MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408275973 · doi:10.1038/s41591-025-03559-0

Allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell therapy with laromestrocel in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a randomized controlled phase 2a trial

2025· article· en· W4408275973 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian G. Rash, Kevin Ramdas, Nataliya Agafonova, Eric Naioti, Lisa McClain‐Moss, Zarin Zainul, Brittany Varnado, Kevin Peterson, Michael Brown, Thiago Peixoto Leal, Steven Kopcho, Raul Carballosa, Paayal Patel, Mark Brody, Brad Herskowitz, Ana Fuquay, Alan F. Jacobson, Ramón Fernández de León, Michael A. Pfeffer, Julie Schwartzbard, Jeffrey Botbyl, Anthony A. Oliva, Joshua M. Hare

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPlaceboMedicineClinical endpointAtrophyAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineNeuroinflammationClinical trialCognitive declineGastroenterologySurgeryDiseasePathologyDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by progressive cognitive decline, severe brain atrophy and neuroinflammation. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 2a clinical trial that tested the safety and efficacy of laromestrocel, a bone-marrow-derived, allogeneic mesenchymal stem-cell therapy, in slowing AD clinical progression, atrophy and neuroinflammation. Participants across ten centers in the United States were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to four infusion groups: group 1 (placebo; four monthly infusions, n = 12); group 2 (25 million cells, one infusion followed by three monthly infusions of placebo, n = 13); group 3 (25 million cells; four monthly doses, n = 13); and group 4 (100 million cells; four monthly doses, n = 11). The study met its primary end point of safety; the rate of treatment-emergent serious adverse events within 4 weeks of any infusion was similar in all four groups: group 1, 0% (95% CI 0-26.5%); group 2, 7.7% (95% CI 0.2-36%); group 3, 7.7% (95% CI 0.2-36%) and group 4, 9.1% (95% CI 0.2-41.3%). Additionally, there were no reported infusion-related reactions, hypersensitivities or amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. Laromestrocel improved clinical assessments at 39 weeks compared to placebo, as measured by a composite AD score (secondary end point was met: group 2 versus placebo change: 0.38; 95% CI -0.06-0.82), Montreal cognitive assessment and the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living. At 39 weeks, Laromestrocel slowed the decline of whole brain volume compared to placebo (n = 10) by 48.4% for all treatment groups combined (groups 2-4: P = 0.005; n = 32) and left hippocampal volume by 61.9% (groups 2-4, P = 0.021; n = 32), and reduced neuroinflammation as measured by diffusion tensor imaging. The change in bilateral hippocampal atrophy correlated with the change in mini-mental state exam scores (R = 0.41, P = 0.0075) in all study patients (N = 42). Collectively these results support safety of single and multiple doses of laromestrocel treatment for mild AD and provide indications of efficacy in combating decline of brain volume and potentially cognitive function. Larger-scale clinical trials of laromestrocel in AD are warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05233774 .

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations41
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature MedicineSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207