Published, Peer-Reviewed Research

Why peer review matters

There is a meaningful difference between a clinic claiming results and a research team publishing findings that other scientists are invited to scrutinize. Peer review is not perfect, but it is the closest thing medicine has to a quality filter. When a cell product appears in a peer-reviewed journal, it has cleared a bar that marketing copy never has to clear.

The cells used at RegenaMex come from CBCells, the same source used in a study published in the journal Aging and Disease.

The study

The study

The paper was published by Iglesias and colleagues in Aging and Disease, Volume 12, Number 4, in August 2021. It is an open-access article, which means you do not need a subscription or a paywall login to read it. The DOI is 10.14336/AD.2020.1218. We link it directly so you can verify everything on this page against the source.

The study was a compassionate-use clinical investigation involving a small group of critically ill patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome, a severe form of lung injury. It used mesenchymal stem cells supplied by CBCells.

The institutions involved

This is the part that is hard to manufacture. The study was conducted in collaboration with the Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador Zubiran, one of Mexico’s premier national medical and research institutes, and the Tecnologico de Monterrey, one of the most respected universities in Latin America.

Serious institutions do not lend their names to work involving a cell source they have not vetted. The involvement of these two institutions is, in practical terms, a second layer of validation on top of the COFEPRIS license, because it tells you the cell product was deemed appropriate for use in formal clinical research by people whose reputations were on the line.

Header of the peer reviewed study published in Aging and Disease journal, 2021

What this study proves, and what it does not

We are going to be direct here, because being direct is what earns trust on a page like this.

What the study establishes: the cells from our source are real, clinical-grade, and credible enough to be used by top-tier institutions in peer-reviewed research. That is a genuine and uncommon credential for a regenerative clinic to be able to point to.

What the study does not establish: it does not prove that stem cell therapy will treat, cure, or improve orthopedic conditions, anti-aging concerns, autoimmune conditions, or any other indication you may be considering. The study was a small, compassionate-use safety investigation in a specific and severe condition. It is evidence about the quality and legitimacy of the cell source. It is not evidence of efficacy for the treatments RegenaMex offers.

We make this distinction deliberately. A clinic willing to draw the line honestly is a clinic worth talking to. If a provider tells you a single published study guarantees your outcome, that should lower your trust, not raise it.

What this study proves, and what it does not

What to Do Next

Read the study yourself using the DOI link above. Review our Regulatory and Safety page to understand the licensing framework. Then have a candid conversation with our team about realistic expectations for your specific situation.

DISCLAIMER

The information on this page is for educational purposes and describes the source, licensing, and processing of the cells used in our therapies. It is not a guarantee of any specific medical outcome. Regenerative therapies are not a substitute for conventional medical care. Speak with a qualified physician about whether any treatment is appropriate for your individual situation.