ArticleRegenerative therapy2026
Genomic analysis of dental pulp mesenchymal stromal cells for therapeutic applications.
Article in Regenerative therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Changes in cell characteristics and the accumulation of gene mutations during expansion culture present significant challenges for the clinical translation of stem cell transplantation technologies. Reduced cell quality may lead to diminished therapeutic efficacy and unexpected cellular dysfunction after transplantation. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), including dental pulp stromal cells (DPSCs), are promising candidates for clinical application because of their multipotent differentiation capacity, immunosuppressive properties, and proliferative potential. However, robust strategies to assess genomic stability during large-scale cell preparation remain insufficient. Methods: DPSCs derived from healthy donors maintained safety profiles and exhibited delayed senescence even after more than 10 passages under large-scale expansion conditions. To evaluate genomic stability, DPSCs derived from healthy individuals and patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus were analyzed after successive passages. Copy number variations (CNVs) were assessed using CytoScan, and disease-related gene mutations were analyzed using the TruSight One Sequencing Panel. Results: During long-term expansion, increases in chromosomal CNVs and Conclusion: This work addresses a critical bottleneck in stem cell therapy by integrating genomic risk profiling into early-stage cell quality assessment, enabling safer and more reliable cell product development. Furthermore, our findings highlight the feasibility of applying medical genomic tools to preemptively identify putative high-risk cell populations during stem cell manufacturing, thereby providing a practical framework for improving the safety and consistency of cell-based transplantation 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.