↓ Skip to main content

An open-label proof-of-concept study of intrathecal autologous bone marrow mononuclear cell transplantation in intellectual disability

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An open-label proof-of-concept study of intrathecal autologous bone marrow mononuclear cell transplantation in intellectual disability
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13287-017-0748-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alok Sharma, Hemangi Sane, Nandini Gokulchandran, Suhasini Pai, Pooja Kulkarni, Vaishali Ganwir, Maitree Maheshwari, Ridhima Sharma, Meenakshi Raichur, Samson Nivins, Prerna Badhe

Abstract

The underlying pathophysiology in intellectual disability (ID) involves abnormalities in dendritic branching and connectivity of the neuronal network. This limits the ability of the brain to process information. Conceptually, cellular therapy through its neurorestorative and neuroregenerative properties can counteract these pathogenetic mechanisms and improve neuronal connectivity. This improved networking should exhibit as clinical efficacy in patients with ID. To assess the safety and efficacy of cellular therapy in patients with ID, we conducted an open-label proof-of-concept study from October 2011 to December 2015. Patients were divided into two groups: intervention group (n = 29) and rehabilitation group (n = 29). The intervention group underwent cellular transplantation consisting of intrathecal administration of autologous bone marrow mononuclear cells and standard neurorehabilitation. The rehabilitation group underwent only standard neurorehabilitation. The results of the symptomatic outcomes were compared between the two groups. In the intervention group analysis, the outcome measures used were the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the Wee Functional Independence Measure (Wee-FIM). To compare the pre-intervention and post-intervention results, statistical analysis was done using Wilcoxon's matched-pairs test for Wee-FIM scores and McNemar's test for symptomatic improvements and IQ. The effect of age and severity of the disorder were assessed for their impact on the outcome of intervention. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) brain scan was used as a monitoring tool to study effects of the intervention. Adverse events were monitored for the safety of cellular therapy. On symptomatic analysis, greater improvements were seen in the intervention group as compared to the rehabilitation group. In the intervention group, the symptomatic improvements, IQ and Wee-FIM were statistically significant. A significantly better outcome of the intervention was found in the paediatric age group (<18 years) and patients with milder severity of ID. Repeat PET-CT scan in three patients of the intervention group showed improved metabolism in the frontal, parietal cortex, thalamus, mesial temporal structures and cerebellum. No major adverse events were witnessed. Cellular transplantation with neurorehabilitation is safe and effective for the treatment of underlying brain deficits in ID. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02245724. Registered 12 September 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 25%
Student > Bachelor 6 19%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 22%
Psychology 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 8 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,462,806
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#2,060
of 2,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#377,700
of 440,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#51
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,210 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.