Publication:
Stem cell/cellular interventions in human spinal cord injury: Is it time to move from guidelines to regulations and legislations? Literature review and Spinal Cord Society position statement

dc.contributor.authorsChhabra, Harvinder S.; Sarda, Kanchan; Jotwani, Geeta; Gourie-Devi, M.; Kaptanoglu, Erkan; Charlifue, Susan; Yadav, S. L.; Mohapatra, B.; Srivastava, Abhishek; Phadke, Kedar
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-10T15:25:34Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-10T18:46:49Z
dc.date.available2022-03-10T15:25:34Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractPurpose In preclinical studies, many stem cell/cellular interventions demonstrated robust regeneration and/or repair in case of SCI and were considered a promising therapeutic candidate. However, data from clinical studies are not robust. Despite lack of substantial evidence for the efficacy of these interventions in spinal cord injury (SCI), many clinics around the world offer them as therapy. These clinics claim efficacy through patient testimonials and self-advertisement without any scientific evidence to validate their claims. Thus, SCS established a panel of experts to review published preclinical studies, clinical studies and current global guidelines/regulations on usage of cellular transplants and make recommendations for their clinical use. Methods The literature review and draft position statement was compiled and circulated among the panel and relevant suggestions incorporated to reach consensus. This was discussed and finalized in an open forum during the SCS Annual Meeting, ISSICON. Results Preclinical evidence suggests safety and clinical potency of cellular interventions after SCI. However, evidence from clinical studies consisted of mostly case reports or uncontrolled case series/studies. Data from animal studies cannot be generalized to human SCI with regard to toxicity prediction after auto/allograft transplantation. Conclusions Currently, cellular/stem cell transplantation for human SCI is experimental and needs to be tested through a valid clinical trial program. It is not ethical to provide unproven transplantation as therapy with commercial implications. To stop the malpractice of marketing such unproven therapies to a vulnerable population, it is crucial that all countries unite to form common, well-defined regulations/legislation on their use in SCI. Graphical abstract These slides can be retrieved from Electronic Supplementary Material. [GRAPHICS] .
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00586-019-06003-3
dc.identifier.eissn1432-0932
dc.identifier.issn0940-6719
dc.identifier.pubmed31098715
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11424/220289
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000480586600013
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSPRINGER
dc.relation.ispartofEUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectGuidelines
dc.subjectSpinal cord injury
dc.subjectAcute paraplegia
dc.subjectClinical trial
dc.subjectStem cell
dc.subjectCellular interventions
dc.subjectPosition statement
dc.subjectRegulations
dc.subjectOLFACTORY ENSHEATHING CELL
dc.subjectAUTOLOGOUS SCHWANN-CELL
dc.subjectCLINICAL-TRIALS
dc.subjectICCP PANEL
dc.subjectAXONAL REGENERATION
dc.subjectPHASE-I
dc.subjectTRANSPLANTATION
dc.subjectTHERAPY
dc.subjectCONDUCT
dc.subjectMARROW
dc.titleStem cell/cellular interventions in human spinal cord injury: Is it time to move from guidelines to regulations and legislations? Literature review and Spinal Cord Society position statement
dc.typereview
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage1845
oaire.citation.issue8
oaire.citation.startPage1837
oaire.citation.titleEUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL
oaire.citation.volume28

Files