SynthesisMolecular neurobiology2026
Therapeutic Efficacy of Mesenchymal Stem Cells at the Level of Biomarkers in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Molecular neurobiology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple sclerosis (MS), particularly progressive forms, remains a significant therapeutic challenge. Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy offers promising immunomodulatory and neuroprotective potential. This systematic review comprehensively evaluates the therapeutic efficacy and biomarker response to MSC therapy in MS. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase up to January 3, 2026. Seventeen publications, corresponding to 16 distinct clinical trials (five unique randomized controlled trials [RCTs] reported in six publications, and 11 non-randomized studies), were included. Data on MSC sources, dosing, routes of administration, and multi-level outcomes (clinical, imaging, immunological, and objective biomarkers) were extracted. Quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Analysis of the included RCTs revealed divergent clinical efficacy. A large trial of intravenous bone marrow-derived MSCs showed no significant improvement in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). In contrast, trials employing intrathecal (IT) administration or umbilical cord-derived MSCs reported potential benefits in disability and functional measures (e.g., T25-FW, 9-HPT). Biomarker analysis showed high inconsistency; however, IT MSC administration in one RCT was associated with a significant reduction in cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels, suggesting a route-dependent neuroprotective effect. Findings on immunological markers (e.g., TNF-α, IL-17) were derived predominantly from studies with a high risk of bias. Critically, MSC therapy demonstrated an excellent safety profile across all studies, with no serious treatment-related adverse events reported. MSC therapy demonstrates an excellent safety profile in MS. Intrathecal and umbilical cord-derived approaches show tentative clinical and biomarker benefits, especially concerning neuroprotection (NfL reduction). However, definitive conclusions are constrained by significant methodological heterogeneity and short follow-up periods across trials. Future research must focus on standardized, large-scale RCTs to optimize MSC source and administration route, and urgently needs to validate the predictive accuracy of biomarkers, beyond reporting only changes in expression levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42764316What 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.