ArticlePloS one2026
Cost-effectiveness of stem cell therapy versus standard of care for acute and subacute ischemic stroke.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A recent meta-analysis demonstrated the efficacy of stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke; however, its cost-effectiveness has not yet been sufficiently explored. Building on the clinical data from that meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the administration of mesenchymal stem cells for acute and subacute ischemic stroke compared with the standard of care. A cost-utility analysis was performed via simulation by using a Markov model. The participants were patients treated for acute or subacute ischemic stroke in hospitals in Japan. Stem cell therapy plus the standard of care (the stem cell group) was compared with the standard of care alone (the control group). The time horizon was 10 years. The primary outcome was the cost of stem cell therapy when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, calculated based on costs and quality-adjusted life years for both groups, was 5 million yen/quality-adjusted life year, the reference value in the cost-effectiveness evaluation in Japan. Efficacy data are obtained from the meta-analysis. Base-case analysis was performed using the most plausible or average values for all input parameters. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were also conducted. In the base case, the stem cell therapy cost when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 5 million yen/quality-adjusted life year was $,3,746 from the public health payer's perspective and $5,157 from the public healthcare and long-term care payer's perspective. The scenario and sensitivity analyses supported the cost-effectiveness of stem cell therapy for acute and subacute ischemic stroke. This study provides threshold costs of stem cell therapy at which it becomes cost-effective for acute and subacute ischemic stroke. These results may support rational pricing strategies for stem cell therapy and facilitate its seamless integration into clinical practice.
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.