Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsClinical TrialPubMedOpen access

Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Treatment of Airway Injuries in A Patient after Long-Term Exposure to Sulfur Mustard.

Nejad-Moghaddam A., Ajdari S., Tahmasbpour E., Goodarzi H., Panahi Y., Ghanei M.

Clinical Trial on Systemic / IV, published in Cell J (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Clinical Trial
Journal
Cell J (2016)
Country
Iran
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
28367422
PMCID
PMC5241508
DOI
10.22074/cellj.2016.4874
Citations
19

Abstract (original English)

Objective Sulfur mustard (SM) is a potent mutagenic agent that targets several organs, particularly lung tissue. Changes in morphological structure of the airway system are associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary deficiency following exposure to SM. Although numerous studies have demonstrated pathological effects of SM on respiratory organs, unfortunately there is no effective treatment to inhibit further respiratory injuries or induce repair in these patients. Due to the extensive progress and achievements in stem cell therapy, we have aimed to evaluate safety and potential efficacy of systemic mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) administration on a SM-exposed patient with chronic lung injuries. Materials and methods In this clinical trial study, our patient received 100×106cells every 20 days for 4 injections over a 2-month period. After each injection we evaluated the safety, pulmonary function tests (PFT), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Assessment Test (CAT), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Borg Scale Dyspnea Assessment (BSDA), and 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT). One-way ANOVA test was used in this study which was not significant (P>0.05). Results There were no infusion toxicities or serious adverse events caused by MSC administration. Although there was no significant difference in PFTs, we found a significant improvement for 6MWT, as well as BSDA, SG

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research