MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386594644 · doi:10.1186/s13287-023-03475-5

What is the optimal dose of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells treatment for knee osteoarthritis? A conventional and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2023· review· en· W4386594644 on OpenAlex
Zongyuan Huang, Shuai Zhang, Mingde Cao, Zhujian Lin, Lingquan Kong, Xin Wu, Qianshi Guo, Yuxiang Ouyang, Yancheng Song

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cell Research & Therapy · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province
KeywordsMesenchymal stem cellOsteoarthritisMedicineWOMACMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleAdverse effectCell therapyAdipose tissueStem cellStem-cell therapyClinical trialInternal medicineSurgeryPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing clinical investigations underscoring the efficacy and safety of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs) therapy in knee osteoarthritis (KOA), no article has recently reviewed the cell dosage. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of varying doses of AD-MSCs in treating KOA using conventional and network meta-analysis. METHODS: A search of databases in in Chinese and English was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) on MSCs for knee osteoarthritis from the inception date to May 1, 2022. This study mainly analyzed the efficacy of AD-MSCs in the treatment of KOA, and subgroup analysis was performed on the therapeutic effects of MSCs from different tissues at the same dose. We divided the different cell doses into low, moderate, and high groups, with the corresponding cell doses: (0-25)*10^6, (25-50)*10^6, and > 50*10^6 cells, respectively. We further analyzed the improvement of improvement of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) after varied dosage injection. RESULTS: A total of 16 literatures were included in this study, of which 8 literatures were about AD-MSCs. Conventional meta-analysis suggests that AD-MSCs can reduce pain and improve function in KOA patients, regardless of the cell doses, up to 12 months of follow-up. The network meta-analysis showed that intra-articular injection of AD-MSCs significantly improved pain and knee function scores in KOA patients compared with the control group at 3, 6, and 12 months. Among the three groups, the high-dose group had the best treatment effect, and the degree of joint pain and dysfunction indicators improved more significantly in the early stage. For adverse events, there was a dose-response trend that increased with increasing doses. CONCLUSIONS: Both cell doses reduced pain and improved knee function in KOA patients. The effect surpassed in the high-dose group than in the moderate-dose, low-dose and control groups. However, adverse events also increase with the increase in dose, which should be carefully considered in clinical application, and the side effects still need to be paid attention to. Considering the limitations of this meta-analysis, future studies need to further explore the efficacy and safety of different doses of treatment, and carry out large sample, multi-center, randomized controlled trials to ensure the reliability and promotion value of the research results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0450.029
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.363
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.102 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it