Stem cells in preclinical spine studies

Stem Cells and Spinal Fusion

BACKGROUND

This manuscript is a review of the literature investigating the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) being applied in the setting of spinal fusion surgery. We mention the rates of pseudarthrosis, discuss current bone grafting options, and examine the preclinical and clinical outcomes of utilizing MSCs to assist in successfully fusing the spine.

METHODS

A thorough literature review was conducted to look at current and previous preclinical and clinical studies using stem cells for spinal fusion augmentation. Searches for PubMed/MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov through January 2021 were conducted for literature mentioning stem cells and spinal fusion.

RESULTS

All preclinical and clinical studies investigating MSC use in spinal fusion were examined. We found 19 preclinical and 17 clinical studies. The majority of studies, both preclinical and clinical, were heterogeneous in design due to different osteoconductive scaffolds, cells, and techniques used. Preclinical studies showed promising outcomes in animal models when using appropriate osteoconductive scaffolds and factors for osteogenic differentiation. Similarly, clinical studies have promising outcomes but differ in their methodologies, surgical techniques, and materials used, making it difficult to adequately compare between the studies.

CONCLUSION

MSCs may be a promising option to use to augment grafting for spinal fusion surgery. MSCs must be used with appropriate osteoconductive scaffolds. Cell-based allografts and the optimization of their use have yet to be fully elucidated. Further studies are necessary to determine the efficacy of MSCs with different osteoconductive scaffolds and growth/osteogenic differentiation factors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Allogeneic mesenchymal precursor cells treatment for chronic low back pain associated with degenerative disc disease: a prospective randomized, placebo-controlled 36-month study of safety and efficacy

BACKGROUND CONTEXT PURPOSE

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of a single intradiscal injection of STRO-3+ adult allogeneic mesenchymal precursor cells (MPCs) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) in subjects with chronic low back pain (CLBP) associated with degenerative disc disease (DDD) through 36-month follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A multicenter, randomized, controlled study conducted at 13 clinical sites (12 in the United States and 1 in Australia).

SUBJECT SAMPLE

A total of 100 subjects with chronic low back pain associated with moderate DDD (modified Pfirrmann score of 3-6) at one level from L1 to S1 for at least 6 months and failing 3 months of conservative treatment, including physical therapy were randomized in a 3:3:2:2 ratio to receive 6 million MPCs with HA, 18 million MPCs with HA, HA vehicle control, or saline control (placebo) treatment.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Subjects were clinically and radiographically evaluated at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postinjection. Subject-reported outcomes including adverse events, LBP on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-36 and Work Productivity and Activity Index were collected.

METHODS

Clinical and radiographic measures were collected at each visit. All randomized subjects were included in the safety assessments and analyzed based on the treatment received. Safety assessments included assessments of AEs, physical and radiographic examinations and laboratory testing. Efficacy assessments evaluated changes in VAS, ODI, and modified Pfirrmann (MP) scores between all active and control groups, respectively. Assessments included least squares mean (Mean), LS mean change from baseline (Mean Change) and responder analyses in order to assess the clinical significance of observed changes from baseline. The population for efficacy assessments was adjusted for the confounding effects of post-treatment interventions (PTIs). This study was conducted under an FDA Investigational New Drug application sponsored and funded by Mesoblast.

RESULTS

There were significant differences between the control and MPC groups for improvement in VAS and ODI. The PTI-corrected VAS and ODI Means and Mean Change analyses; the proportion of subjects with VAS ≥30% and ≥50% improvement from baseline; absolute VAS score ≤20; and ODI reduction ≥10 and ≥15 points from baseline showed MPC therapy superior to controls at various time points through 36 months. Additionally, the proportion of subjects achieving the minimally important change and clinically significant change composite endpoints for the MPC groups was also superior compared with controls at various time points from baseline to 36 months. There were no significant differences in change in MP score from baseline across the groups. There were also no statistically significant differences in change in modified MP score at the level above or below the level treated between study arms. Both the procedure and treatment were well tolerated and there were no clinical symptoms of immune reaction to allogeneic MPCs. There was a low rate of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events, and the rates of these events in the MPC groups were not significantly different from the control groups. One TEAE of severe back pain was possibly related to study agent and one TEAE of implantation site infection was considered to be related to the study procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide evidence that intradiscal injection of MPCs could be a safe, effective, durable, and minimally invasive therapy for subjects who have CLBP associated with moderate DDD.

Advanced Strategies for the Regeneration of Lumbar Disc Annulus Fibrosus

Damage to the annulus fibrosus (AF), the outer region of the intervertebral disc (IVD), results in an undesirable condition that may accelerate IVD degeneration causing low back pain. Despite intense research interest, attempts to regenerate the IVD have failed so far and no effective strategy has translated into a successful clinical outcome. Of particular significance, the failure of strategies to repair the AF has been a major drawback in the regeneration of IVD and nucleus replacement. It is unlikely to secure regenerative mediators (cells, genes, and biomolecules) and artificial nucleus materials after injection with an unsealed AF, as IVD is exposed to significant load and large deformation during daily activities. The AF defects strongly change the mechanical properties of the IVD and activate catabolic routes that are responsible for accelerating IVD degeneration. Therefore, there is a strong need to develop effective therapeutic strategies to prevent or reconstruct AF damage to support operational IVD regenerative strategies and nucleus replacement. By the way of this review, repair and regenerative strategies for AF reconstruction, their current status, challenges ahead, and future outlooks were discussed.

Autologous mesenchymal stromal cells embedded in tricalcium phosphate for posterolateral spinal fusion: results of a prospective phase I/II clinical trial with long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Posterolateral spinal fusion with autologous bone graft is considered the "gold standard" for lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) when surgical treatment is indicated. The potential role of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to replace the bone graft in this setting has not been fully addressed.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the safety, feasibility and potential clinical efficacy of the implantation of autologous MSCs embedded with tricalcium phosphate as a therapeutic alternative to bone graft in patients with DDD during posterolateral spine fusion.

STUDY DESIGN

Phase I/II single-arm prospective clinical trial.

METHODS

Eleven patients with monosegmental DDD at L4-L5 or L5-S1 level were included. Autologous bone marrow-derived MSC were expanded in our Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Facility and implanted during spinal surgery embedded in a tricalcium phosphate carrier. Monitoring of patients included a postoperative period of 12 months with four visits (after the 1st, 3rd, 6th, and 12th month), with clinical and radiological assessment that included the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), the vertebral fusion grade observed through a simple Rx, and the evaluation of possible complications or adverse reactions. In addition, all patients were further followed up to 5 years for outcome.

RESULTS

Median age of patients included was 44 years (range 30-58 years), and male/female ratio was (6/5) L4-L5 and L5-S1 DDD was present five and six patients, respectively. Autologous MSCs were expanded in all cases. There were no adverse effects related to cell implantation. Regarding efficacy, both VAS and ODI scores improved after surgery. Radiologically, 80% of patients achieved lumbar fusion at the end of the follow-up. No adverse effects related to the procedure were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of autologous MSCs for spine fusion in patients with monosegmental degenerative disc disease is feasible, safe, and potentially effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

no. EudraCT: 2010-018335-17 ; code Identifier: NCT01513694 ( clinicaltrials.gov ).

Stem Cells in Spinal Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Review of literature.

OBJECTIVES

This review of literature investigates the application of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in spinal fusion, highlights potential uses in the development of bone grafts, and discusses limitations based on both preclinical and clinical models.

METHODS

A review of literature was conducted looking at current studies using stem cells for augmentation of spinal fusion in both animal and human models.

RESULTS

Eleven preclinical studies were found that used various animal models. Average fusion rates across studies were 59.8% for autograft and 73.7% for stem cell-based grafts. Outcomes included manual palpation and stressing of the fusion, radiography, micro-computed tomography (μCT), and histological analysis. Fifteen clinical studies, 7 prospective and 8 retrospective, were found. Fusion rates ranged from 60% to 100%, averaging 87.1% in experimental groups and 87.2% in autograft control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It appears that there is minimal clinical difference between commercially available stem cells and bone marrow aspirates indicating that MSCs may be a good choice in a patient with poor marrow quality. Overcoming morbidity and limitations of autograft for spinal fusion, remains a significant problem for spinal surgeons and further studies are needed to determine the efficacy of stem cells in augmenting spinal fusion.

Application of a three-dimensional graft of autologous osteodifferentiated adipose stem cells in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: clinical proof of concept

BACKGROUND

The authors applied a scaffold-free osteogenic three-dimensional (3D) graft made of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs) in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF).

METHODS

Three patients (two patients and one patient with 1 and 2 levels, respectively) with degenerative spondylolisthesis underwent MI-TLIF with 3D graft made of AMSCs. To obtain the AMSCs, fatty tissue was collected from the abdomen by lipoaspiration and differentiated afterwards in our Cell/Tissue bank. Clinical outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) as well as fusion status were assessed preoperatively and up to 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

At 12 months, all four operated AMSC levels could be assessed (n = 4). Grade 3 fusion could be confirmed at two levels out of four. Mean VAS score improved from 8.3 to 2 and ODI also improved from 47 to 31%. No donor site complication was observed. The final AMSC osteogenic product was stable, did not rupture with forceps manipulation, and was easily implanted directly into the cage with no marked modification of operating time.

CONCLUSIONS

A scaffold-free 3D graft made of AMSCs can be manufactured and used as a promising alternative for spinal fusion procedures. Nevertheless, further studies of a larger series of patients are needed to confirm its effectiveness.

Mesenchymal stromal cells in spinal fusion: Current and future applications

Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have been a promising area of study for regenerative medicine. These cells can be harvested from bone marrow, adipose tissue, and other areas allowing for autologous transplantation of these cells into the area of degeneration or injury. With the proper signals, these cells may be able to regenerate healthy tissue. Recent studies have yielded promising evidence supporting translational mesenchymal stromal cell applications particularly in spinal fusion surgery.

Autophagy: A double-edged sword in intervertebral disk degeneration

Autophagy is a homeostatic mechanism through which intracellular damaged organelles and proteins are degraded and recycled in response to increased metabolic demands or stresses. Although primarily cytoprotective, dysfunction of autophagy is often associated with many degenerative diseases, including intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration (IDD). As a main contributing factor to low back pain, IDD is the pathological basis for various debilitating spinal diseases. Either higher or lower levels of autophagy are observed in degenerative IVD cells. Despite the precise role of autophagy in disc degeneration that is still controversial, with difference from protection to aggravation, targeting autophagy has shown promise for mitigating disc degeneration. In the current review, we summarize the changes of autophagy in degenerative IVD cells and mainly discuss the relationship between autophagy and IDD. With continued efforts, modulation of the autophagic process could be a potential and attractive therapeutic strategy for degenerative disc disease.

Stem cells and spinal fusion--are we there yet?

Wheeler DL, Fredericks DC, Dryer RF, Bae HW. Allogeneic mesenchymal precursor cells (MPCs) combined with an osteoconductive scaffold to promote lumbar interbody spine fusion in an ovine model. Spine J 2016:16:389-99 (in this issue).

Evaluation of posterolateral lumbar fusion in sheep using mineral scaffolds seeded with cultured bone marrow cells

The objective of this study is to investigate the efficacy of hybrid constructs in comparison to bone grafts (autograft and allograft) for posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in sheep, instrumented with transpedicular screws and bars. Hybrid constructs using cultured bone marrow (BM) mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown promising results in several bone healing models. In particular, hybrid constructs made by calcium phosphate-enriched cells have had similar fusion rates to bone autografts in posterolateral lumbar fusion in sheep. In our study, four experimental spinal fusions in two animal groups were compared in sheep: autograft and allograft (reference group), hydroxyapatite scaffold, and hydroxyapatite scaffold seeded with cultured and osteoinduced bone marrow MSCs (hybrid construct). During the last three days of culture, dexamethasone (dex) and beta-glycerophosphate (β-GP) were added to potentiate osteoinduction. The two experimental situations of each group were tested in the same spinal segment (L4–L5). Spinal fusion and bone formation were studied by clinical observation, X-ray, computed tomography (CT), histology, and histomorphometry. Lumbar fusion rates assessed by CT scan and histology were higher for autograft and allograft (70%) than for mineral scaffold alone (22%) and hybrid constructs (35%). The quantity of new bone formation was also higher for the reference group, quite similar in both (autograft and allograft). Although the hybrid scaffold group had a better fusion rate than the non-hybrid scaffold group, the histological analysis revealed no significant differences between them in terms of quantity of bone formation. The histology results suggested that mineral scaffolds were partly resorbed in an early phase, and included in callus tissues. Far from the callus area the hydroxyapatite alone did not generate bone around it, but the hybrid scaffold did. In nude mice, labeled cells were induced to differentiate in vivo and monitored by bioluminescence imaging (BLI). Although the cultured MSCs had osteogenic potential, their contribution to spinal fusion when seeded in mineral scaffolds, in the conditions disclosed here, remains uncertain probably due to callus interference with the scaffolds. At present, bone autografts are better than hybrid constructs for posterolateral lumbar fusion, but we should continue to seek better conditions for efficient tissue engineering.

Cellular bone matrices: viable stem cell-containing bone graft substitutes

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Advances in the field of stem cell technology have stimulated the development and increased use of allogenic bone grafts containing live mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), also known as cellular bone matrices (CBMs). It is estimated that CBMs comprise greater than 17% of all bone grafts and bone graft substitutes used.

PURPOSE

To critically evaluate CBMs, specifically their technical specifications, existing published data supporting their use, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation, cost, potential pitfalls, and other aspects pertaining to their use.

STUDY DESIGN

Areview of literature.

METHODS

A series of Ovid, Medline, and Pubmed-National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) searches were performed. Only articles in English journals or published with English language translations were included. Level of evidence of the selected articles was assessed. Specific technical information on each CBM was obtained by direct communication from the companies marketing the individual products.

RESULTS

Five different CBMs are currently available for use in spinal fusion surgery. There is a wide variation between the products with regard to the average donor age at harvest, total cellular concentration, percentage of MSCs, shelf life, and cell viability after defrosting. Three retrospective studies evaluating CBMs and fusion have shown fusion rates ranging from 90.2% to 92.3%, and multiple industry-sponsored trials are underway. No independent studies evaluating spinal fusion rates with the use of CBMs exist. All the commercially available CBMs claim to meet the FDA criteria under Section 361, 21 CFR Part 1271, and are not undergoing FDA premarket review. The CBMs claim to provide viable MSCs and are offered at a premium cost. Numerous challenges exist in regard to MSCs' survival, function, osteoblastic potential, and cytokine production once implanted into the intended host.

CONCLUSIONS

Cellular bone matrices may be a promising bone augmentation technology in spinal fusion surgery. Although CBMs appear to be safe for use as bone graft substitutes, their efficacy in spinal fusion surgery remains highly inconclusive. Large, nonindustry sponsored studies evaluating the efficacy of CBMs are required. Without results from such studies, surgeons must be made aware of the potential pitfalls of CBMs in spinal fusion surgery. With the currently available data, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of CBMs as bone graft substitutes in spinal fusion surgery.