Opportunities and barriers to establishing a cell therapy programme in South Africa
Jackson CS., Pepper MS.
Narrative Review, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2013) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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 (2013)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 23719318
- PMCID
- PMC3707026
- DOI
- 10.1186/scrt204
- Citations
- 7
Abstract (original English)
The establishment of a cell therapy programme in South Africa has the potential to contribute to the alleviation of the country's high disease burden and also to contribute to economic growth. South Africa has various positive attributes that favour the establishment of such a high-profile venture; however, there are also significant obstacles which need to be overcome. We discuss the positive and negative features of the current health biotechnology sector. The positive factors include a strong market pull and a highly innovative scientific and medical community, while the most problematic features include the lack of human resources and education and limited funding. The South African Government has undertaken to strengthen the biotechnology sector in general, but a focus on cell therapy is lacking. The next important step would be to provide financial, legal/ethical and other support for groups that are active and productive in this field through the development of a local cell therapy programme.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.