MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403195122 · doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics16101299

Cell Therapy for Retinal Degenerative Diseases: Progress and Prospects

2024· review· en· W4403195122 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Y. Wu, Jaskarn K. Dhaliwal, Akash Sasitharan, Ananda Kalevar

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetinal degenerationRetinalMedicineCell therapyNeuroscienceOphthalmologyCellBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and retinitis pigmentosa (RP) are leading causes of vision loss, with AMD affecting older populations and RP being a rarer, genetically inherited condition. Both diseases result in progressive retinal degeneration, for which current treatments remain inadequate in advanced stages. This review aims to provide an overview of the retina’s anatomy and physiology, elucidate the pathophysiology of AMD and RP, and evaluate emerging cell-based therapies for these conditions. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted, focusing on cell therapy approaches, including embryonic stem cells (ESCs), induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and retinal progenitor cells. Preclinical and clinical studies were analyzed to assess therapeutic potential, with attention to mechanisms such as cell replacement, neuroprotection, and paracrine effects. Relevant challenges, including ethical concerns and clinical translation, were also explored. Results: Cell-based therapies demonstrate potential for restoring retinal function and slowing disease progression through mechanisms like neuroprotection and cell replacement. Preclinical trials show promising outcomes, but clinical studies face significant hurdles, including challenges in cell delivery and long-term efficacy. Combination therapies integrating gene editing and biomaterials offer potential future advancements. Conclusions: While cell-based therapies for AMD and RP have made significant progress, substantial barriers to clinical application remain. Further research is essential to overcome these obstacles, improve delivery methods, and ensure the safe and effective translation of these therapies into clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceuticsSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207