Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37258785›Full record

ArticleAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2023

Advanced Technologies for Potency Assay Measurement.

Raghavan Chinnadurai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Raghavan ChinnaduraiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Mercer University School of Medicine, Savannah, GA, USA. chinnadurai_r@mercer.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Crucial for their application, cell products need to be well-characterized in the cell manufacturing facilities and conform to regulatory approval criteria before infusion into the patients. Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSCs) are the leading cell therapy candidate in clinical trials worldwide. Early phase clinical trials have demonstrated that MSCs display an excellent safety profile and are well tolerated. However, MSCs have also exhibited contradictory efficacy in later-phase clinical trials with reasons for this discrepancy including poorly understood mechanism of MSC therapeutic action. With likelihood that a number of attributes are involved in MSC derived clinical benefit, an assay that measures a single quality of may not adequately reflect potency, thus a combination of bioassays and analytical methods, collectively called "assay matrix" are favoured for defining the potency of MSC more adequately. This chapter highlights advanced technologies and targets that can achieve quantitative measurement for a range of MSC attributes, including immunological, genomic, secretome, phosphorylation, morphological, biomaterial, angiogenic and metabolic assays.

Indexed as

Mesenchymal Stem CellsHumansPhosphorylationQuality ControlAngiogenic assaysAssay matrixBiomaterial based assaysGenomic assaysImmunological assaysMetabolic assaysMorphological profiling assaysMSC release criteriaPhosphorylation assaysSecretome assays

Identifiers

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.