The use and effectiveness of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are limited by lethal complications, i.e., acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD and cGVHD, respectively), in which immune cells from the donor attack healthy recipient tissues. GVHD presents both prophylactic and therapeutic challenges, and overall survival is poor. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) show considerable promise in the treatment of GVHD because of their potential immunomodulatory activity. Multiple studies have been performed to explore the possible benefit of MSCs in GVHD, but the results of these studies are sometimes conflicting. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the effect of MSC infusion on GVHD treatment and prevention. We systematically searched the MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and SinoMed CBM databases to identify studies published before February 2018 involving patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing HSCT and receiving MSC-based or conventional therapy. We included studies if they reported on the outcomes of interest. Ultimately, 10 studies were selected from among 413 candidates. According to our meta-analyses, compared with conventional treatment, MSC therapy demonstrated substantial improvements in terms of complete response (CR) and overall survival for cGVHD. However, MSC therapy did not show substantial improvements in terms of engraftment, the incidence of aGVHD, relapse, death, death due to relapse, or death due to infection. Subgroup analyses showed that MSCs derived from the umbilical cord (U-MSCs) and MSC infusion after HSCT substantially improved engraftment and cGVHD incidence, whereas MSCs derived from bone marrow (B-MSCs) and MSC infusion before HSCT shows no improvement. In addition, B-MSCs and MSC infusion before HSCT tend to prolong engraftment time, as well as increase the rates of relapse and death. MSC infusion can reduce cGVHD but not aGVHD incidence and showed a positive effect in patients who already had aGVHD. For GVHD prevention, the use of U-MSCs and MSC infusion after HSCT were optimal for reducing cGVHD incidence and promoting engraftment, and might help decrease the incidence rate of relapse and death. However, B-MSCs and MSC infusion before HSCT may be harmful to patients and thus require serious consideration. A lack of robust evidence, owing to the small number of studies and small sample sizes, indicates a need for further high-quality clinical trials including large numbers of patients to validate our findings.

In the last few decades, health systems research (HSR) has garnered much attention with a rapid increase in the related literature. This study aims to review and evaluate the global progress in HSR and assess the current quantitative trends.

Liver disease is a major cause of death and disability. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) show promise for the treatment of liver disease. However, whether MSC-based therapy is more effective than conventional treatment is unclear, as are the optimal MSC source, the administration frequency, and the most effective MSC delivery route. We therefore undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of the therapeutic efficacy of MSCs against liver disease and the related factors. We systematically searched Medline (PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and SinoMed CBM to identify studies published up to June 2017 involving liver disease patients receiving MSC-based therapy and which reported estimates of liver function during the follow-up period. Thirty-nine studies were selected from 672 publications. According to a meta-analysis of 23 controlled studies, compared with conventional treatment MSC therapy significantly improves liver function in patients with liver disease in terms of the model of end-stage liver disease score, albumin, alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin levels, and prothrombin time, up to 6 months after administration. However, it has no beneficial effects in terms of prothrombin activity, international normalized ratio, or cholinesterase level. Considerable heterogeneity was identified at most time points. Subgroup analyses showed that a single MSC injection was more effective than multiple injections, MSC administration was more effective via the hepatic artery than the peripheral vein, and MSCs derived from bone marrow were more effective than those derived from the umbilical cord. MSC-based therapy is relatively safe and improves liver function during the first 6 months after administration. A single injection administration via the hepatic artery and MSCs derived from bone marrow are optimal in terms of improving liver function. However the significant heterogeneity among studies and discontinuous results of the subgroup meta-analysis should be addressed; moreover the long-term efficacy of MSC therapy warrants further investigation.

Background: Dementia is the leading cause of death in elderly Western populations. Preventative interventions that could delay dementia onset even modestly would provide a major public health impact. There are no disease-modifying treatments currently available. Lithium has been proposed as a potential treatment. We assessed the association between lithium use and the incidence of dementia and its subtypes. Methods and findings: We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing patients treated between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2019, using data from electronic clinical records of secondary care mental health (MH) services in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT), United Kingdom (catchment area population approximately 0.86 million). Eligible patients were those aged 50 years or over at baseline and who had at least 1 year follow-up, excluding patients with a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia before, or less than 1 year after, their start date. The intervention was the use of lithium. The main outcomes were dementia and its subtypes, diagnosed and classified according to the International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision (ICD-10). In this cohort, 29,618 patients (of whom 548 were exposed to lithium) were included. Their mean age was 73.9 years. A total of 40.2% were male, 33.3% were married or in a civil partnership, and 71.0% were of white ethnicity. Lithium-exposed patients were more likely to be married, cohabiting or in a civil partnership, to be a current/former smoker, to have used antipsychotics, and to have comorbid depression, mania/bipolar affective disorder (BPAD), hypertension, central vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or hyperlipidemias. No significant difference between the 2 groups was observed for other characteristics, including age, sex, and alcohol-related disorders. In the exposed cohort, 53 (9.7%) patients were diagnosed with dementia, including 36 (6.8%) with Alzheimer disease (AD) and 13 (2.6%) with vascular dementia (VD). In the unexposed cohort, corresponding numbers were the following: dementia 3,244 (11.2%), AD 2,276 (8.1%), and VD 698 (2.6%). After controlling for sociodemographic factors, smoking status, other medications, other mental comorbidities, and physical comorbidities, lithium use was associated with a lower risk of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40 to 0.78), including AD (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.82) and VD (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.69). Lithium appeared protective in short-term (≤1-year exposure) and long-term lithium users (>5-year exposure); a lack of difference for intermediate durations was likely due to lack of power, but there was some evidence for additional benefit with longer exposure durations. The main limitation was the handling of BPAD, the most common reason for lithium prescription but also a risk factor for dementia. This potential confounder would most likely cause an increase in dementia in the exposed group, whereas we found the opposite, and the sensitivity analysis confirmed the primary results. However, the specific nature of the group of patients exposed to lithium means that caution is needed in extending these findings to the general population. Another limitation is that our sample size of patients using lithium was small, reflected in the wide CIs for results relating to some durations of lithium exposure, although again sensitivity analyses remained consistent with our primary findings. Conclusions: We observed an association between lithium use and a decreased risk of developing dementia. This lends further support to the idea that lithium may be a disease-modifying treatment for dementia and that this is a promising treatment to take forwards to larger randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for this indication.