Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Chinese medicine boosts regenerative medicine in stem cell - based therapy

Bi Z., Tang H., Wang E., Wang Y., Meng Y., Yuan J.

Narrative Review on Hip, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2025) — 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
Stem Cell Res Ther (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40999449
PMCID
PMC12465768
DOI
10.1186/s13287-025-04618-6
Citations
1

Abstract (original English)

This review article explores the possible role of Chinese medicine (CM) in modulating stem cells for regenerative medicine, synthesizing evidence from animal experiments and human trials. The article focuses on how CM modulates the stem cell environment, specifically their roles in delaying cellular senescence and promoting stem cell survival, enhancing proliferation and differentiation, as well as stimulating exosome secretion. It also conducts a critical analysis of methodological rigor and clinical transparency within the included studies to enable a more objective assessment of their reliability and reproducibility. To guarantee the responsible integration of CM and stem cells in future clinical application, it also discussed the safety, efficacy, and heterogeneity of stem cells, as well as delivery methods, alongside the dose-response relationship of CM. The current evidence for CM in stem cell therapy remains constrained by the absence of standardized comparative baselines in animal studies and clinical outcome assessment. This methodological gap not only compromises the evidentiary weight of herbal effects but also introduces confounding variables in studies. The elucidation of CM mechanistic role in stem cell therapeutics necessitates robust interdisciplinary collaboration, this is an imperative and critically urgent thing within peer-reviewed research framework.

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
Stem CellsAnimalsHumansMedicine, Chinese TraditionalStem Cell TransplantationRegenerative MedicineCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCellular Senescence

Browse all related research

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

Related research