Current Status of Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy and Bone Marrow Transplantation in IBD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular therapy is a promising new approach to address unmet medical needs in patients with IBD, mainly Crohn's disease (CD). Two series have reported autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for CD. The largest one is a phase I study from Chicago including 24 patients with active CD refractory to conventional therapies. All patients went into remission with a CD Activity Index (CDAI) <150. The percentage of clinical relapse-free survival was 91% at 1 year, 63% at 2 years, 57% at 3 years, 39% at 4 years and 19% at 5 years. The percentage of patients in remission (CDAI <150), steroid-free or medication-free at any post-transplantation evaluation interval remained ≥70, ≥80 and ≥60%, respectively. In Europe and Canada, a currently ongoing randomized trial hopes to answer the question of whether autologous HSCT adds any benefit to the effect of immunosuppression used during mobilization. Although promising, HSCT for CD is still experimental and its toxicity leaves this option for a considerably reduced number of refractory patients in whom the disease is not amenable to surgical resection. A more recently developed, less aggressive approach involves the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Successful pre-clinical studies using MSCs in models of autoimmunity, inflammation or tissue damage have paved the way for clinical trials. Two phase I studies on autologous bone marrow-derived MSCs for the treatment of active refractory CD have been published recently; one using systemic administration in patients with luminal CD and the other assessing the effects of local injection of MSCs for the treatment of fistulizing CD, showing that application of autologous MSCs is feasible, well tolerated and might produce clinical benefits.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".