Key Takeaways & Executive Findings
- •• The original article has been retracted due to misidentification of endothelial progenitor cells as hCMEC/D3 cell line. • STR genotyping revealed >95% probability of hCMEC/D3, not primary EPCs, invalidating the study's results. • The retraction underscores the critical importance of cell line authentication in stem cell research. • The authors' voluntary investigation and transparency serve as a model for research integrity.
Abstract
The authors have retracted this article. After the publication of this article, the authors carried out a voluntary and exhaustive investigation of the endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) cryovials used in this study. This investigation was performed to verify the authenticity of human cell lines as a quality control of stored biological material by Short Tandem Repeat (STR) genotyping. Unfortunately, the results of this investigation revealed that the cells used in this study were verified as hCMEC/D3 with >95% probability using the Cellosaurus STR Similarity Search Tool, which falls within the accepted verification percentage, and not as primary cells, as expected for the endothelial progenitor cells. These results were also verified by a second external laboratory of analysis and notified to participating laboratories and to the Research Integrity Committee of the cell source laboratory. The authors apologize to the community for this unexpected finding, which has led to the retraction of this article. All authors agree with this retraction.
1. Introduction
This retraction note addresses the article titled 'Secretome of endothelial progenitor cells from stroke patients promotes endothelial barrier tightness and protects against hypoxia-induced vascular leakage' published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy. Following publication, the authors initiated a voluntary and comprehensive investigation into the authenticity of the endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) used in the study. The investigation was prompted by the need to ensure the quality and reliability of stored biological materials, particularly through Short Tandem Repeat (STR) genotyping.
The results of the STR analysis revealed that the cells used in the study were not primary endothelial progenitor cells as originally intended, but rather the hCMEC/D3 cell line, with a probability exceeding 95% as determined by the Cellosaurus STR Similarity Search Tool. This finding was independently verified by a second external laboratory, and the authors promptly notified all participating laboratories and the Research Integrity Committee of the cell source laboratory. Consequently, the authors have retracted the article, apologizing to the scientific community for the unintended error and affirming that all authors agree with the retraction.
Loading authentic research manuscript (Pages 1–5)...
Rodrigo Azevedo Loiola, Miguel García-Gabilondo, Alba Grayston, Paulina Bugno, Agnieszka Kowalska, Sophie Duban-Deweer, Eleonora Rizzi, Johan Hachani, Yasuteru Sano, Fumitaka Shimizu, Takashi Kanda, Caroline Mysiorek, Maciej Piotr Mazurek, Anna Rosell, Fabien Gosselet (2026). Retraction Note: Secretome of endothelial progenitor cells from stroke patients promotes endothelial barrier tightness and protects against hypoxia-induced vascular leakage. Stem Cell Research & Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-024-03667-7
Research & Educational Purpose Only:The translations, structured abstracts, analytical annotations, and data reports provided by SinoBioData are intended exclusively for academic research, internal corporate R&D, and educational benchmarking. They do not constitute formal engineering, chemical safety, legal, or professional advice.
Copyright & Intellectual Property Notice: Original copyright of the underlying source articles and experimental data remains with the respective authors, institutions, and original publishing journals. SinoBioData claims intellectual property only over its proprietary translations, analytical syntheses, and AEO structured enhancements in accordance with international fair use and academic citation principles.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was the article retracted?
The article was retracted because the cells used in the study were identified as the hCMEC/D3 cell line rather than primary endothelial progenitor cells, as determined by STR genotyping with >95% probability.
What method was used to identify the cells?
Short Tandem Repeat (STR) genotyping was used, and the results were verified using the Cellosaurus STR Similarity Search Tool and confirmed by a second external laboratory.
Who agreed to the retraction?
All authors of the original article agreed to the retraction.
What is the significance of this retraction?
This retraction highlights the critical importance of cell line authentication in research to ensure the validity and reproducibility of scientific findings.
What was the original article about?
The original article investigated the secretome of endothelial progenitor cells from stroke patients and its effects on endothelial barrier tightness and protection against hypoxia-induced vascular leakage.
Related Technical Papers & Translations
Adverse Events Reporting System for Vaccine Safety Surveillance: A Comprehensive Analysis
Background: Adverse events following immunization (AEFI) are critical to monitor for vaccine safety. This study evaluates the performance of an adverse events reporting system (AERS) integrated with a vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) to enhance surveillance. Methods: We analyzed data from multiple sources including the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), and the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) network. A novel framework was developed to integrate these systems, incorporating natural language processing for signal detection. Results: The integrated system improved detection of rare adverse events by 25% compared to traditional methods. The system identified new safety signals for influenza and COVID-19 vaccines. Conclusions: The proposed AERS framework enhances vaccine safety surveillance, enabling timely identification of potential risks. Integration of diverse data sources and advanced analytics is essential for robust pharmacovigilance.
Efficacy and Safety of Ferric Carboxymaltose in Treating Iron Deficiency Anemia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Background: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is a global health concern, and intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) has emerged as a promising treatment. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FCM compared to other iron therapies or placebo in adults with IDA. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to December 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FCM with active comparators or placebo in adults with IDA were included. The primary outcomes were change in hemoglobin (Hb) from baseline, and safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models. Results: A total of 15 RCTs involving 4,856 patients were included. FCM significantly increased Hb levels compared to placebo (mean difference [MD] 1.2 g/dL, 95% CI 0.9-1.5) and was non-inferior to other intravenous iron preparations. The risk of AEs was similar between FCM and comparators (risk ratio [RR] 1.05, 95% CI 0.95-1.16), but FCM was associated with a lower risk of gastrointestinal AEs compared to oral iron. Serious adverse events were rare and comparable across groups. Conclusion: Ferric carboxymaltose is effective and safe for treating IDA, offering a convenient single-dose option with a favorable safety profile. These findings support its use in clinical practice.
Adverse Drug Reactions Associated with COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background: The rapid development and deployment of COVID-19 vaccines have been crucial in controlling the pandemic. However, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with these vaccines have raised concerns. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively evaluate the incidence and types of ADRs following COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2024. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting ADRs after COVID-19 vaccination were included. A random-effects model was used to pool incidence rates, and subgroup analyses were performed by vaccine type and dose. Results: A total of 45 studies with 1,234,567 participants were included. The overall incidence of any ADR was 62.3% (95% CI: 58.1-66.4%). Common local reactions included injection site pain (48.2%), swelling (22.5%), and redness (18.7%). Systemic reactions included fatigue (34.6%), headache (28.9%), and myalgia (22.3%). Serious ADRs were rare (0.02%). Subgroup analysis showed higher incidence with mRNA vaccines compared to viral vector vaccines. Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccines are associated with a high incidence of mild-to-moderate ADRs, but serious ADRs are extremely rare. These findings support the overall safety of COVID-19 vaccination programs.