Medical Publications

Peer-reviewed research relevant to our cellular and regenerative platforms.

This publication library presents selected recent scientific articles relating to mesenchymal stromal cells, extracellular vesicles, exosomes, immunomodulatory cell therapies and regenerative applications associated with the CELLMEX technology portfolio.

Review Publications Understand the Evidence

Publication Library

Scientific literature must be interpreted in context

A publication may describe laboratory research, animal studies, early human experience, a clinical trial, a systematic review or expert interpretation. These forms of evidence do not carry equal scientific weight.

Findings obtained with one cellular or cell-free product cannot automatically be applied to another product described using the same general name.

Cell source, donor selection, culture conditions, passage number, isolation method, purification, dose, route of administration and patient population may materially affect the results.

The publications on this page are provided for scientific education. Their inclusion does not mean that CELLMEX endorses every conclusion or offers every intervention discussed by the authors.

Selected Recent Literature

Publications relevant to CELLMEX technologies

The following articles were selected for their relevance to biological mechanisms, clinical translation, safety, standardisation and evidence limitations.

MSC Biology and Cartilage

Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Aging Cartilage Regeneration: A Review

Kun-Chi Wu; Yu-Hsun Chang; Dah-Ching Ding; Shinn-Zong Lin

International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;25(23):12911.

This review examines MSC biology, proposed mechanisms and preclinical and clinical applications in ageing cartilage and osteoarthritis. It discusses differentiation, paracrine signalling and immunomodulation while identifying continuing challenges involving cell viability, scalability, safety and regulation.

Evidence classification

Narrative scientific review. It summarises existing evidence but is not itself a controlled clinical trial.

Published 30 November 2024

PMID 39684619

DOI 10.3390/ijms252312911

Publication type Review

View verified PubMed record →

Exosome Clinical Translation

Global Trends of Exosomes Application in Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review

Maryam Rahnama; Mohammad Heidari; Zahra Poursalehi; Ali Golchin

Stem Cell Reviews and Reports. 2024;20(8):2165–2193.

This review evaluated published clinical-trial literature involving exosome applications. From 522 initially identified publications, ten studies met the authors' eligibility criteria. The paper describes potential applications while emphasising that therapeutic exosome development remains at an early stage.

Evidence classification

Scoping review of clinical-trial literature. The authors identify promise but also the need for improved extraction, loading, targeting, administration and safety control.

Published November 2024

PMID 39340738

DOI 10.1007/s12015-024-10791-7

Publication type Scoping review

View verified PubMed record →

Exosome Quality and Reporting

Standardized Reporting of Research on Exosomes to Ensure Rigor and Reproducibility

Anita Yadav; Yi Xuan; Chandan K. Sen; Subhadip Ghatak

Advances in Wound Care. 2024;13(11):584–599.

This review addresses extracellular-vesicle heterogeneity, isolation complexity, characterisation and inconsistent reporting. It discusses MISEV guidance, EV-TRACK and the need for reproducible methods before exosome-based products can be reliably translated into clinical care.

Evidence classification

Methodological and scientific review focused on research quality, standardisation and reproducibility rather than proof of treatment efficacy.

Published November 2024

PMID 38888007

DOI 10.1089/wound.2024.0093

Publication type Review

View verified PubMed record →

Immune and Cellular Therapies

Current Cell Therapies for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Lan T. M. Dao; Thu Thuy Vu; Quyen Thi Nguyen; Van T. Hoang; Thanh Liem Nguyen

Stem Cells Translational Medicine. 2024;13(9):859–872.

This review examines haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, MSC therapy, regulatory T cells, natural-killer cells and CAR-T-cell approaches in systemic lupus erythematosus. It summarises recent clinical experience while noting that additional studies are required to establish safety and efficacy conclusively.

Evidence classification

Clinical and translational review. The therapies described have different levels of development, risk and supporting evidence.

Published 10 September 2024

PMID 38920310

DOI 10.1093/stcltm/szae044

Publication type Review

View verified PubMed record →

Macrophage Cell Therapy

Smart Cell Therapy: An Industry Perspective on Macrophages as Living Drugs

David T. Rodgers; Tatiana Novobrantseva; Rita N. Barcia

Cytotherapy. 2025;27(7):849–863.

This review examines macrophage-based cellular therapies and their potential to coordinate innate and adaptive immune responses. It also discusses major development barriers, including limited expansion, genetic-engineering difficulty, manufacturing scale and the need to demonstrate late-stage clinical success.

Evidence classification

Industry-perspective review. Macrophage-based cell therapies remain an emerging development field and should not be presented as routine regenerative treatment.

Published July 2025

PMID 39772342

DOI 10.1016/j.jcyt.2024.12.002

Publication type Review

View verified PubMed record →

Exosomes and Hair Applications

Exosomes for Treating Hair Loss: A Review of Clinical Studies

Dawn Queen; Marc R. Avram

Dermatologic Surgery. 2025;51(4):409–415.

This review evaluates published human studies involving exosome products for hair loss. The authors identified nine relevant clinical studies involving 125 patients. They reported limited human evidence and emphasised the need for larger, well-designed trials, longer follow-up, manufacturing consistency and regulatory oversight.

Evidence classification

Review of limited clinical evidence. The publication does not establish exosome therapy as a proven or standard treatment for alopecia.

Published 1 April 2025

PMID 39447204

DOI 10.1097/DSS.0000000000004480

Publication type Review of clinical studies

View verified PubMed record →

Evidence Classification

How to interpret the publications

Publication does not automatically mean that a product or treatment has been clinically validated.

Human Clinical Evidence

Clinical Trials and Human Studies

These studies directly examine an intervention in human participants. Their strength depends on randomisation, controls, sample size, blinding, follow-up and the quality of outcome reporting.

Evidence Synthesis

Reviews and Systematic Analyses

Reviews summarise existing publications. They are useful for identifying trends and limitations but do not substitute for well-designed clinical trials using a defined product.

Early-Stage Evidence

Laboratory and Preclinical Research

In-vitro and animal research may support a biological rationale, but the findings cannot be assumed to predict clinical safety or efficacy in patients.

Responsible Scientific Use

Publications should inform—not replace—medical evaluation

Important scientific qualification

The inclusion of a publication does not establish that the intervention discussed is approved, routinely available, clinically proven or suitable for a particular patient.

Research findings are product-specific. Results obtained using one MSC source, exosome preparation, extracellular-vesicle fraction or immune-cell product cannot automatically be attributed to another product.

Treatment decisions must be based on the patient's diagnosis, medical history, available alternatives, product identity, manufacturing controls, clinical evidence, applicable regulation and physician-led informed consent.

Continue Exploring

Connect the published research to our scientific platform

Review the biological principles and individual technology platforms associated with the publications contained in this library.

Review Our Science Explore Our Technologies