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

Evaluating the efficacy of stem cells in treating severe dry eye disease

Fu L., Pelosini L., Kopsachilis N., Foti R., D'Esposito F., Musa M.

Clinical Trial on Face & Skin, published in World J Stem Cells (2025) — 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
World J Stem Cells (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40308890
PMCID
PMC12038461
DOI
10.4252/wjsc.v17.i4.101891

Abstract (original English)

Dry eye disease (DED) is a multifactorial disorder that disturbs ocular surface equilibrium, considerably diminishing quality of life. Present therapies only offer symptomatic alleviation. Stem cell treatment, especially mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), has surfaced as a viable approach for tissue regeneration and immunological regulation in DED. Preclinical and early clinical investigations indicate that MSCs can improve lacrimal gland functionality, diminish inflammation, and facilitate corneal regeneration. Nonetheless, obstacles persist in enhancing MSC viability, determining the optimal MSC source, and guaranteeing sustained therapeutic effectiveness. Additional extensive randomized clinical trials are required to confirm the efficacy of MSC-based therapies for severe DED.

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

Browse all related research

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

Related research