CellKine clinical trial: first report from a phase 1 trial of allogeneic bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells in subjects with painful lumbar facet joint arthropathy
Abstract Background: Lumbar facet joint arthropathy (LFJA) is a major cause of low back pain (LBP), with current treatments offering limited long-term benefits. Bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) show promise due to their immunomodulatory and trophic effects, potentially addressing underlying degenerative processes in LFJA. Objectives: This initial report describes the outcomes of the first treated patient in an ongoing mutidisciplinary phase 1 clinical trial evaluating the safety and feasibility of intra-articular allogeneic BM-MSCs for painful LFJA. Methods: Following enrollment in our IRB-approved protocol, symptomatic LFJA was confirmed through double blocks on L4 and L5 medial branches. Two 1-mL syringes, each containing 10 million BM-MSCs, were prepared in the cGMP facility and administered bilaterally to the patient’s L4-L5 lumbar facet joints. The patient underwent standardized follow-ups, including clinical examinations and functional and imaging assessments for 2 years, utilizing patient-reported outcomes measurement information system—computer adaptive tests (PROMIS CATs), visual analogue scale, Oswestry disability index, work functional status and opioid pain medication use, and MR imaging Fenton–Czervionke score. Results: The patient tolerated the procedure well, with no drug-related adverse events during the study period. Pain, spine function, and work functional status improved at multiple follow-ups. This patient also reported improvements in mental and social health, along with a notable improvement in the grade of facet synovitis observed at the one-year follow-up MRI evaluation. Conclusions: This case report suggests the safety and feasibility of administering intra-articular allogeneic BM-MSCs, offering therapeutic benefits for pain management and functional activities.
Hidden risk of gadolinium-based contrast agents during interventional pain medicine procedures: a retrospective chart review
Introduction Epidural steroid injections and epidural blood patches commonly involve the injection of a small amount of radiocontrast media under fluoroscopy to properly identify the target tissue or anatomic space and prevent off-target or intravascular delivery of therapeutic or diagnostic drugs. Iodinated low osmolar non-ionic contrast media is the standard preparation used as it is considered safe and cost-effective, but gadolinium-based preparations have been used as an alternative for patients with an ‘iodine’-related or radiocontrast media allergy label to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. The risk of neurotoxic events when gadolinium is inadvertently injected into the intrathecal space has been reported in recent years, raising concerns when gadolinium-based contrast media is used in lieu of iodinated low osmolar non-ionic contrast media. Methods A retrospective review was conducted of patients who received gadolinium-based contrast media for procedures with risk of inadvertent intrathecal access from January 1, 2019 to May 1, 2022. Information on patient demographics, allergy label information, and procedure description was documented for all patients who received gadolinium-based contrast media for axial spine procedures (including epidural steroid injections, epidural blood patch procedures, and selective nerve root blocks), and all side effects reported within 1 month of the procedure were recorded. Saved fluoroscopy images of all procedures for which there was concern for possible gadolinium-based contrast media-related side effect were reviewed for evidence of inadvertent intrathecal gadolinium-based contrast media administration. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using REDCap and IBM SPSS Statistics V.28. Results We identified 508 patients who received gadolinium-based contrast media during a fluoroscopically guided axial spine procedure. These patients underwent 697 epidural procedures and 23 patients were identified as experiencing an adverse event that could be consistent with possible, probable, or clear signs of exposure to intrathecal gadolinium. Our calculated adverse event rate was 3.3%. Ten patients required additional medical evaluation or treatment. Discussion Almost all patients in our cohort had an allergy label on their chart that guided the provider to switch to gadolinium-based contrast media, but most were incomplete, ill-defined, or related to allergy to iodine but not iodinated contrast media. Such practice is not recommended based on current guidelines. The current study raises concern regarding the use of gadolinium-based contrast media in axial spine procedures, with the risk of potential severe adverse events, without evidence-based need for avoiding iodinated contrast media.
Efficacy and Safety of MSC Cell Therapies for Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract MSC (a.k.a. mesenchymal stem cell or medicinal signaling cell) cell therapies show promise in decreasing mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and suggest benefits in treatment of COVID-19-related ARDS. We performed a meta-analysis of published trials assessing the efficacy and adverse events (AE) rates of MSC cell therapy in individuals hospitalized for COVID-19. Systematic searches were performed in multiple databases through November 3, 2021. Reports in all languages, including randomized clinical trials (RCTs), non-randomized interventional trials, and uncontrolled trials, were included. Random effects model was used to pool outcomes from RCTs and non-randomized interventional trials. Outcome measures included all-cause mortality, serious adverse events (SAEs), AEs, pulmonary function, laboratory, and imaging findings. A total of 736 patients were identified from 34 studies, which included 5 RCTs (n = 235), 7 non-randomized interventional trials (n = 370), and 22 uncontrolled comparative trials (n = 131). Patients aged on average 59.4 years and 32.2% were women. When compared with the control group, MSC cell therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.35-0.85, I 2 = 0.0%), reduction in SAEs (IRR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.14-0.90, I 2 = 0.0%) and no significant difference in AE rate. A sub-group with pulmonary function studies suggested improvement in patients receiving MSC. These findings support the potential for MSC cell therapy to decrease all-cause mortality, reduce SAEs, and improve pulmonary function compared with conventional care. Large-scale double-blinded, well-powered RCTs should be conducted to further explore these results.