Are all stem cells equal? Systematic review, evidence map, and meta-analyses of preclinical stem cell-based therapies for bronchopulmonary dysplasia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Regenerative stem cell-based therapies for bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), the most common preterm birth complication, demonstrate promise in animals. Failure to objectively appraise available preclinical data and identify knowledge gaps could jeopardize clinical translation. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of preclinical studies testing cell-based therapies in experimental neonatal lung injury. Fifty-three studies assessing 15 different cell-based therapies were identified: 35 studied the effects of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) almost exclusively in hyperoxic rodent models of BPD. Exploratory NMAs, for select outcomes, suggest that MSCs are the most effective therapy. Although a broad range of promising cell-based therapies has been assessed, few head-to-head comparisons and unclear risk of bias exists. Successful clinical translation of cell-based therapies demands robust preclinical experimental design with appropriately blinded, randomized, and statistically powered studies, based on biological plausibility for a given cell product, in standardized models and endpoints with transparent reporting. Significance statement Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), a chronic lung disease that follows ventilator and oxygen therapy for acute respiratory failure after premature birth, is the most frequent complication of extreme prematurity. BPD is associated with long-term respiratory and neurological consequences reaching into adulthood and currently lacks effective therapy. Regenerative cell-based therapy, demonstrating therapeutic benefit in experimental neonatal lung injury, has now spawned clinical trials. Yet there has been no systematic review to assess the extent of current evidence regarding safety and efficacy of cell-based therapies in preclinical BPD and identify gaps that could jeopardize successful clinical translation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it