Alexandre Asch, Daniel F Kalbermatten, Srinivas Madduri
{"title":"Clinical manufacturing of adipose-derived stem cells for therapeutic use: current technologies, quality systems and production challenges.","authors":"Alexandre Asch, Daniel F Kalbermatten, Srinivas Madduri","doi":"10.1080/17460751.2026.2730229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This systematic review evaluated manufacturing technologies for adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs), focusing on automation, quality control, potency, scalability, cost, and regulatory compliance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for English-language studies published January 2020-September 2025. Studies addressing clinical-grade ADSC manufacturing, quality control, regulatory compliance, or production economics were included; non-ADSC studies, reviews, case reports, and conference abstracts were excluded. Two reviewers qualitatively assessed methodological quality and bias. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis, so findings were synthesized narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-six studies were included; participant numbers were inconsistently reported, as the review focused on manufacturing processes. Automated bioreactors achieved 2- to 10-fold higher yields than flask-based approaches, with improved reproducibility and reduced contamination risk. Five validated platforms were identified. GMP production costs ranged from $15,000 to $50,000 per dose; automation offered potential reductions of 20%-40%. Key limitations included 3- to 5-fold inter-donor variability, 15%-25% batch-to-batch variation, and 5%-10% manufacturing failure rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ADSC manufacturing is progressing toward scalable production, but clinical translation remains constrained by biological variability, limited potency-assay validation, high costs, and regulatory complexity. Standardization and clinically relevant potency assays are needed to improve consistency and access.</p>","PeriodicalId":21043,"journal":{"name":"Regenerative medicine","volume":" ","pages":"489-508"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13671448/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regenerative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17460751.2026.2730229","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: This systematic review evaluated manufacturing technologies for adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs), focusing on automation, quality control, potency, scalability, cost, and regulatory compliance.
Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for English-language studies published January 2020-September 2025. Studies addressing clinical-grade ADSC manufacturing, quality control, regulatory compliance, or production economics were included; non-ADSC studies, reviews, case reports, and conference abstracts were excluded. Two reviewers qualitatively assessed methodological quality and bias. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis, so findings were synthesized narratively.
Results: Forty-six studies were included; participant numbers were inconsistently reported, as the review focused on manufacturing processes. Automated bioreactors achieved 2- to 10-fold higher yields than flask-based approaches, with improved reproducibility and reduced contamination risk. Five validated platforms were identified. GMP production costs ranged from $15,000 to $50,000 per dose; automation offered potential reductions of 20%-40%. Key limitations included 3- to 5-fold inter-donor variability, 15%-25% batch-to-batch variation, and 5%-10% manufacturing failure rates.
Conclusions: ADSC manufacturing is progressing toward scalable production, but clinical translation remains constrained by biological variability, limited potency-assay validation, high costs, and regulatory complexity. Standardization and clinically relevant potency assays are needed to improve consistency and access.
本系统综述评估了脂肪源性干细胞(ADSCs)的制造技术,重点关注自动化、质量控制、效力、可扩展性、成本和法规遵从性。方法:按照PRISMA指南,检索PubMed、Embase和Web of Science,检索2020年1月至2025年9月发表的英语研究。包括临床级ADSC制造、质量控制、法规遵从性或生产经济学的研究;非adsc研究、综述、病例报告和会议摘要被排除在外。两位审稿人对方法学质量和偏倚进行了定性评估。异质性排除了meta分析,因此研究结果是叙述性综合的。结果:纳入46项研究;由于审查的重点是制造过程,参与者的数量报告不一致。自动化生物反应器的产率比基于烧瓶的方法高2到10倍,可重复性提高,污染风险降低。确定了5个经过验证的平台。GMP生产成本从每剂15,000美元到50,000美元不等;自动化提供了20%-40%的潜在减少。主要的限制包括供体间3- 5倍的变异,批次间15%-25%的变异,5%-10%的生产失败率。结论:ADSC生产正朝着规模化生产的方向发展,但临床转化仍然受到生物学变异性、有限的效价分析验证、高成本和监管复杂性的限制。需要标准化和临床相关的效价测定来提高一致性和可及性。
期刊介绍:
Regenerative medicine replaces or regenerates human cells, tissue or organs, to restore or establish normal function*. Since 2006, Regenerative Medicine has been at the forefront of publishing the very best papers and reviews covering the entire regenerative medicine sector. The journal focusses on the entire spectrum of approaches to regenerative medicine, including small molecule drugs, biologics, biomaterials and tissue engineering, and cell and gene therapies – it’s all about regeneration and not a specific platform technology. The journal’s scope encompasses all aspects of the sector ranging from discovery research, through to clinical development, through to commercialization. Regenerative Medicine uniquely supports this important area of biomedical science and healthcare by providing a peer-reviewed journal totally committed to publishing the very best regenerative medicine research, clinical translation and commercialization.
Regenerative Medicine provides a specialist forum to address the important challenges and advances in regenerative medicine, delivering this essential information in concise, clear and attractive article formats – vital to a rapidly growing, multidisciplinary and increasingly time-constrained community.
Despite substantial developments in our knowledge and understanding of regeneration, the field is still in its infancy. However, progress is accelerating. The next few decades will see the discovery and development of transformative therapies for patients, and in some cases, even cures. Regenerative Medicine will continue to provide a critical overview of these advances as they progress, undergo clinical trials, and eventually become mainstream medicine.