Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsClinical TrialEurope PMCOpen access

Concise Review: Review and Perspective of Cell Dosage and Routes of Administration From Preclinical and Clinical Studies of Stem Cell Therapy for Heart Disease

Golpanian S., Schulman IH., Ebert RF., Heldman AW., DiFede DL., Yang PC.

Clinical Trial on Cardiovascular Disease, published in Stem Cells Transl Med (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
Stem Cells Transl Med (2016)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
26683870
PMCID
PMC4729551
DOI
10.5966/sctm.2015-0101
Citations
98

Abstract (original English)

An important stage in the development of any new therapeutic agent is establishment of the optimal dosage and route of administration. This can be particularly challenging when the treatment is a biologic agent that might exert its therapeutic effects via complex or poorly understood mechanisms. Multiple preclinical and clinical studies have shown paradoxical results, with inconsistent findings regarding the relationship between the cell dose and clinical benefit. Such phenomena can, at least in part, be attributed to variations in cell dosing or concentration and the route of administration (ROA). Although clinical trials of cell-based therapy for cardiovascular disease began more than a decade ago, specification of the optimal dosage and ROA has not been established. The present review summarizes what has been learned regarding the optimal cell dosage and ROA from preclinical and clinical studies of stem cell therapy for heart disease and offers a perspective on future directions. Significance: Preclinical and clinical studies on cell-based therapy for cardiovascular disease have shown inconsistent results, in part because of variations in study-specific dosages and/or routes of administration (ROA). Future preclinical studies and smaller clinical trials implementing cell-dose and ROA comparisons are warranted before proceeding to pivotal trials.

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
Stem CellsAnimalsDogsHumansHeart DiseasesStem Cell TransplantationTransplantation, AutologousTransplantation, HomologousCell CountInjections, Intralesional

Browse all related research

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

Related research