Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38800643›Full record

ArticleJOR spine2024

Why clinical trials in disc regeneration strive to achieve completion: Insights from publication status and funding sources.

Luca Ambrosio, Giorgia Petrucci, Fabrizio Russo, Claudia Cicione, Rocco Papalia, Gianluca Vadalà, Vincenzo Denaro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JOR spine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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.

Luca AmbrosioOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico Rome Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2424-1274
Giorgia PetrucciOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico Rome Italy.
Fabrizio RussoOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico Rome Italy.
Claudia CicioneLaboratory for Regenerative Orthopaedics, Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Department of Medicine and Surgery Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma Rome Italy.
Rocco PapaliaOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico Rome Italy.
Gianluca VadalàOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico Rome Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7142-1660
Vincenzo DenaroOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico Rome Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Chronic discogenic low back pain (LBP) poses a significant global burden, yet effective therapeutic interventions directly targeting the underlying degenerative process remain elusive. After demonstrating promising results in preclinical studies, intradiscal injection of cell-based treatments has been increasingly investigated in the clinical setting. However, most clinical trials failed to reach publication, with the few available reports showing only minor improvements. The aim of this study was to analyze the prospective clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov investigating cell therapies for LBP, with a specific emphasis on identifying critical obstacles hindering study completion, including trial design and funding sources. Methods: A systematic search of prospective clinical trials investigating cell-based treatments for chronic LBP due to intervertebral disc degeneration was performed on ClinicalTrials.gov. Extracted data encompassed study design, recruitment, experimental treatment modalities, investigated outcomes, current status, completion date, publication status, and funding sources. Fisher's exact test assessed associations between categorical variables, while a multiple logistic regression model aimed to identify factors potentially linked to the publication status of the studies. Results: Our search identified 26 clinical trials. Among these, only 7 (26.9%) were published, and none of the other studies marked as completed reported any results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Fifty percent of included trials were funded by universities, whereas the rest was sponsored by industry (38.5%) or private institutions (11.5%). Experimental treatments primarily involved cell-based or cell-derived products of varying sources and concentrations. Products containing carriers, such as hyaluronic acid or fibrin, were more frequently funded by industry and private organizations ( Conclusion: Most clinical trials exploring cell-based disc regenerative therapies for chronic LBP have never reached completion, with only a small fraction reporting preliminary data in publications.

Indexed as

clinical trialintervertebral disc degenerationintervertebral disc regenerationlow back painregenerative medicinestem cells

Identifiers

PMID38800643
PMCPMC11126785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.