Cell-therapy for Parkinson's disease: 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 Cell-based strategies focusing on replacement or protection of dopaminergic neurons have been considered as a potential approach to treat Parkinson's disease (PD) for decades. However, despite promising preclinical results, clinical trials on cell-therapy for PD reported mixed outcomes and a thorough synthesis of these findings is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate cell-therapy for PD patients. Methods We systematically identified all clinical trials investigating cell- or tissue-based therapies for PD published before July 2023. Out of those, studies reporting transplantation of homogenous cells (containing one cell type) were included in meta-analysis. The mean difference or standardized mean difference in quantitative neurological scale scores before and after cell-therapy was analyzed to evaluate treatment effects. Results The systematic literature search revealed 106 articles. Eleven studies reporting data from 11 independent trials (210 patients) were eligible for meta-analysis. Disease severity and motor function evaluation indicated beneficial effects of homogenous cell-therapy in the 'off' state at 3-, 6-, 12-, or 24-month follow-ups, and for motor function even after 36 months. Most of the patients were levodopa responders (61.6-100% in different follow-ups). Cell-therapy was also effective in improving the daily living

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.