ReviewRegenerative medicine2026
Intraparenchymal stem cell transplantation for spinal cord injury: a review of clinical trials.
Review in Regenerative medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) results in severe and often permanent motor, sensory, and autonomic impairment, and current treatments offer limited restorative benefit. Stem-cell based approaches have been investigated to promote neural repair, but peripheral delivery is limited by poor cell localization and engraftment. Intraparenchymal (IP) transplantation, which delivers cells directly into injured spinal cord, is intended to improve local retention, survival, and integration. This review synthesizes early-phase clinical trials from the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia, evaluating five major cell platforms: autologous olfactory-ensheathing-cells (OECs), fetal-derived neural stem cells (HuCNS-SC), embryonic stem cell derived oligodendrocyte progenitors (OPC1), fetal spinal cord derived neural progenitor cells (NSI-566), and autologous Schwann cells (ahSCs). IP delivery demonstrates convergent early-phase safety, with no recurrent cell-related severe toxicity, tumor formation, or progressive neurological deterioration attributable to the delivery platform. Functional outcomes remain heterogeneous and modest. Large, reproducible neurological recovery has not been observed, although some studies report limited sensory improvements, isolated motor gains, or electrophysiologic evidence of conduction across or below the injury. These findings support biological activity but insufficient functional efficacy under current trial designs. Future progress will require controlled efficacy studies with standardized endpoints, optimized timing and dosing, and rehabilitation or neuromodulatory integration.
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.