Muscular Dystrophy: cell-therapy evidence and registered trials
A source-first research page for the exact condition. It does not recommend a cell product, clinic or private treatment.
Registry snapshot
ClinicalTrials.gov returned 26 registered studies for the stored condition/intervention query, including 4 recruiting records, retrieved 2026-08-05T06:02:03+00:00. A registry count does not establish efficacy, approval, relevance or eligibility; inspect each study's design, product, status and inclusion criteria.
Research activity over time
Registration of new studies accelerated: 10 newly registered studies in 2020–2024 against 2 in 2015–2019. The first study in this registry query was posted in 2009; the registry now holds 26 in total, of which 4 are recruiting. Counting is by first-posted date, so the series reflects when research was registered — not enrolment, completion or results.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov API v2, retrieved 2026-08-05. A registration count is not evidence of efficacy, approval or eligibility. Open the exact query ↗
What the trial registry actually shows
Our own count of every study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov for muscular dystrophy with a stem-cell intervention, retrieved 2026-09-05. A registration is a declaration of intent, not a result — which is why the status column matters more than the total.
| Status in the registry | Studies | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Status not updated by sponsor | 10 | 38% |
| Withdrawn before enrolling | 5 | 19% |
| Completed | 4 | 15% |
| Recruiting now | 4 | 15% |
| No longer available | 1 | 4% |
| Enrolling by invitation only | 1 | 4% |
| Active, closed to entry | 1 | 4% |
| All registered studies | 26 | 100% |
Reading it: 5 stopped before finishing — terminated, withdrawn or suspended, 19% of the total; 5 carry no assigned trial phase, meaning they sit outside the phased development path that leads to an approved medicine; 2 reached Phase 2 or later, against 19 still at Phase 1 or earlier; 10 have had no status update from the sponsor and may be dormant.
Which cell family is actually studied here
The same condition, split by the three families that registries can distinguish. Sub-types such as Muse, placental or fetal preparations are not separated in the registry and sit inside the mesenchymal count.
| Cell family | Studies |
|---|---|
| Mesenchymal stromal cells | 9 |
| Exosomes | 2 |
| Haematopoietic transplant | 1 |
Mesenchymal cells dominate the registered work here: 9 studies against 1 using haematopoietic transplant.
Counts are our own extraction from the ClinicalTrials.gov API, retrieved 2026-09-05. The query behind them is published with the dataset so anyone can repeat the count. Nothing here is evidence of benefit or a treatment recommendation.
What to verify before interpreting a study or offer
- The exact product, cell source, processing, dose and delivery route.
- The indication, study phase, comparator, endpoints, status and eligibility criteria.
- Whether the proposed use is authorised, part of a registered trial or otherwise investigational.
- Provider and manufacturing authorisations, release testing, traceability and adverse-event reporting.
- How the proposal compares with current standard care, reviewed by an independent physician.
Sources & further reading
- Stem-cell trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) ↗
- Peer-reviewed research (PubMed) ↗
- ISSCR — patient resources ↗
- FDA — consumer guidance ↗
- EMA — ATMP framework ↗
Registry data is a discovery aid, not evidence that a treatment works or is suitable for an individual patient.