SynthesisPloS one2021
Clinical efficacy on glycemic control and safety of mesenchymal stem cells in patients with diabetes mellitus: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT data.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of stem cell therapy in type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of stem cell therapy in patients with Diabetes Mellitus - a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness and safety of human umbilical cord-mesenchymal stem cells for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus.World journal of diabetes · 2022Trial
- A Comprehensive Review of Novel Advances in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.Journal of diabetes · 2025Review
- Overview of Cellular Therapeutics Clinical Trials: Advances, Challenges, and Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Mesenchymal stem cell-based therapy for type 1 & 2 diabetes mellitus patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Review
- Tailoring cell therapies for diabetic metabolic phenotypes: a comparative study on the efficacy of various umbilical cord-derived cell regimens.Stem cells translational medicine · 2025Article
- Analysis of Predictive Factors for the Efficacy of Modified Three-Port Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in Treating Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2025Article
- Current status of stem cell therapy for type 1 diabetes: a critique and a prospective consideration.Stem cell research & therapy · 2024Review
- Stem cell therapy for type 1 diabetes: a scientometric assessment of global research during the twenty-first century.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2022Article
- Mesenchymal stem cells: an early yet promising prospect for Asthma.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Aqueous extract ofJournal of stem cells & regenerative medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes mellitus as a chronic metabolic disease is threatening human health seriously. Although numerous clinical trials have been registered for the treatment of diabetes with stem cells, no articles have been published to summarize the efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS AND
findingsThe aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence from RCTs and, where possible, conduct meta-analyses to provide a reliable numerical summary and the most comprehensive assessment of therapeutic efficacy and safety with MSCs in diabetes. PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, the Cochrane Library and CNKI were searched. The retrieval time was from establishment of these databases to January 4, 2020. Seven RCTs were eligible for analysis, including 413 participants. Meta-analysis results showed that there were no significant differences in the reduction of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) compared to the baseline [mean difference (MD) = -1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-2.26,0.16), P<0.01, I2 = 94%] and the control group [MD = -0.62, 95%CI (-1.46,0.23), P<0.01, I2 = 87%]. The MSCs treatment group showed a significant decrease in hemoglobin (Hb) A1c [random-effects, MD = -1.32, 95%CI (-2.06, -0.57), P<0.01, I2 = 90%] after treatment. Additionally, HbA1c reduced more significantly in MSC treatment group than in control group [random-effects, MD = -0.87, 95%CI (-1.53, -0.22), P<0.01, I2 = 82%] at the end of follow-up. However, as for fasting C-peptide levels, the estimated pooled MD showed that there was no significant increase [MD = -0.07, 95%CI (-0.30, 0.16), P<0.01, I2 = 94%] in MSCs treatment group compared with that in control group. Notably, there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between MSCs treatment group and control group [relative risk (RR) = 0.98, 95%CI (0.72, 1.32), P = 0.02, I2 = 70%]. The most commonly observed adverse reaction in the MSC treatment group was hypoglycemia (29.95%).
conclusionsThis meta-analysis revealed MSCs therapy may be an effective and safe intervention in subjects with diabetes. However, due to the limited studies, a number of high-quality as well as large-scale RCTs should be performed to confirm these conclusions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.