Citations

Background Lumbar facet arthropathy (LFA) is a degenerative, arthritic joint disorder and a common specific cause of axial low back pain and functional impairment. Currently, no disease-modifying therapies are available for symptomatic LFA. Mesenchymal stem/stromal cell (MSC)-based therapy represents an emerging regenerative treatment modality with the promise to target the underlying pathophysiology of LFA. Despite encouraging clinical evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of MSC therapy in other osteoarthritis, its therapeutic utility in LFA remains largely unexplored. We recently completed a prospective, single-arm, open-label phase I clinical trial that demonstrated a favourable safety profile and preliminary clinical benefit following intra-articular administration of bone marrow-derived MSCs (BMSCs) in patients with symptomatic LFA. Building on these findings, we present the protocol for CellKine II , a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over phase II clinical trial to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of intra-articular delivery of allogeneic, culture-expanded BMSCs in patients with painful LFA. Methods and analysis This study is a single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over phase II trial with a target accrual of 40 patients. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single intra-articular injection of either Arm A: BMSC or Arm B: Placebo (dimethyl sulfoxide). At the 6-month follow-up, all patients will be unblinded. Patients initially randomised to Arm A will continue follow-up for up to 12 months. Patients initially randomised to Arm B may cross over to receive the BMSC treatment, followed by an additional 12 months of post-BMSC treatment follow-up, or they may continue observation for another 6 months without BMSC treatment. Overall, each patient will be followed up to 12 months after BMSC treatment. The primary endpoints are back pain, functional outcomes and adverse events at 6 months post-randomisation. Ethics and dissemination This study will be conducted in compliance with U.S. federal regulations and Mayo Clinic institutional research policies and procedures. The protocol has been approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB) and the Data Safety Monitoring Board (IRB No. 21-013278). The results of this trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and on ClinicalTrials.gov. Trial registration number NCT06001853 .

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite standard of care with maximal safe resection and chemoradiation, glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive type of primary brain cancer. Surgical resection provides a window of opportunity to locally treat gliomas while the patient is recovering and before initiating concomitant chemoradiation. The objective was to assess the safety and establish the maximum tolerated dose of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs) for the treatment of recurrent GBM. Secondary objectives were to assess the toxicity profile and long-term survival outcomes of patients enrolled in the trial. In addition, biospecimens will be collected to explore the local and systemic responses to this therapy. METHODS: We will conduct a phase 1, dose-escalated, nonrandomized, open-label, clinical trial of patients with GBM who are undergoing surgical resection for recurrence. Up to 18 patients will receive intracavitary application of AMSCs encapsulated in fibrin glue during surgical resection. All patients will be followed for up to 5 years for safety and survival data. Adverse events will be recorded using the CTCAE V5.0. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: This study will explore the maximum tolerated dose of AMSCs along with the toxicity profile of this therapy in patients with recurrent GBM. In addition, preliminary long-term survival and progression-free survival outcome analysis will be used to power further randomized studies. Finally, cerebrospinal fluid and blood will be obtained throughout the treatment period to investigate circulating molecular and inflammatory tumoral/stem cell markers and explore the mechanism of action of the therapeutic intervention. DISCUSSION: This prospective translational study will determine the initial safety and toxicity profile of local delivery of AMSCs for recurrent GBM. It will also provide additional survival metrics for future randomized trials.

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.

Abstract Background We have previously shown bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) may shift immune responses toward anti-inflammatory pathways and stabilize the course of obstructive chronic lung allograft syndrome (o-CLAD) after lung transplantation. In this study, we measured the response of lower dose infusions. Methods We infused low-dose MSCs intravenously in 13 patients who had developed moderate-to-severe o-CLAD. Three had previously received an infusion of MSCs from a different donor and were re-dosed at 1 × 106 MSC/kg, while 5 received a first dose at 1 × 106 MSC/kg and five received an even lower dose at 0.5 × 106 MSC/kg. We recorded pulmonary function tests before and after infusion, and patients were followed clinically for 12 months. Results Infusions were well tolerated, and no significant adverse events were recorded in the first 30 days. There was significant decline (mean ± SD) in forced vital capacity (FVC) (3.49 ± 1.03 vs 3.18 ± 0.94 L, P = .03) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (2.28 ± 0.86 vs 1.77 ± 0.49 L, P = .04) over the year preceding infusion. FVC (3.18 ± 0.94 vs 3.46 ± 0.99 L, P = .53) and FEV1 was not significantly changed (1.77 ± 0.49 vs 1.88 ± 0.75, P = .72) when comparing values immediately prior to infusion to those obtained 1 year after infusion, indicating a possible stabilizing effect on lung function decline due to o-CLAD. Conclusion Intravenous infusions of bone marrow-derived MSCs are well tolerated in lung transplant recipients with moderate-to-severe CLAD. Low-dose MSCs appear to slow progression of CLAD in some patients.

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are becoming an increasingly popular therapeutic option among patients with a broad range of ailments to modulate immunity and induce regeneration. The majority of patients receiving these MSC therapies are on concurrent medication or have ongoing infection. In the present study, we examined the effect of immunosuppressive drugs and lipopolysaccharides (LPS)/endotoxins on the secretory profile, migration towards site of injury, and suppression of lymphocyte proliferation of bone marrow-derived MSCs (BMSCs). Generally, LPS coculture augmented the secretory capacity of BMSCs while exposure to immunosuppressive drugs resulted primarily in no change or attenuated secretion, with some cases of increased secretion, dependent on the cytokine assayed. Among the immunosuppressants evaluated, Hydrocortisone had the most widespread inhibitory effect, while LPS from E. coli O111:B4 had the most potent stimulatory effect. In addition, we also showed that Hydrocortisone or LPS from E. coli O111:B4 affected the migratory and immunosuppressive capacity of BMSCs. Following simulation with Hydrocortisone, BMSC migration was attenuated, and immunosuppressive capacity against T cell proliferation was enhanced, however, the opposite effects were seen with LPS from E. coli O111:B4. Our data suggests that the clinical outcomes of MSC-based therapy are affected by the use of immunosuppressive medication or the presence of endotoxemia in patients.

BACKGROUNDClinical trials involving mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy have variable outcomes. We hypothesize this is largely attributed to donor‐to‐donor variability and tissue of origin.STUDY DESIGN AND METHODSWe examined proliferation rates, cytokine secretion profiles, and differentiation capability of seven bone marrow–derived MSCs (BM‐MSCs) and 16 adipose tissue–derived MSCs (AD‐MSCs) from 23 donors.RESULTSAD‐MSCs had the capacity to undergo more than 40 population doublings, while the BM‐MSC proliferation rate was found to be considerably slower. We observed more donor‐to‐donor variability in proliferation rates of BM‐MSCs than with AD‐MSCs. Cytokine analysis revealed that secretion of eight cytokines was significantly increased by AD‐MSCs at Passage (P)3 compared with P1, while for BM‐MSCs at P3 relative to P1, only interleukin‐8 and RANTES secretion was significantly increased. By P5, secretion of all cytokines by AD‐MSCs was either decreased or unchanged relative to P1. In contrast, cytokine secretion by BM‐MSCs at P5 was mostly unchanged, although secretion of six cytokines was significantly increased relative to P1. When we compared cytokine secretion between AD‐MSCs and BM‐MSCs at P3, AD‐MSCs significantly secreted higher concentrations of cytokines than BM‐MSCs while the opposite was observed at P5. This suggests that BM‐MSCs are relatively more potent at P5 while AD‐MSCs are relatively more potent at P3. AD‐MSCs and BM‐MSCs exhibited the capacity for chondrogenic differentiation. AD‐MSCs and BM‐MSCs appeared to display a more enhanced inclination toward adipogenic and osteogenic differentiation, respectively.CONCLUSIONMSC physiology is significantly influenced by donor variability and tissue of origin and this should be considered when designing clinical trials.

The Protein Kinase D (PKD) isoforms PKD1, PKD2, and PKD3 are effectors of the novel Protein Kinase Cs (nPKCs) and diacylglycerol (DAG). PKDs impact diverse biological processes like protein transport, cell migration, proliferation, epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) and apoptosis. PKDs however, have distinct effects on these functions. While PKD1 blocks EMT and cell migration, PKD2 and PKD3 tend to drive both processes. Given the importance of EMT and cell migration to the initiation and progression of various malignancies, abnormal expression of PKDs has been reported in multiple types of cancers, including breast, pancreatic and prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss how EMT and cell migration are regulated by PKD isoforms and the significance of this regulation in the context of cancer development.

PAKs (p21-activated kinases) are effectors of RhoGTPases. PAK4 contributes to regulation of cofilin at the leading edge of migrating cells through activation of LIMK (Lin-11/Isl-1/Mec-3 kinase). PAK4 activity is regulated by an autoinhibitory domain that is released upon RhoGTPase binding as well as phosphorylation at Ser474 in the activation loop of the kinase domain. In the present study, we add another level of complexity to PAK4 regulation by showing that phosphorylation at Ser99 is required for its targeting to the leading edge. This phosphorylation is mediated by PKD1 (protein kinase D1). Phosphorylation of PAK4 at Ser99 also mediates binding to 14-3-3 protein, and is required for the formation of a PAK4–LIMK–PKD1 complex that regulates cofilin activity and directed cell migration.