Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42559161›Full record

ArticleJOR spine2026

Surviving the Nucleus Pulposus Desert: Next-Generation Strategies for Intervertebral Disc Cell Therapy.

Tynhinane Hamidouche, Namdev More, Tiffany Lee, Mia Orr, Anne Camus, Devina Purmessur, Sarah E Gulbrand, Nadeen O Chahine, Lara Silverman, Dmitriy Sheyn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JOR spine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Tynhinane HamidoucheOrthopedic Stem Cell Research Lab, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Los Angeles California USA.
Namdev MoreOrthopedic Stem Cell Research Lab, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Los Angeles California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7906-1310
Tiffany LeeOrthopedic Stem Cell Research Lab, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Los Angeles California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-1386-1210
Mia OrrOrthopedic Stem Cell Research Lab, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Los Angeles California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1578-6985
Anne CamusNantes University, Oniris, CHU Nantes, Inserm, Regenerative Medicine and Skeleton, RMeS, UMR 1229 Nantes France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8820-0407
Devina PurmessurDepartment of Biomedical Engineering The Ohio State University Columbus Ohio USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7445-1678
Sarah E GulbrandDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7806-6606
Nadeen O ChahineDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Columbia University New York New York USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0478-6042
Lara SilvermanLIS Bioconsulting, LLC Salt Lake City Utah USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7497-847X
Dmitriy SheynOrthopedic Stem Cell Research Lab, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Los Angeles California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3333-1485

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Low back pain remains the leading cause of disability worldwide, with intervertebral disc degeneration representing a major biological contributor. Although cell-based therapies have shown promise in preclinical models, clinical translation has yielded modest and inconsistent outcomes. Accumulating evidence suggests that therapeutic failure reflects not only limitations in cell source or differentiation potential, but also the hostile biochemical and biomechanical microenvironment of the degenerative disc. Hypoxia, nutrient deprivation, acidity, lactate accumulation, fibrosis, senescence, inflammation, and abnormal mechanical loading collectively impair cell survival, integration, and long-term function. Method: We performed a comprehensive review of the literature using PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, with emphasis on studies published between 2020 and 2026. Evidence was critically evaluated to examine advances in cell-based therapies for IVDD, including cell sources, mechanisms of repair, biomaterial-assisted delivery systems, microenvironment-targeted strategies, translational studies, and emerging technologies that enhance regenerative efficacy. Discussion: Current evidence indicates that successful disc regeneration depends not only on selecting an appropriate therapeutic cell source but also on overcoming the biological constraints imposed by the degenerative niche. We critically compare the regenerative potential of mesenchymal stromal cells, nucleus pulposus cells, and induced pluripotent stem cell-derived therapies, highlighting their respective advantages and limitations. We further discuss how biomaterial carriers, extracellular vesicles, developmental biology-guided differentiation, genetic engineering, preconditioning approaches, and smart delivery platforms are being integrated to improve cell survival, phenotype stability, extracellular matrix restoration, and functional repair. Conclusion: Future success in intervertebral disc regeneration will require integrated therapeutic strategies that combine optimized cell sources with biomaterial-assisted delivery, microenvironment modulation, and precision bioengineering. Advancing these complementary approaches will be essential for achieving durable biological repair, restoring disc structure and function, and translating regenerative therapies into effective clinical treatments for patients with degenerative disc disease.

Indexed as

cell therapyiPSC derived iNPIVD degenerationlow back painmicrogelnotochordal cells

Identifiers

PMID42559161
PMCPMC13440357

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.