Autologous and allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies for diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Background Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a global health concern, characterized by insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction. Traditional treatments often fail to address underlying mechanisms, necessitating alternative therapies. Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based therapies have shown promise due to their regenerative and immunomodulatory properties. However, evidence on their efficacy and safety in type 2 DM remains limited and further evaluation is needed. Aim To evaluate the safety, efficacy and therapeutic potential of MSC-based therapies in type 2 DM. Methods This systematic review analyzed studies published between 2000 and 2025, focusing on autologous and allogeneic MSC therapies in DM. Studies were identified from various databases, including clinical and preclinical trials. Outcomes related to glycemic control, insulin requirements, β-cell function, and safety were assessed. Results MSC-based therapies significantly improved glycemic control, reduced insulin requirements and enhanced β-cell function in both clinical and preclinical settings. Safety profiles were favorable, with minimal adverse effects observed, primarily transient and self-limiting. No fatal events were reported. Variability in treatment outcomes and the need for standardized protocols were challenges. Conclusion MSC-based therapies offer a promising alternative to conventional DM treatments, significantly

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

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