Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37834955›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023

Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Md Asiful Islam, Sayeda Sadia Alam, Shoumik Kundu, Saleh Ahmed, Shabiha Sultana, Azim Patar, Tareq Hossan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Symptom burden and outcomes among patients with early-onset versus average-onset neuroendocrine neoplasms.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. VCAM-1Neurochemical research · 2024
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Olig2Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2024
    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

7 authors.

Md Asiful IslamWHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5937-6473
Sayeda Sadia AlamDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka 1342, Bangladesh.
Shoumik KunduDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Texas Tech University, 2500 Broadway St, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Saleh AhmedCenter for Biotechnology and Genomic Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA.ORCID 0009-0000-8271-5234
Shabiha SultanaDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA.
Azim PatarDepartment of Neuroscience, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0001-8047-8183
Tareq HossanDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka 1342, Bangladesh.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The assurance of safety and effectiveness is a significant focal point in all therapeutic approaches. Although mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been identified as a potential novel therapeutic strategy for multiple sclerosis (MS), existing evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of this strategy remains inconclusive. Thus, the primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) was to comprehensively assess the effectiveness and safety of MSC therapy in individuals diagnosed with MS. A comprehensive search was conducted using appropriate keywords in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases to determine the eligible studies. The change in the expanded disability status scale (EDSS) score from baseline to follow-up was used to assess MSC efficacy. The effectiveness of the therapy was assessed using a random-effects model, which calculated the combined prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for MS patients who experienced improvement, stability, or worsening of their condition. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020209671). The findings indicate that 40.4% (95% CI: 30.6-50.2) of MS patients exhibited improvements following MSC therapy, 32.8% (95% CI: 25.5-40.1) remained stable, and 18.1% (95% CI: 12.0-24.2) experienced a worsening of their condition. Although no major complications were observed, headaches 57.6 [37.9-77.3] and fever 53.1 [20.7-85.4] were commonly reported as minor adverse events. All of the results reported in this meta-analysis are consistent and credible according to the sensitivity analyses. Regardless of different individual studies, our meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview showing the potential of MSC therapy as a possible effective treatment strategy for patients with MS.

Indexed as

efficacyexpanded disability status scalemesenchymal stem cellsmeta-analysismultiple sclerosissafetysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37834955
PMCPMC10573670

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.