Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39407034›Full record

ReviewNature medicine2024

Cell therapy for neurological disorders.

Soshana P Svendsen, Clive N Svendsen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Endogenous Engineering Reprograms Extracellular Vesicles for Enhanced Therapeutic Function.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Stem cell extracellular vesicles for neuropsychiatric disorders and translation.Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids · 2026
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Soshana P SvendsenCedars-Sinai Board of Governors Regenerative Medicine Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Clive N SvendsenCedars-Sinai Board of Governors Regenerative Medicine Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA. clive.svendsen@cshs.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8696-3446

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell therapies for neurological disorders are entering the clinic and present unique challenges and opportunities compared with conventional medicines. They have the potential to replace damaged nervous tissue and integrate into the brain or spinal cord to produce functional effects for the lifetime of the patient, which could revolutionize the way clinicians treat debilitating neurological disorders. The major challenge has been cell sourcing, which historically relied mainly on fetal brain tissue. This has largely been overcome with the advent of pluripotent stem cell technology and the ability to make almost any cell of the nervous system at scale. Furthermore, advances in gene editing now allow the generation of genetically modified cells that could perform better and evade the immune system. With all the remarkable new approaches to treat neurological disorders, we take a critical look at the state of current clinical trials and how challenges may be overcome with the evolving technology and innovation occurring in the stem cell field.

Indexed as

Cell- and Tissue-Based TherapyNervous System DiseasesAnimalsClinical Trials as TopicGene EditingHumansPluripotent Stem CellsStem Cell Transplantation

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.