ReviewStem cell research & therapy2025
Addressing the challenges of immunogenicity, heterogeneity and tumorigenicity in the clinical translation of human embryonic stem cells.
Review in Stem cell research & therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differentiation potential of human amniotic fluid derived-mesenchymal stem cells into dopaminergic neurons.Anatomy & cell biology · 2026Article
- Beyond Targeted Gene Panels: Whole-Exome Sequencing as a Strategic Platform for Precision Therapeutics in Alzheimer's Disease.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Regenerative Therapy at the Crossroads: From Cell-Based to Cell-Free Precision Medicine.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Tracheal Regeneration: Recent Progress in the Application of Stem Cells in Tracheal Bioengineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Current status of neural progenitor/stem cells for spinal cord injury: fundamental research and clinical trials.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The clinical translation of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) presents promising potential for regenerative medicine, offering innovative treatments for a diverse array of conditions including neurodegenerative diseases, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, and heart disease. This review article navigates the complex landscape of hESCs application, centering on the challenges of tumorigenicity, immunogenicity, and heterogeneity that impede their clinical translation. Tumorigenicity poses a significant safety concern, necessitating the development of stringent differentiation protocols to prevent the formation of tumors post-transplantation. Immunogenicity, due to the allogeneic nature of hESC therapies, demands innovative solutions such as HLA typing and gene editing techniques to attenuate immune rejection. Heterogeneity among hESC lines hinders standardization and reproducibility, essential for regulatory approval. This review highlights strategies to address challenges in clinical hESC applications, including HLA haplotype banks and cloaking for immune compatibility, the critical role of safety monitoring, as well as key regulatory frameworks and interlaboratory potency standardization to support translation. Meanwhile, the review points to future needs for advanced gene editing for immune modulation, more precise cell differentiation techniques, and robust ethical and regulatory frameworks, plus accumulating human clinical data for key technologies and optimizing long-term safety monitoring to maximize hESCs' therapeutic potential safely and ethically.
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.