Question

How strong is the evidence for stem-cell therapy in Spinal Cord Injury?

ClinicalTrials.gov registrations alone cannot establish how strong the evidence is. Registry activity is active but still early, with limited late-phase registration: the registry holds 70 records, 22 completed, 3 at Phase 3 or 4, and 8 stopped early (11%). MSC-specific work accounts for 38 of those records. These counts describe research activity and maturity, not benefit, safety or certainty. Snapshot 2026-08-29.

Medical review statusMedically reviewedReviewed by: Stem Plus medical teamReviewed on: 2026-08-29Last evidence update: 2026-08-29Methodology and editorial standards
Clinical review team: Dr Kamelia Milcheva, Hematologist · Dr Vadym Uvarov, Board-Certified Physician · Hepatobiliary Surgeon · Candidate of Medical SciencesEditorial responsibility: StemCellAtlas research teamEducational information only. This page does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or a treatment recommendation.

What counts as a real result in Spinal Cord Injury

Credible evidence uses blinded ASIA impairment grading, independent functional measures and electrophysiology over at least a year, against the well-documented natural recovery curve. Regained sensation reported during intensive rehabilitation cannot be attributed to an infusion.

What we can say from registrations alone

  • Volume: 70 registered studies since 2006.
  • Maturity: 3 confirmatory-phase records.
  • Delivery: 22 completed; 8 terminated, withdrawn or suspended.
  • Scale: median planned enrolment 18 participants, largest 500.

The completed studies

Completed does not mean published, and published does not mean positive. These are the finished records — the starting point for checking whether results ever appeared.

StudyPhaseStatusPlanned nLead sponsorStart
NCT01873547 — Different Efficacy Between Rehabilitation Therapy and Stem Cells Transplantation in Patients With SCI in ChinaPhase 3Completed300General Hospital of Chinese Armed Police Forces2012-06
NCT02481440 — Repeated Subarachnoid Administrations of hUC-MSCs in Treating SCIPhase 1, Phase 2Completed102Limin Rong2018-03-30
NCT01572376 — Autologous Bone Marrow Stem Cells in Pressure Ulcer TreatmentPhase 1, Phase 2Completed30Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias2007-11
NCT02302157 — Dose Escalation Study of AST-OPC1 in Spinal Cord InjuryPhase 1, Phase 2Completed25Lineage Cell Therapeutics, Inc.2015-03
NCT04331405 — Allogeneic Cord Blood Cells for Adults With Severe Acute Contusion Spinal Cord InjuryPhase 1, Phase 2Completed20Sklifosovsky Institute of Emergency Care2013-03-18
NCT04288934 — Treatment of Spinal Cord Injuries With (AutoBM-MSCs)vs (WJ-MSCs).Phase 1Completed20University of Jordan2017-08-15

What registrations cannot tell you

Whether results were positive. Whether they were published at all — a large share of registered studies never report outcomes, which biases what the literature appears to show. And whether the product a commercial clinic sells resembles the product studied: cell source, dose, processing and delivery route vary enormously between a registered protocol and an off-protocol injection.

How to use this when someone is selling you a treatment

Ask which specific registered study supports the offer, then compare its intervention description with your quote. If the answer is a general gesture at "Spinal Cord Injury research", you are being sold the field's activity rather than evidence about the product. The Provider Question Builder turns that gap into questions.

Frequently asked

How strong is the evidence for stem-cell therapy in Spinal Cord Injury?

ClinicalTrials.gov registrations alone cannot establish how strong the evidence is. Registry activity is active but still early, with limited late-phase registration: 70 registered records, 3 at Phase 3/4 and 8 stopped early (2026-08-29).

Has any stem-cell product been approved for this condition?

Look it up at source: regulators publish authorised products and indications. Registration of a trial, a licence to operate a clinic and product approval are three different things.

Why do clinics cite hundreds of studies?

Because the registry is public and impressive-looking. What it cannot show — published, controlled outcomes for the exact product — is the part that decides the question.

Registry and literature counts retrieved 2026-08-29 (ClinicalTrials.gov API v2; PubMed E-utilities). Registration or publication volume measures research activity, not effectiveness or approval. Educational information — not medical advice; verify product, indication, legal pathway and evidence with an independent qualified physician. Page generated 2026-08-29. See our editorial standards.

Explore all sections · Data & downloads