Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsRandomized Controlled TrialPubMedOpen access

Local, systemic and immunologic safety comparison between xenogeneic equine umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells, allogeneic canine adipose mesenchymal stem cells and placebo: a randomized controlled trial.

Punzón E., García-Castillo M., Rico MA., Padilla L., Pradera A.

Randomized Controlled Trial on Systemic / IV, published in Front Vet Sci (2023) — 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
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal
Front Vet Sci (2023)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
37266387
PMCID
PMC10229832
DOI
10.3389/fvets.2023.1098029
Citations
3

Abstract (original English)

Mesenchymal stem cells are multipotent cells with a wide range of therapeutic applications, including, among others, tissue regeneration. This work aims to test the safety (EUC-MSC) of intra-articular administration of equine umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells in young healthy dogs under field conditions following single and repeated administration. This was compared with the safety profile of allogenic canine adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells (CAD-MSC) and placebo in order to define the safety of xenogeneic use of mesenchymal stem cells when administered intra-articular. Twenty-four police working dogs were randomized in three groups in a proportion 1:1:1. EUC-MSCs and CAD-MSCs were obtained from healthy donors and were manufactured following company SOPs and under GMP and GMP-like conditions, respectively, and compliant all necessary controls to ensure the quality of the treatment. The safety of the treatment was evaluated locally, systemically and immunologically. For this purpose, an orthopedic examination and Glasgow test for the assessment of pain in the infiltrated joint, blood tests, clinical examination and analysis of the humoral and cellular response to treatment were performed. No adverse events were detected following single and repeated MSC administration despite both equine and canine MSC generate antibody titres in the dogs. The intra-articular administr

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