Evidence Hub

Clinical field study evaluating the safety and efficacy of allogeneic uterine-derived mesenchymal stem cells for refractory feline chronic gingivostomatitis

Williams VS, Schneider JL, Parrish RS, Thompson CM, Wrightson C, Taechangam N, Sharif O, Soltero-Rivera M et al.

Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

ObjectivesThe present study evaluated the safety and efficacy of intravenous, allogeneic uterine-derived mesenchymal stem cells (UMSCs) for client-owned cats with refractory feline chronic gingivostomatitis (FCGS).MethodsThis was a 90-day prospective, multi-site, baseline-controlled, clinical trial involving 46 cats with refractory FCGS after partial- or full-mouth extractions. Cats received two doses of 20 million UMSCs, 14 days apart. Effectiveness was evaluated at days 14, 28, 60 and 90 using owner-reported assessment of overall response (ORA), client-specific outcome measures (CSOM) of quality-of-life improvement and veterinarian-assessed global oral lesion score (GOLS) tissue healing. Safety assessments included clinical observations and clinical pathology.ResultsTreatment success rates at days 28, 60 and 90 were 61.4% (27/44), 76.3% (29/38) and 78.8% (26/33) for CSOM; 65.9% (29/44), 73.7% (28/38) and 75.8% (25/33) for ORA; and 31.8% (13/44), 47.5% (18/38) and 45.5% (15/33) for GOLS. CSOM and GOLS on day 14 after a single dose were 52.3% (23/44) and 25.0% (11/44), respectively. Cats treated within 6 months of tooth extraction had greater improvement in GOLS. There were no statistically significant differences in outcomes between cats with partial- or full-mouth extractions. Adverse events were generally mild and transient, with most related to underlying disease. All six serious adverse events were either unlikely to be due to, or in one case inconclusively attributed…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free