Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMedOpen access

Advancing Regenerative Cellular Therapies in Non-Scarring Alopecia.

Anudeep TC., Jeyaraman M., Muthu S., Rajendran RL., Gangadaran P., Mishra PC.

Narrative Review on Scar, Hair Loss, Hair Regeneration, published in Pharmaceutics (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Narrative Review
Journal
Pharmaceutics (2022)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
35335987
PMCID
PMC8953616
DOI
10.3390/pharmaceutics14030612
Citations
35

Abstract (original English)

Alopecia or baldness is a common diagnosis in clinical practice. Alopecia can be scarring or non-scarring, diffuse or patchy. The most prevalent type of alopecia is non-scarring alopecia, with the majority of cases being androgenetic alopecia (AGA) or alopecia areata (AA). AGA is traditionally treated with minoxidil and finasteride, while AA is treated with immune modulators; however, both treatments have significant downsides. These drawbacks compel us to explore regenerative therapies that are relatively devoid of adverse effects. A thorough literature review was conducted to explore the existing proven and experimental regenerative treatment modalities in non-scarring alopecia. Multiple treatment options compelled us to classify them into growth factor-rich and stem cell-rich. The growth factor-rich group included platelet-rich plasma, stem cell-conditioned medium, exosomes and placental extract whereas adult stem cells (adipose-derived stem cell-nano fat and stromal vascular fraction; bone marrow stem cell and hair follicle stem cells) and perinatal stem cells (umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hUCB-MSCs), Wharton jelly-derived MSCs (WJ-MSCs), amniotic fluid-derived MSCs (AF-MSCs), and placental MSCs) were grouped into the stem cell-rich group. Because of its regenerative and proliferative capabilities, MSC lies at the heart of regenerative cellular treat

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research