ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Identification of critical process parameters and quality attributes for bioreactor-based expansion of human MSCs.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From production to bedside: A tiered QC framework for regulatory alignment and analytical comparability in decentralized CGT.Regenerative therapy · 2026Review
- Genotoxicity Integration into Bioprocess Optimization Reveals Progressive DNA Damage During Bioreactor Expansion of Adipose-Derived Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Mechanomedicine-guided mechanical preconditioning of dental-derived stromal cells for tissue regeneration.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Review
- Comparative evaluation of YOLOv8, YOLOv11, and RT-DETR for automated microcarrier colonization assessment in bioreactor cell cultures.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) have been identified as a promising therapeutic option for osteoarthritis, graft vs. host disease and cardiovascular diseases, among others. For widespread application of these therapies, robust and scaled manufacturing processes are required that reliably yield high amounts of high quality MSCs. One of the primary challenges in MSC manufacturing is achieving robustness, due to the high donor-to-donor and batch-to-batch variability seen in MSC manufacturing. To achieve more consistent manufacturing, standardization of the manufacturing process and analytical methods to determine cell quality and control process parameters will be needed. Traditionally, MSCs are cultivated in two dimensional (2D) systems, such as flasks or plates. However, these systems are limited in their scalability. To enhance volumetric productivity, upscaling may be achieved using agitated bioreactors where the MSCs are grown on microcarriers or other types of scaffolds. In this article, we have reviewed existing publications on the manufacturing of MSCs in agitated bioreactor systems regarding the process conditions used and the quality parameters measured to define more clearly the most relevant cell quality and process parameters. Key cell quality parameters measured are cell number and viability, immunophenotype and differentiation potential, while key process parameters include the cultivation system (cell source, bioreactor type, media composition), physiochemical properties of the media such as pH and dissolved oxygen (DO), as well as nutrient supply. Defining these parameters more clearly will support the development of robust MSC manufacturing processes at scale using improved process control and facilitate the widespread clinical application of MSC-based cell therapies.
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.