Black et, al. 2007
Stem Cells vs. Arthritis: What a Peer-Reviewed Study Tells Us (and What It Doesn’t)
At Elita Genetics, we closely monitor peer-reviewed studies in regenerative medicine to inform our approach and help shape future research directions here in Australia. As a stem cell bank, we’re particularly interested in trials that aim to assess real-world outcomes in companion animals, especially those that move beyond anecdote and into controlled study design.
One such study, published in Veterinary Therapeutics in 2007, represents an important early effort to evaluate the efficacy of autologous adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell (AD-MSC) therapy in dogs with chronic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip. While the dataset is limited, the design is robust, and the findings are worth revisiting as the field matures.
Study Design at a Glance
This was a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial involving 21 client-owned dogs with mild to moderate bilateral hip OA of at least six months' duration. Dogs were split into two groups: one received a single intra-articular (IA) injection of AD-MSCs into each hip joint; the other received a placebo (saline). All participants continued with stable NSAID therapy if already prescribed, but no other interventions were permitted during the study window.
Veterinary assessments and owner surveys were conducted at baseline, and again at days 30, 60, and 90 post-injection. Clinical endpoints included lameness (walk and trot), pain on manipulation, range of motion, and a functional disability score.
What Did They Find?
Dogs treated with AD-MSCs showed statistically significant improvement across several clinician-assessed measures:
Notably, these improvements were observed from day 30 onwards and sustained through to day 90. The magnitude of improvement was sufficient in many cases to downgrade persistent lameness to intermittent, a clinically meaningful shift.
Functional disability scores also improved in treated dogs, but the high subjectivity of this measure and greater variance limited statistical confidence.
Owner surveys suggested perceived improvement in quality of life and mobility in the treatment group, although the sample was reduced due to protocol deviations and the results did not reach significance.