ArticleJournal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea)2025
Safety and Tolerability of Wharton's Jelly-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Patients With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Phase 1 Clinical Study.
Article in Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress on cell therapy for skeletal muscle disorders.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2026Review
- Dentinogenic Effect of BMP-7 on Wharton's Jelly Mesenchymal Stem Cells Cultured in Decellularized Dental Pulp.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Induced Pluripotent (iPSC) and Mesenchymal (MSC) Stem Cells for In Vitro Disease Modeling and Regenerative Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Improving the therapeutic efficacy of gene therapy for duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) by evaluating and managing inflammation.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Stem/progenitor cell-based therapy for Duchenne muscular dystrophy.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeThis study was an open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 clinical trial to determine the safety and dose of EN001 for patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). EN001, developed by ENCell, are allogeneic early-passage Wharton's jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells that originate at the umbilical cord, with preclinical studies demonstrating their high therapeutic efficacy for DMD.
methodsThis phase 1 clinical trial explored the safety and tolerability of EN001 as a potential treatment option for patients with DMD. Six pediatric participants with DMD were divided into two subgroups of equal size: low-dose EN001 (5.0×10⁵ cells/kg) and high-dose EN001 (2.5×10⁶ cells/kg). All participants were monitored for 12 weeks after EN001 administration to assess its safety. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was evaluated across 2 weeks post administration. Exploratory efficacy was evaluated by measuring serum creatine kinase levels, and functional evaluations-including spirometry, myometry, the North Star Ambulatory Assessment, and the 6-minute walk test-were conducted at week 12 and compared with the baseline values.
resultsNo participants experienced serious adverse events related to EN001 injection during the 12-week follow-up period. Mild adverse events included injection-related local erythema, edema, parosmia, and headache, but DLT was not observed. Functional evaluations at week 12 revealed no significant changes from baseline.
conclusionsThese results demonstrated that EN001 are safe and well tolerated for patients with DMD, and did not cause serious adverse events. The efficacy of EN001 could be confirmed through larger-scale future studies that incorporate repeated dosing and have a randomized controlled trial design.
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.