Characterisation of mesenchymal stromal cells in clinical trial reports: analysis of published descriptors

Stem Cell Research & Therapy

Emma Rand¹  Alison J. Wilson¹  Paul G. Genever¹  Andrew J. Webster² 

[1] Department of Biology, University of York;Science and Technology Studies Unit, Department of Sociology, University of York;

关键词: Mesenchymal stem cells;    Mesenchymal stromal cells;    Clinical trial;    Characterisation;    Cell therapy;    Regenerative medicine;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13287-021-02435-1

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Abstract Background Mesenchymal stem or stromal cells are the most widely used cell therapy to date. They are heterogeneous, with variations in growth potential, differentiation capacity and protein expression profile depending on tissue source and production process. Nomenclature and defining characteristics have been debated for almost 20 years, yet the generic term ‘MSC’ is used to cover a wide range of cellular phenotypes. Against a documented lack of definition of cellular populations used in clinical trials, our study evaluated the extent of characterisation of the cellular population or study drug. Methods A literature search of clinical trials involving mesenchymal stem/stromal cells was refined to 84 papers upon application of pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data were extracted covering background trial information including location, phase, indication, tissue source and details of clinical cell population characterisation (expression of surface markers, viability, differentiation assays and potency/functionality assays). Descriptive statistics were applied, and tests of association between groups were explored using Fisher’s exact test for count data with simulated p value. Results Twenty-eight studies (33.3%) include no characterisation data. Forty-five (53.6%) reported average values per marker for all cell lots used in the trial, and 11 (13.1%) studies included individual values per cell lot. Viability was reported in 57% of studies. Differentiation was discussed: osteogenesis (29% of papers), adipogenesis (27%), and chondrogenesis (20%) and other functional assays arose in 7 papers (8%). The extent of characterisation was not related to the clinical phase of development. Assessment of functionality was very limited and did not always relate to the likely mechanism of action. Conclusions The extent of characterisation was poor and variable. Our findings concur with those in other fields including bone marrow aspirate and platelet-rich plasma therapy. We discuss the potential implications of these findings for the use of mesenchymal stem or stromal cells in regenerative medicine, and the importance of characterisation for transparency and comparability of literature. Graphical abstract

【 授权许可】

Unknown