Regulated and Unregulated Clinical Trials of Stem Cell Therapies for Stroke.

Several lines of laboratory investigations reporting solid safety profiles and robust efficacy readouts of stem cells in clinically relevant animal models have advanced stem cell transplantation as an experimental therapy for stroke. Unfortunately, translating laboratory findings into effective clinical trials entails rigorous regulatory examinations, which posed a major challenge in the application of stem cells to patients. As a consequence of this slow pace of clinical entry, and a media-propagated hype narrating stem cells as a “magic bullet”, a dangerous market has been created for unregulated stem cell clinics. These clinics are often guilty of misleading patients and delivering low-quality, even harmful, treatments. Additionally, these medical tourism-purported clinical procedures, which have been performed even in the US, are likely to negatively impact on the true science and clinical value of stem cells. For the full potential of stem cell therapies to be realized, these pressing public misconceptions and regulatory clinical concerns must be addressed. Here, we provide the scientific evidence supporting the safe and effective conduct of stem cells. Arguably, relying on such evidence-based science to dictate the translation of stem cells from the laboratory to the clinic should allow an objective assessment of the risks and the rewards, and the delineation of the hype from hope of this experimental stroke therapy.