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

Trends of Stem Cell Therapies in Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Maeda T., Sugita S., Kurimoto Y., Takahashi M.

Clinical Trial, published in J Clin Med (2021) — 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
J Clin Med (2021)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
33923985
PMCID
PMC8074076
DOI
10.3390/jcm10081785
Citations
36

Abstract (original English)

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a highly prevalent irreversible impairment in the elderly population worldwide. Stem cell therapies have been considered potentially viable for treating AMD through the direct replacement of degenerated cells or secretion of trophic factors that facilitate the survival of existing cells. Among them, the safety of pluripotent stem cell-derived retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) cell transplantation against AMD, and some hereditary retinal degenerative diseases, has been discussed to a certain extent in clinical studies of RPE cell transplantation. Preparations are in progress for its clinical application. On the other hand, clinical trials using somatic stem cells are also being conducted, though these had controversial outcomes. Retinal regenerative medicine using stem cells is expected to make steady progress toward practical use while new technologies are incorporated from various fields, thereby making the role of ophthalmologists in this field increasingly important.

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.