ArticleScientific reports2025
Clinical feasibility and cost efficiency of perinatal mesenchymal stem cell production under GMP conditions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Activities of human amniotic membrane extracellular vesicles with a focus on ophthalmology.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- Innovative strategies for immune thrombocytopenia treatment: immunomodulatory mechanisms and clinical potential of mesenchymal stem cells.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Review
- The Role and Mechanism of Hair Follicle Neural Crest Stem Cells and Their Small Extracellular Vesicles in Repair of Peripheral Nerve Injury.Stem cells international · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perinatal tissues such as umbilical cord, amniotic fluid, amniotic membrane, and placenta contain mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) with clinical potential; however, a direct comparison of these sources under Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) conditions remains limited. To evaluate and compare perinatal tissue types in terms of viable MSC yield, sterility, and GMP-adjusted processing cost in order to identify practically applicable sources for clinical-grade biobanking. A total of 160 perinatal tissue samples were collected from 32 term pregnancies during elective cesarean delivery. Standardized GMP protocols were applied for MSC isolation, sterility screening using automated BACTEC™ culture systems, and immunophenotypic characterization in accordance with ISCT criteria. Multivariate linear regression was used to identify independent predictors of MSC yield. Cost modeling included reagents, labor, and cryostorage within a laboratory-scale GMP setting. Umbilical cord tissue yielded the highest number of viable MSCs (6.5 × 10⁶ ± 0.8 cells/sample), followed by amniotic fluid (5.8 × 10⁶ ± 0.6). Amniotic fluid exhibited the lowest contamination rate (3%), whereas placental tissues demonstrated higher microbial burden (18-21%). Tissue type was the strongest predictor of MSC yield (β = 0.61, p < 0.001). Normalized cost analyses indicated that umbilical cord and amniotic fluid offered the most favorable yield-to-cost profiles. Under current GMP conditions, umbilical cord and amniotic fluid appear to provide the most balanced combination of MSC yield, sterility, and processing cost. These findings support a practical framework for tissue selection and workflow optimization in perinatal MSC biobanking and translational regenerative applications.
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.