ReviewAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2026
"Time Is Brain" - for Cell Therapies.
Review in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Time Is Brain" - for Cell Therapies.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Network Pharmacology Analysis and Experimental Study of Yinchen Against Neuroinflammation in Ischemic Stroke.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The principle "time is brain" has long guided acute stroke treatment, emphasizing that earlier intervention improves outcomes. While this dictum applies to current gold-standard reperfusion therapies, its relevance to emerging regenerative approaches such as stem cell therapy remains to be established. A growing body of preclinical and clinical studies suggests that timing of cell delivery is a key determinant of graft survival, integration and therapeutic efficacy, largely through interactions with the evolving post-stroke microenvironment. Here, we discuss how early transplantation may access salvageable tissue but faces a hostile inflammatory microenvironment, whereas transplantation at the subacute or chronic phase benefits from a more permissive milieu but by then much of the tissue has been irreversibly lost. We further suggest the optimal window also depends on cell type and mechanism of action: neuroprotective or immunomodulatory grafts may benefit from earlier delivery, while cells requiring long-term survival and integration may perform better later. Thus, "time is brain" also applies to cell therapies, but it may require aligning graft delivery with the evolving post-stroke microenvironment rather than the acute therapeutic window. Identifying biomarkers that track inflammatory changes, vascular remodeling and brain damage could personalize this "window of receptivity" and guide tailored future clinical trials.
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.