of both cell types • Future research should adapt and modify downstream processes to available single-use devices.
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.