Single and repeated intra-articular injections in the tarsocrural joint with allogeneic and autologous equine bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells are safe, but did not reduce acute inflammation in an experimental interleukin-1β model of synovitis

Single injection of intra-articular autologous protein solution in horses with acute interleukin-1B-induced synovitis decreases joint pathology scores

BACKGROUND

Autologous protein solution (APS) has been shown to decrease lameness in horses with osteoarthritis (OA). Synovitis is an early driver of OA, providing an opportunity to intervene in the progression of disease via intra-articular (IA) therapeutics.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of a single IA APS injection in horses with interleukin-1β (IL-1β)-induced synovitis. We hypothesised that APS would decrease joint swelling and lameness, improve synovial fluid parameters and improve joint pathology scores in horses compared with untreated controls.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomised controlled in vivo experiment.

METHODS

Synovitis was induced with IL-1β (65 ng) in one randomly selected tarsocrural joint. Twenty-four hours later, joints were treated with APS (Pro-Stride®) (n = 12) or left as untreated controls (n = 6). Lameness examinations and joint circumference measurements were performed on Days 0 (prior to IL-1β), 1 (prior to APS), 2, 4, 7 and 14. Synovial fluid, obtained on the same days, was analysed for protein concentration, nucleated cell count, and cytokine (IL-1β, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IL-6, IL-10) and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) concentrations. Gross pathology and synovial membrane histopathology scoring was performed on APS-treated (n = 5), untreated control (n = 4) and normal (n = 9) tarsocrural joints.

RESULTS

APS did not decrease lameness or joint circumference compared with untreated controls. Synovial fluid parameters were not different between treatment groups. APS treatment did significantly decrease gross and histopathology scores.

MAIN LIMITATIONS

Main limitations included the use of an induced model of the synovitis, inter-horse variability in the response to IL-1β and likely variability in the constituents of APS from individual horses.

CONCLUSIONS

APS treatment of tarsocrural joints with synovitis did not significantly improve lameness or alter synovial fluid parameters. APS did lead to significant improvement in gross joint appearance and synovial membrane histology suggesting that APS may have disease-modifying effects.

Case report: Equine metacarpophalangeal joint partial and full thickness defects treated with allogenic equine synovial membrane mesenchymal stem/stromal cell combined with umbilical cord mesenchymal stem/stromal cell conditioned medium

Here, we describe a case of a 5-year-old show-jumping stallion presented with severe lameness, swelling, and pain on palpation of the left metacarpophalangeal joint (MCj). Diagnostic imaging revealed full and partial-thickness articular defects over the lateral condyle of the third metacarpus (MC3) and the dorsolateral aspect of the first phalanx (P1). After the lesion's arthroscopic curettage, the patient was subjected to an innovative regenerative treatment consisting of two intra-articular injections of equine synovial membrane mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (eSM-MSCs) combined with umbilical cord mesenchymal stem/stromal cells conditioned medium (UC-MSC CM), 15 days apart. A 12-week rehabilitation program was accomplished, and lameness, pain, and joint effusion were remarkably reduced; however, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) scan presented incomplete healing of the MC3's lesion, prompting a second round of treatment. Subsequently, the horse achieved clinical soundness and returned to a higher level of athletic performance, and imaging exams revealed the absence of lesions at P1, fulfillment of the osteochondral lesion, and cartilage-like tissue formation at MC3's lesion site. The positive outcomes suggest the effectiveness of this combination for treating full and partial cartilage defects in horses. Multipotent mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) and their bioactive factors compose a novel therapeutic approach for tissue regeneration and organ function restoration with anti-inflammatory and pro-regenerative impact through paracrine mechanisms.

Overview of Equine Stem Cells: Sources, Practices, and Potential Safety Concerns

Over the past 2 decades, equine veterinarians are turning increasingly to stem cell therapies to repair damaged tissues or to promote healing through modulation of the immune system. Research is ongoing into optimizing practices associated with stem cell product transport, dosage, and administration. Culture-expanded equine mesenchymal stem cell therapies seem safe, even when used allogeneically, but various safety concerns should be considered. Stem cells and cellular reprogramming tools hold great promise for future equine therapies.

A Translational Model for Repeated Episodes of Joint Inflammation: Welfare, Clinical and Synovial Fluid Biomarker Assessment

This study investigates repeated low-dose lipopolysaccharide (LPS) injections in equine joints as a model for recurrent joint inflammation and its impact on animal welfare. Joint inflammation was induced in eight horses by injecting 0.25 ng of LPS three times at two-week intervals. Welfare scores and clinical parameters were recorded at baseline and over 168 h post-injection. Serial synoviocentesis was performed for the analysis of a panel of synovial fluid biomarkers of inflammation and cartilage turnover. Clinical parameters and a final synoviocentesis were also performed eight weeks after the last sampling point to assess the recovery of normal joint homeostasis. Statistical methods were used to compare the magnitude of response to each of the 3 LPS inductions and to compare the baseline and final measurements. Each LPS injection produced consistent clinical and biomarker responses, with minimal changes in welfare scores. General matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) activity and joint circumference showed greater response to the second LPS induction, but response to the third was comparable to the first. Gylcosaminoglycans (GAG) levels showed a significantly decreased response with each induction, while collagen-cleavage neoepitope of type II collagen (C2C) and carboxypropetide of type II collagen epitope (CPII) showed quicker responses to the second and third inductions. All parameters were comparable to baseline values at the final timepoint. In conclusion, a consistent, reliable intra-articular inflammatory response can be achieved with repeated injections of 0.25 ng LPS, with minimal impact on animal welfare, suggesting potential as a refined translational model of recurrent joint inflammation.

Cryopreserved allogeneic bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells show better osteochondral defect repair potential than adipose tissue mesenchymal stem cells

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) due to their characteristic properties have a potential to treat osteoarthritis, one of the major growing joint problems. MSCs show differential ex vivo chondrogenic potential on the basis of source that remains to be validated under in vivo environment. This study compared chondrogenic potential of MSCs derived from two common sources, adipose tissue (AD) and bone marrow (BM) under ex vivo and in vivo environments. The randomized placebo controlled osteochondral defect (OCD) study divided n = 72 rabbits equally into Control, AD-MSCs and BM-MSCs groups. Ex vivo chondrogenic induction resulted in an increased aggrecan fold expression in BM-MSCs and AD-MSCs. The former cell type had significantly (p<0.05) higher fold expression as compared to the latter. The cell treated OCDs had significantly reduced gene expression for inflammatory markers (IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-α) as compared to the control. In OCD study, radiography, MRI, gross observation, histopathology and SEM revealed that the cell treated defects were early filled by the tissue that had better surface architecture and matrices as compared to the control. BM-MSCs treated defects had better scores especially for gross and histopathology than the AD-MSCs. Gene expression for osteochondral regulation and cartilaginous matrices was higher in BM-MSCs group while only for matrices including the Col I in AD-MSCs as compared to the control. It was concluded that OCD in the cell treated groups are filled early with mostly a fibrocartilaginous to hyaline tissue. BM-MSCs may have an edge over AD-MSCs in OCD repair.

Treatment Effects of Intra-Articular Allogenic Mesenchymal Stem Cell Secretome in an Equine Model of Joint Inflammation

Background

Allogenic mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) secretome is a novel intra-articular therapeutic that has shown promise in in vitro and small animal models and warrants further investigation.

Objectives

To investigate if intra-articular allogenic MSC-secretome has anti-inflammatory effects using an equine model of joint inflammation.

Study Design

Randomized positively and negatively controlled experimental study.

Method

In phase 1, joint inflammation was induced bilaterally in radiocarpal joints of eight horses by injecting 0.25 ng lipopolysaccharide (LPS). After 2 h, the secretome of INFy and TNFα stimulated allogeneic equine MSCs was injected in one randomly assigned joint, while the contralateral joint was injected with medium (negative control). Clinical parameters (composite welfare scores, joint effusion, joint circumference) were recorded, and synovial fluid samples were analyzed for biomarkers (total protein, WBCC; eicosanoid mediators, CCL2; TNFα; MMP; GAGs; C2C; CPII) at fixed post-injection hours (PIH 0, 8, 24, 72, and 168 h). The effects of time and treatment on clinical and synovial fluid parameters and the presence of time-treatment interactions were evaluated. For phase 2, allogeneic MSC-secretome vs. allogeneic equine MSCs (positive control) was tested using a similar methodology.

Results

In phase 1, the joint circumference was significantly (p &lt; 0.05) lower in the MSC-secretome treated group compared to the medium control group at PIH 24, and significantly higher peak synovial GAG values were noted at PIH 24 (p &lt; 0.001). In phase 2, no significant differences were noted between the treatment effects of MSC-secretome and MSCs.

Main Limitations

This study is a controlled experimental study and therefore cannot fully reflect natural joint disease. In phase 2, two therapeutics are directly compared and there is no negative control.

Conclusions

In this model of joint inflammation, intra-articular MSC-secretome injection had some clinical anti-inflammatory effects. An effect on cartilage metabolism, evident as a rise in GAG levels was also noted, although it is unclear whether this could be considered a beneficial or detrimental effect. When directly comparing MSC-secretome to MSCs in this model results were comparable, indicating that MSC-secretome could be a viable off-the-shelf alternative to MSC treatment.

Current use of biologic therapies for musculoskeletal disease: A survey of board-certified equine specialists

Objective

To evaluate the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), autologous conditioned serum (ACS), platelet‐rich plasma (PRP), and autologous protein solution (APS) for the treatment of equine musculoskeletal disease by diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Surgery (ACVS), and American College of Veterinary Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation (ACVSMR).

Study design

Cross‐sectional study.

Sample population

Diplomates (n = 423).

Methods

An email link was sent to ACVS and ACVMR diplomates. A survey contained 59 questions regarding demographics, as well as indications, frequency, adverse effects, and limitations of use. Responses were analyzed using Fisher's exact test.

Results

One hundred and fifty four surveys were analyzed. Years in practice and type of practice were not associated with biologic therapy use. PRP was the most used therapy (120/137; 87.5%). PRP and MSCs were most often administered intralesionally while ACS and APS were most often administered intra‐articularly. ACS (50/104; 48.1%) treatment was repeated commonly within 2 weeks of initial injection. MSCs (39/90; 43.3%) and PRP (38/100; 38%) were commonly repeated 1‐2 months after initial injection and APS was typically repeated >4 months after initial injection (21/53; 39.6%). Local inflammation and expense were the most common adverse effect and limitation of use.

Conclusion

Diplomates most commonly utilized PRP and MSC intralesionally for soft‐tissue injuries, and ACS and ACP intra‐articularly for joint injury. Protocols for repeated administration varied widely. Local inflammation was a clinical concern with the use of biologics.

Clinical significance

Biologic therapies are used commonly by ACVS and ACVSMR diplomates for soft tissue and joint disease.

Preparation Technique Affects Recipient Immune Targeting of Autologous Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Fetal bovine serum (FBS) is used for MSC preparation in pre-clinical animal models and veterinary applications, recently in US clinical trials, and for MSC products with current foreign market authorizations. The effect of anti-bovine titers, which are common in animals and humans, has not been investigated. In the equine model, where anti-bovine titers are universally high due to routine vaccination, we evaluated the recipient immune response to autologous MSCs prepared with and without FBS. Preparation of MSCs with FBS resulted in post injection inflammation and antibody mediated cytotoxicity of MSCs when compared to MSCs prepared without FBS. Importantly, synovial MSC concentrations were reduced and LPS induced pain was higher, when FBS was used to prepare MSCs, demonstrating reduced efficacy of FBS prepared MSCs. Fetal bovine serum should no longer be utilized for MSC preparation in pre-clinical study, clinical study, or veterinary applications. The use of FBS in previously reported studies, and in MSC therapeutics with current foreign market authorization, should be considered when interpreting results.

Regenerative Medicine for Equine Musculoskeletal Diseases

Simple Summary

Lameness due to musculoskeletal disease is the most common diagnosis in equine veterinary practice. Many of these orthopaedic disorders are chronic problems, for which no clinically satisfactory treatment exists. Thus, high hopes are pinned on regenerative medicine, which aims to replace or regenerate cells, tissues, or organs to restore or establish normal function. Some regenerative medicine therapies have already made their way into equine clinical practice mainly to treat tendon injures, tendinopathies, cartilage injuries and degenerative joint disorders with promising but diverse results. This review summarises the current knowledge of commonly used regenerative medicine treatments and critically discusses their use.

Abstract

Musculoskeletal injuries and chronic degenerative diseases commonly affect both athletic and sedentary horses and can entail the end of their athletic careers. The ensuing repair processes frequently do not yield fully functional regeneration of the injured tissues but biomechanically inferior scar or replacement tissue, causing high reinjury rates, degenerative disease progression and chronic morbidity. Regenerative medicine is an emerging, rapidly evolving branch of translational medicine that aims to replace or regenerate cells, tissues, or organs to restore or establish normal function. It includes tissue engineering but also cell-based and cell-free stimulation of endogenous self-repair mechanisms. Some regenerative medicine therapies have made their way into equine clinical practice mainly to treat tendon injures, tendinopathies, cartilage injuries and degenerative joint disorders with promising results. However, the qualitative and quantitative spatiotemporal requirements for specific bioactive factors to trigger tissue regeneration in the injury response are still unknown, and consequently, therapeutic approaches and treatment results are diverse. To exploit the full potential of this burgeoning field of medicine, further research will be required and is ongoing. This review summarises the current knowledge of commonly used regenerative medicine treatments in equine patients and critically discusses their use.

Interactions Between Allogeneic Mesenchymal Stromal Cells and the Recipient Immune System: A Comparative Review With Relevance to Equine Outcomes

Despite significant immunosuppressive activity, allogeneic mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) carry an inherent risk of immune rejection when transferred into a recipient. In naïve recipients, this immune response is initially driven by the innate immune system, an immediate reaction to the foreign cells, and later, the adaptive immune system, a delayed response that causes cell death due to recognition of specific alloantigens by host cells and antibodies. This review describes the actions of MSCs to both suppress and activate the different arms of the immune system. We then review the survival and effectiveness of the currently used allogeneic MSC treatments.

Mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of musculoskeletal disease in horses: Relative merits of allogeneic versus autologous stem cells

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are widely used for treatment of musculoskeletal diseases in horses, but there is ongoing debate regarding the relative safety and efficacy of allogeneic MSCs, compared with autologous equine MSCs. This review summarises the currently available published data regarding the therapeutic use of autologous and allogeneic MSCs in horses. Arguments that have been advanced against the use of allogeneic MSCs include higher risk of immunological reactions and shorter cell survival times following injection. Arguments favouring the use of allogeneic MSCs include the ability to bank cells and reduce the time to treatment, to collect MSCs from younger donor animals and the ability to manipulate banked cells prior to administration. In vitro studies and a limited set of experimental in vivo studies have indicated that adverse immunological reactions may occur when allogeneic MSCs are administered to horses. However, newer studies lack evidence of inflammatory reactions or adverse clinical responses when allogeneic MSCs are administered and compared with autologous MSCs. Thus, while the relative merits of allogeneic vs autologous MSCs for treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in horses have not been fully established, accumulating evidence from studies in horses suggests that allogeneic MSCs maybe a safe alternative to autologous MSCs. Large, properly designed, randomised trials in addition to careful immunological evaluation of short-term and long-term, local and systemic immune responses are needed to more fully resolve the issue.