SynthesisSystematic reviews2026
Efficacy and safety of stem cell therapy in patients with Diabetes Mellitus - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 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.
- Review
- Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes: Synergistic β-Cell Regeneration, Immune Modulation, and Exosome-Mediated Glucose Homeostasis.Stem cells international · 2026Review
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
backgroundTo support the development of a national guideline on stem cell therapy, the Department of Health Research, India, commissioned this systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various stem cell types in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), focusing on patient-important outcomes.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases from inception to August 30, 2024. Critical outcomes for type 1 DM included insulin-free periods, hypoglycemic episodes, quality of life, and serious adverse events. For type 2 DM, outcomes included HbA1c, insulin requirements at 6, 12, and 24 months, and serious adverse events. Meta-analyses used random- or fixed-effects models based on heterogeneity (Chi-square test and I
resultsThe search identified 11,026 articles, of which 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, encompassing 427 and 351 patients in the intervention and control groups, respectively, with follow-ups ranging from 3 to 96 months. Predominantly studied therapies included mesenchymal and bone marrow mononuclear stem cells. In type 1 DM, stem cell therapy showed no significant improvement in quality of life [MD: 3.15% (95% CI: -0.80 to 7.10); 2 trials, n = 63 participants; I
conclusionStem cell therapy did not achieve an insulin-free state or improved quality of life in type 1 DM patients. However, it reduced insulin requirements by 14-36 units over 6-24 months in type 2 DM patients, without significant glycemic control. Larger, high-quality RCTs with extended follow-ups are essential to determine the therapeutic potential of stem cell therapy in diabetes mellitus. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42023451602.
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.