Safety and feasibility of intramyocardial versus intracoronary delivery of autologous cell therapy in advanced heart failure: the REGENERATE-IHD pilot study

Stem cell-based therapies for heart failure management: a narrative review of current evidence and future perspectives

Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent and debilitating global cardiovascular condition affecting around 64 million individuals, placing significant strain on healthcare systems and diminishing patients' quality of life. The escalating prevalence of HF underscores the urgent need for innovative therapeutic approaches that target the root causes and aim to restore normal cardiac function. Stem cell-based therapies have emerged as promising candidates, representing a fundamental departure from conventional treatments focused primarily on symptom management. This review explores the evolving landscape of stem cell-based therapies for HF management. It delves into the mechanisms of action, clinical evidence from both positive and negative outcomes, ethical considerations, and regulatory challenges. Key findings include the potential for improved cardiac function, enhanced quality of life, and long-term benefits associated with stem cell therapies. However, adverse events and patient vulnerabilities necessitate stringent safety assessments. Future directions in stem cell-based HF therapies include enhancing efficacy and safety through optimized stem cell types, delivery techniques, dosing strategies, and long-term safety assessments. Personalized medicine, combining therapies, addressing ethical and regulatory challenges, and expanding access while reducing costs are crucial aspects of the evolving landscape.

Intramyocardial Stem Cell Transplantation during Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Safely Improves Cardiac Function: Meta-Analysis of 20 Randomized Clinical Trials

IMSC transplantation during CABG is considered one of the most promising methods to effectively deliver stem cells and has been widely studied in many trials. But the results of outcomes and safety of this modality still vary widely. We conducted this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate not only the outcome but also the safety of this promising method. A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was undertaken using the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Articles were thoroughly evaluated and analyzed. Twenty publications about IMSC during CABG were included. Primary outcomes were measured using LVEF, LVESV, LVESVI, LVESD, LVEDV, LVEDVI, LVEDD, WMSI, and 6-MWT. Safety measures were depicted by total deaths, MACE, CRD, CVA, myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmia, and cardiac-related readmission. IMSC transplantation during CABG significantly improved LVEF (MD = 3.89%; 95% CI = 1.31% to 6.46%; p = 0.003) and WMSI (MD = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.01-0.56; p = 0.04). Most of the other outcomes showed favorable results for the IMSC group but were not statistically significant. The safety analysis also showed no significant risk difference for IMSC transplantation compared to CABG alone. IMSC during CABG can safely improve cardiac function and tend to improve cardiac volumes and dimensions. The analysis and application of influencing factors that increase patients' responses to IMSC transplantation are important to achieve long-term improvement.

Optimal effectiveness of heart failure management - an umbrella review of meta-analyses examining the effectiveness of interventions to reduce (re)hospitalizations in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is a major health concern, which accounts for 1-2% of all hospital admissions. Nevertheless, there remains a knowledge gap concerning which interventions contribute to effective prevention of HF (re)hospitalization. Therefore, this umbrella review aims to systematically review meta-analyses that examined the effectiveness of interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. An electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, and Medline to identify eligible studies published in the English language in the past 10 years. Primarily, to synthesize the meta-analyzed data, a best-evidence synthesis was used in which meta-analyses were classified based on level of validity. Secondarily, all unique RCTS were extracted from the meta-analyses and examined. A total of 44 meta-analyses were included which encompassed 186 unique RCTs. Strong or moderate evidence suggested that catheter ablation, cardiac resynchronization therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, telemonitoring, and RAAS inhibitors could reduce (re)hospitalization. Additionally, limited evidence suggested that multidisciplinary clinic or self-management promotion programs, beta-blockers, statins, and mitral valve therapy could reduce HF hospitalization. No, or conflicting evidence was found for the effects of cell therapy or anticoagulation. This umbrella review highlights different levels of evidence regarding the effectiveness of several interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. It could guide future guideline development in optimizing care pathways for heart failure patients.

Cell-Based Therapies for Heart Failure

Heart failure has reached epidemic proportions with the advances in cardiovascular therapies for ischemic heart diseases and the progressive aging of the world population. Efficient pharmacological therapies are available for treating heart failure, but unfortunately, even with optimized therapy, prognosis is often poor. Their last therapeutic option is, therefore, a heart transplantation with limited organ supply and complications related to immunosuppression. In this setting, cell therapies have emerged as an alternative. Many clinical trials have now been performed using different cell types and injection routes. In this perspective, we will analyze the results of such trials and discuss future perspectives for cell therapies as an efficacious treatment of heart failure.

Systemic and local delivery of mesenchymal stem cells for heart renovation: Challenges and innovations

In the beginning stage of heart disease, the blockage of blood flow frequently occurs due to the persistent damage and even death of myocardium. Cicatricial tissue developed after the death of myocardium can affect heart function, which ultimately leads to heart failure. In recent years, several studies carried out about the use of stem cells such as embryonic, pluripotent, cardiac and bone marrow-derived stem cells as well as myoblasts to repair injured myocardium. Current studies focus more on finding appropriate measures to enhance cell homing and survival in order to increase paracrine function. Until now, there is no universal delivery route for mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for different diseases. In this review, we summarize the advantages and challenges of the systemic and local pathways of MSC delivery. In addition, we also describe some advanced measures of cell delivery to improve the efficiency of transplantation. The combination of cells and therapeutic substances could be the most reliable method, which allows donor cells to deliver sufficient amounts of paracrine factors and provide long-lasting effects. The cardiac support devices or tissue engineering techniques have the potential to facilitate the controlled release of stem cells on local tissue for a sustained period. A novel promising epicardial drug delivery system is highlighted here, which not only provides MSCs with a favorable environment to promote retention but also increases the contact area and a number of cells recruited in the heart muscle.

Effect of stem cell transplantation on patients with ischemic heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Stem cell transplantation (SCT) has become a promising way to treat ischemic heart failure (IHF). We performed a large-scale meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to investigate the efficacy and safety of SCT in IHF patients. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving stem cell transplantation for the treatment of IHF were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, SpringerLink, Web of Science, and Cochrane Systematic Review databases as well as from reviews and the reference lists of relevant articles. Fourteen eligible randomized controlled trials were included in this study, for a total of 669 IHF patients, of which 380 patients were treated with SCT. The weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for changes in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (LVEDV and LVESV), and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina grade using a fixed effects model, while relative risk (RR) was used for mortality. Compared with the control group, SCT significantly lowered the NYHA class (MD = − 0.73, 95% CI − 1.32 to − 0.14, P < 0.05), LVESV (MD = − 14.80, 95% CI − 20.88 to − 8.73, P < 0.05), and CCS grade (MD = − 0.81, 95% CI − 1.45 to − 0.17, P < 0.05). Additionally, SCT increased LVEF (MD = 6.55, 95% CI 5.93 to 7.16, P < 0.05). However, LVEDV (MD = − 0.33, 95% CI − 1.09 to 0.44, P > 0.05) and mortality (RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.66, P > 0.05) did not differ between the two groups. This meta-analysis suggests that SCT may contribute to the improvement of LVEF, as well as the reduction of the NYHA class, CCS grade, and LVESV. In addition, SCT does not affect mortality.

Cellular therapies for chronic ischemic heart failure

The development of stem cell therapies for chronic ischemic heart failure is highly sought after to attempt to improve morbidity and mortality of this prevalent disease. This article reviews clinical trials that investigate stem cell therapy for chronic ischemic heart failure. To generate this review article, PubMed was searched using keywords "stem cell therapy heart failure" with the article type "Clinical Trial" selected on 10/04/2016. The raw search yielded 156 articles; 53 articles were selected for inclusion in the review between the original literature search and manual research/cross-referencing. Additional reviews and original articles were also manually researched and cross-referenced. Cellular-based therapies utilizing peripheral blood progenitor cells, bone marrow cells, mesenchymal stem cells, cells of cardiac origin, and embryonic stem cells have yielded mixed results, but some studies have shown modest efficacy. Skeletal myoblasts raised concerns about safety due to arrhythmias. Optimizing cell type and delivery method will be of critical importance in enhancing efficacy of therapy within various subsets of chronic ischemic heart failure patients. Although much more work needs to be done to optimize treatment strategies, developing stem cell therapies for chronic ischemic heart failure could be of critical importance to lessen the impactful health burden that heart failure has on patients and society.

Cell therapy for heart disease after 15 years: Unmet expectations

Over the past two decades cardiac cell therapy (CCT) has emerged as a promising new strategy to cure heart diseases at high unmet need. Thousands of patients have entered clinical trials for acute or chronic heart conditions testing different cell types, including autologous or allogeneic bone marrow (BM)-derived mononuclear or selected cells, BM- or adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal cells, or cardiac resident progenitors based on their potential ability to regenerate scarred or dysfunctional myocardium. Nowadays, the original enthusiasm surrounding the regenerative medicine field has been cushioned by a cumulative body of evidence indicating an inefficient or modest efficacy of CCT in improving cardiac function, along with the continued lack of indisputable proof for long-term prognostic benefit. In this review, we have firstly comprehensively outlined the positive and negative results of cell therapy studies in patients with acute myocardial infarction, refractory angina and chronic heart failure. Next, we have discussed cell therapy- and patient-related variables (e.g. cell intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics as well as criteria of patient selection and proposed methodologies) that might have dampened the efficacy of past cell therapy trials. Finally, we have addressed critical factors to be considered before embarking on further clinical trials.

Stem cell therapy for chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure

BACKGROUND

A promising approach to the treatment of chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure is the use of stem cells. The last decade has seen a plethora of randomised controlled trials developed worldwide, which have generated conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

The critical evaluation of clinical evidence on the safety and efficacy of autologous adult bone marrow-derived stem/progenitor cells as a treatment for chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, and four ongoing trial databases for relevant trials up to 14 December 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials comparing autologous adult stem/progenitor cells with no cells in people with chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure. We included co-interventions, such as primary angioplasty, surgery, or administration of stem cell mobilising agents, when administered to treatment and control arms equally.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all references for eligibility, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We undertook a quantitative evaluation of data using random-effects meta-analyses. We evaluated heterogeneity using the I2 statistic and explored substantial heterogeneity (I2 greater than 50%) through subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADEprofiler (GRADEpro), excluding studies with a high or unclear risk of selection bias. We focused our summary of findings on long-term follow-up of mortality, morbidity outcomes, and left ventricular ejection fraction measured by magnetic resonance imaging.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 randomised controlled trials involving 1907 participants (1114 cell therapy, 793 controls) in this review update. Twenty-three trials were at high or unclear risk of selection bias. Other sources of potential bias included lack of blinding of participants (12 trials) and full or partial commercial sponsorship (13 trials).Cell therapy reduced the incidence of long-term mortality (≥ 12 months) (risk ratio (RR) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 0.87; participants = 491; studies = 9; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Periprocedural adverse events associated with the mapping or cell/placebo injection procedure were infrequent. Cell therapy was also associated with a long-term reduction in the incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.97; participants = 345; studies = 5; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) and incidence of arrhythmias (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.99; participants = 82; studies = 1; low-quality evidence). However, we found no evidence that cell therapy affects the risk of rehospitalisation for heart failure (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.09; participants = 375; studies = 6; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) or composite incidence of mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and/or rehospitalisation for heart failure (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.08; participants = 141; studies = 3; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence), or long-term left ventricular ejection fraction when measured by magnetic resonance imaging (mean difference -1.60, 95% CI -8.70 to 5.50; participants = 25; studies = 1; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found low-quality evidence that treatment with bone marrow-derived stem/progenitor cells reduces mortality and improves left ventricular ejection fraction over short- and long-term follow-up and may reduce the incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction and improve New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification in people with chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure. These findings should be interpreted with caution, as event rates were generally low, leading to a lack of precision.

Cellular Therapy for Heart Failure

The pathogenesis of cardiomyopathy and heart failure (HF) is underpinned by complex changes at subcellular, cellular and extracellular levels in the ventricular myocardium. For all of the gains that conventional treatments for HF have brought to mortality and morbidity, they do not adequately address the loss of cardiomyocyte numbers in the remodeling ventricle. Originally conceived to address this problem, cellular transplantation for HF has already gone through several stages of evolution over the past two decades. Various cell types and delivery routes have been implemented to positive effect in preclinical models of ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy, with pleiotropic benefits observed in terms of myocardial remodeling, systolic and diastolic performance, perfusion, fibrosis, inflammation, metabolism and electrophysiology. To a large extent, these salubrious effects are now attributed to the indirect, paracrine capacity of transplanted stem cells to facilitate endogenous cardiac repair processes. Promising results have also followed in early phase human studies, although these have been relatively modest and somewhat inconsistent. This review details the preclinical and clinical evidence currently available regarding the use of pluripotent stem cells and adult-derived progenitor cells for cardiomyopathy and HF. It outlines the important lessons that have been learned to this point in time, and balances the promise of this exciting field against the key challenges and questions that still need to be addressed at all levels of research, to ensure that cell therapy realizes its full potential by adding to the armamentarium of HF management.

An exploratory randomized control study of combination cytokine and adult autologous bone marrow progenitor cell administration in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: the REGENERATE-IHD clinical trial

Aims

The effect of combined cytokine and cell therapy in ischaemic cardiomyopathy is unknown. Meta‐analyses suggest improved cardiac function with cell therapy. The optimal cell delivery route remains unclear. We investigated whether granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor (G‐CSF) alone or in combination with intracoronary (i.c.) or intramyocardial (i.m.) injection of autologous bone marrow‐derived cells (BMCs) improves cardiac function.

Methods and results

Ninety patients with symptomatic ischaemic cardiomyopathy and no further treatment options were enrolled in the randomized, placebo‐controlled, single‐centre REGENERATE‐IHD study. Randomization was to one of three arms: peripheral, i.c., or i.m. In each arm, patients were randomized to active treatment or placebo. All patients, apart from the peripheral placebo group (saline only) received G‐CSF for 5 days. The i.c. and i.m. arms received either BMCs or serum (placebo). The primary endpoint was change in LVEF at 1 year assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography. The i.m. BMC group showed a significant improvement in LVEF of 4.99% (95% confidence interval 0.33–9.6%; P = 0.038) at 1 year. This group also showed a reduction in NYHA class at 1 year and NT‐proBNP at 6 months. No other group showed a significant change in LVEF. This finding is supported by post‐hoc between‐group comparisons.

Conclusion

We have shown that G‐CSF combined with autologous i.m. BMCs has a beneficial effect on cardiac function and symptoms. However, this result should be considered preliminary in support of a clinical benefit of i.m. stem cell infusion in ‘no option’ patients and needs further exploration in a larger study.

Meta-Analyses of Human Cell-Based Cardiac Regeneration Therapies: What Can Systematic Reviews Tell Us About Cell Therapies for Ischemic Heart Disease?

Controversies from basic science, discrepancies from clinical trials, and divergent results from meta-analyses have recently arisen in the field of cell therapies for cardiovascular repair and regeneration. Noticeably, there are almost as many systematic reviews and meta-analyses published as there are well-conducted clinical studies. But how do we disentangle the confusion they have raised? This article addresses why results obtained from systematic reviews and meta-analyses of human cell-based cardiac regeneration therapies are still valid to inform the design of future clinical trials. It also addresses how meta-analyses are not free from limitations and how important it is to assess the quality of the evidence and the quality of the systematic reviews and finally how stronger conclusions can be drawn when several pieces of evidence converge.

Increases in plasma Tβ4 after intracardiac cell therapy in chronic ischemic heart failure is associated with symptomatic improvement

Aim: Tβ4 is an integral factor in repair of myocardium in animal models. To investigate whether Tβ4 is important in human cardiac disease and has a role in mediating the beneficial cardiac effects of bone-marrow-derived stem cell (BMSC) therapy, we measured serial plasma Tβ4 levels in patients enrolled on the REGENERATE-IHD cell therapy trial. Patients & Methods: Plasma Tβ4 concentrations were measured in 13 patients who received BMSCs and 14 controls. Results: There was a significant increase in plasma Tβ4 in the BMSC group 24 h after intracardiac injection. Increases in Tβ4 levels were associated with improvement in New York Heart Association symptom class. Conclusion: This exploratory study highlights the need for further study of Tβ4 in human cardiovascular disease.