METHODS: Ten symptomatic patients with DCM and refractory cardiac function, despite maximum medical therapy, were selected. Five had ischemic DCM deemed unlikely to benefit from revascularization alone and underwent bypass operations with concurrent intramyocardial MSC injection (group A). Two patients had previous revascularization and three had non-ischemic DCM and received intracoronary MSC injection (group B).
RESULTS: Group A and B patients received 0.5-1.0 × 10(6) and 2.0-3.0 × 10(6) MSC/kg body weight, respectively. All patients remained alive at 1 year. There were significant improvements from baseline to 6 and 12 months in left ventricular ejection fraction and other left ventricular parameters. Scar reduction was noted in six patients by 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Autologous bone marrow MSC treatment is safe and feasible for treating chronic severe refractory DCM effectively, via intracoronary or direct intramyocardial administration at prescribed doses.
OBJECTIVE: To pool all published studies that compared the safety and efficacy of autologous CBT derived from different sources and phenotypes with non cell-based therapy (NCT) in CLI patients.
METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov from 1974-2017. Sixteen randomised clinical trials (RCTs) involving 775 patients receiving the following interventions: mobilised peripheral blood stem cells(m-PBSC), bone marrow mononuclear cells(BM-MNC), bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells(BM-MSC), cultured BM-MNC(Ixmyelocel-T), cultured PB cells(VesCell) and CD34+ cells were included in the meta-analysis.
RESULTS: High-quality evidence (QoE) showed similar all-cause mortality rates between CBT and NCT. AR reduction by approximately 60% were observed in patients receiving CBT compared to NCT (moderate QoE). CBT patients experienced improvement in ulcer healing, ABI, TcO2, pain free walking capacity and collateral vessel formation (moderate QoE). Low-to-moderate QoE showed that compared to NCT, intramuscular BM-MNC and m-PBSC may reduce amputation rate, rest pain, and improve ulcer healing and ankle-brachial pressure index, while intramuscular BM-MSC appeared to improve rest pain, ulcer healing and pain-free walking distance but not AR. Efficacy of other types of CBT could not be confirmed due to limited data. Cell harvesting and implantation appeared safe and well-tolerated with similar rates of adverse-events between groups.
CONCLUSION: Implantation of autologous CBT may be an effective therapeutic strategy for no-option CLI patients. BM-MNC and m-PSBC appear more effective than NCT in improving AR and other limb perfusion parameters. BM-MSC may be beneficial in improving perfusion parameters but not AR, however, this observation needs to be confirmed in a larger population of patients. Generally, treatment using various sources and phenotypes of cell products appeared safe and well tolerated. Large-size RCTs with long follow-up are warranted to determine the superiority and durability of angiogenic potential of a particular CBT and the optimal treatment regimen for CLI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated simple statistics and published model-based approaches. Multiplex-qPCR was conducted to determine the expression of 24 candidate RG in AMLs (N=9). Singleplex-qPCR was carried out on selected RG (SRP14, B2M and ATP5B) and genes of interest in AML (N=15) and healthy controls, HC (N=12).
RESULTS: RG expression levels in AML samples were highly variable and coefficient of variance (CV) ranged from 0.37% to 10.17%. Analysis using GeNorm and Normfinder listed different orders of most stable genes but the top seven (ACTB, UBE2D2, B2M, NF45, RPL37A, GK, QARS) were the same. In singleplex-qPCR, SRP14 maintained the lowest CV in AML samples. B2M, one of most stable reference genes in AML, was expressed near significantly different in AML and HC. GeNorm selected ATP5B+SRP14 while Normfinder chose SRP14+B2M as the best two RG in combination. The median expressions of combined RG genes in AML compared to HC were less significantly different than individually implying smaller expression variation after combination. Genes of interest normalised with RG in combination or individually, displayed significantly different expression patterns.
CONCLUSIONS: The selection of best reference gene in qPCR must consider all sample sets. Model-based approaches are important in large candidate gene analysis. This study showed combination of RG SRP14+B2M was the most suitable normalisation factor for qPCR analysis of AML and healthy individuals.