Skip to main content

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Pharmacol.
Sec. Neuropharmacology
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1481617

Stem cell-derived exosomes for ischemic stroke: a conventional and network meta-analysis based on animal models

Provisionally accepted
KangLi Xu KangLi Xu 1,2Xiaohui Zhao Xiaohui Zhao 1,2Yuxuan He Yuxuan He 1,2Hongxin Guo Hongxin Guo 1,2YunKe Zhang YunKe Zhang 1,2*
  • 1 Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, China
  • 2 First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Objective We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of stem cell-derived exosomes for treating ischemic stroke and to screen for the optimal administration strategy.We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for relevant studies published from their inception to December 31, 2023. Conventional and network meta-analyses of the routes of administration, types, and immune compatibility of stem cell-derived exosomes were performed using the cerebral infarct volume(%) and modified neurological severity score (mNSS) as outcome indicators.Results A total of 38 randomized controlled animal experiments were included. Conventional metaanalysis showed that compared with the negative control group: intravenous administration significantly reduced the cerebral infarct volume(%) and mNSS; intranasal administration significantly reduced the cerebral infarct volume(%); and intracerebral administration significantly reduced the mNSS. ADSC-Exos, BMSC-Exos, DPSC-Exos and NSC-Exos significantly reduced the cerebral infarct volume(%) and mNSS; EPC-Exos, ESC-Exos, iPSC-Exos and NPC-Exos significantly reduced the cerebral infarct volume(%); UCMSC-Exos significantly reduced the mNSS; and there was no significant difference between USC-Exos and negative controls. Engineered modified exosomes had better efficacy than unmodified exosomes. Both allogeneic and xenogeneic stem cell-derived exosomes significantly reduced the cerebral infarct volume(%) and the mNSS. The network meta-analysis showed that intravenous administration was the best route of administration for reducing the cerebral infarct volume(%) and mNSS. Among the 10 types of stem cell-derived exosomes that were administered intravenously, BMSC-Exos were the best type for reducing the cerebral infarct volume (%) and the mNSS. Allogeneic exosomes had the best efficacy in reducing the cerebral infarct volume (%), whereas xenogeneic stem cell-derived exosomes had the best efficacy in reducing the mNSS.This meta-analysis, by integrating the available evidence, revealed that intravenous administration is the best route of administration, that BMSC-Exos are the best exosome type, that allogeneic exosomes have the best efficacy in reducing the cerebral infarct volume (%), and that xenogeneic exosomes have the best efficacy in reducing mNSS, which can provide options for preclinical studies. In the future, more high-quality randomized controlled animal experiments, especially direct comparative evidence, are needed to determine the optimal administration strategy for stem cell-derived exosomes for ischemic stroke.

    Keywords: Stem Cells, Exosomes, Stroke, animal experiments, Animal Models, Meta-analysis

    Received: 16 Aug 2024; Accepted: 10 Oct 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Xu, Zhao, He, Guo and Zhang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: YunKe Zhang, First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.