Effects of Repetitive Transendocardial CD34 + Cell Transplantation in Patients With Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy

Six-minute walk test as clinical end point in cardiomyopathy clinical trials, including ATTR-CM: a systematic literature review

Aim: The six-minute walk test (6MWT) is a common measure of functional capacity in patients with heart failure (HF). Primary clinical study end points in cardiomyopathy (CM) trials, including transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis with CM (ATTR-CM), are often limited to hospitalization and mortality. Objective: To investigate the relationship between the 6MWT and hospitalization or mortality in CM, including ATTR-CM. Method: A PRISMA-guided systematic literature review was conducted using search terms for CM, 6MWT, hospitalization and mortality. Results: Forty-one studies were identified that reported 6MWT data and hospitalization or mortality data for patients with CM. The data suggest that a greater 6MWT distance is associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization or mortality in CM. Conclusion: The 6MWT is an accepted alternative end point in CM trials, including ATTR-CM.

Cellular and molecular mechanisms driving cardiac tissue fibrosis: On the precipice of personalized and precision medicine

Cardiac fibrosis is a significant contributor to heart failure, a condition that continues to affect a growing number of patients worldwide. Various cardiovascular comorbidities can exacerbate cardiac fibrosis. While fibroblasts are believed to be the primary cell type underlying fibrosis, recent and emerging data suggest that other cell types can also potentiate or expedite fibrotic processes. Over the past few decades, clinicians have developed therapeutics that can blunt the development and progression of cardiac fibrosis. While these strategies have yielded positive results, overall clinical outcomes for patients suffering from heart failure continue to be dire. Herein, we overview the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying cardiac tissue fibrosis. To do so, we establish the known mechanisms that drive fibrosis in the heart, outline the diagnostic tools available, and summarize the treatment options used in contemporary clinical practice. Finally, we underscore the critical role the immune microenvironment plays in the pathogenesis of cardiac fibrosis.

Epigenetic regulation of sex dimorphism in cardiovascular health

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain the leading cause of morbidity and mortality, affecting people of all races, ages, and sexes. Substantial sex dimorphism exists in the prevalence, manifestation, and outcomes of CVDs. Understanding the role of sex hormones as well as sex-hormone-independent epigenetic mechanisms could play a crucial role in developing effective and sex-specific cardiovascular therapeutics. Existing research highlights significant disparities in sex hormones, epigenetic regulators, and gene expression related to cardiac health, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of these variations between men and women. Despite these differences, current treatment approaches for CVDs often lack sex-specific considerations. A pivotal shift toward personalized medicine, informed by comprehensive insights into sex-specific DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA dynamics, holds the potential to revolutionize CVD management. By understanding sex-specific epigenetic complexities, independent of sex hormone influence, future cardiovascular research can be tailored to achieve effective diagnostic and therapeutic interventions for both men and women. This review summarizes the current knowledge and gaps in epigenetic mechanisms and sex dimorphism implicated in CVDs.

Stem cell therapy for heart failure in the clinics: new perspectives in the era of precision medicine and artificial intelligence

Stem/progenitor cells have been widely evaluated as a promising therapeutic option for heart failure (HF). Numerous clinical trials with stem/progenitor cell-based therapy (SCT) for HF have demonstrated encouraging results, but not without limitations or discrepancies. Recent technological advancements in multiomics, bioinformatics, precision medicine, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML) provide new approaches and insights for stem cell research and therapeutic development. Integration of these new technologies into stem/progenitor cell therapy for HF may help address: 1) the technical challenges to obtain reliable and high-quality therapeutic precursor cells, 2) the discrepancies between preclinical and clinical studies, and 3) the personalized selection of optimal therapeutic cell types/populations for individual patients in the context of precision medicine. This review summarizes the current status of SCT for HF in clinics and provides new perspectives on the development of computation-aided SCT in the era of precision medicine and AI/ML.

DCM Support: cell therapy and circulatory support for dilated cardiomyopathy patients with severe ventricular impairment

AIMS

The DCM Support trial (NCT03572660) uses a percutaneous circulatory support device (Impella CP, Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) to improve the safety of an intracoronary cell infusion procedure in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and a severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

DCM Support is a single-site, single-arm Phase II trial enrolling 20 symptomatic DCM patients with an LVEF ≤ 35% despite optimal medical and device therapy. After 5 days of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy and a subsequent bone marrow aspiration, patients undergo an intracoronary infusion of autologous bone-marrow-derived mononuclear cells. The Impella CP device is used to provide haemodynamic support during the infusion procedure. The trial's primary endpoint is change in LVEF from baseline at 3 months. Secondary efficacy endpoints are change in LVEF from baseline at 12 months, and change in exercise capacity, New York Heart Association class, quality of life, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels from baseline at 3 and 12 months. Safety endpoints include procedural safety and major adverse cardiac events at 3 and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first trial to assess the safety and efficacy of cytokine and autologous intracoronary cell therapy with a procedural circulatory support device for patients with severe left ventricular impairment. This novel combination may allow us to target a patient population most at need of this therapy.

Effect of allogeneic adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cell treatment in chronic ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction - the SCIENCE trial

AIMS

The aim of the SCIENCE trial was to investigate whether a single treatment with direct intramyocardial injections of adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (CSCC_ASCs) was safe and improved cardiac function in patients with chronic ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study was a European multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial using allogeneic CSCC_ASCs from healthy donors or placebo (2:1 randomization). Main inclusion criteria were New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-III, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <45%, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels >300 pg/ml. CSCC_ASCs or placebo (isotonic saline) were injected directly into viable myocardium. The primary endpoint was change in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) at 6-month follow-up measured by echocardiography. A total of 133 symptomatic HFrEF patients were included. The treatment was safe without any drug-related severe adverse events or difference in cardiac-related adverse events during a 3-year follow-up period. There were no significant differences between groups during follow-up in LVESV (0.3 ± 5.0 ml, p = 0.945), nor in secondary endpoints of left ventricular end-diastolic volume (-2.0 ± 6.0 ml, p = 0.736) and LVEF (-1.6 ± 1.0%, p = 0.119). The NYHA class improved slightly within the first year in both groups without any difference between groups. There were no changes in 6-min walk test, NT-proBNP, C-reactive protein or quality of life the first year in any groups.

CONCLUSION

The SCIENCE trial demonstrated safety of intramyocardial allogeneic CSCC_ASC therapy in patients with chronic HFrEF. However, it was not possible to improve the pre-defined endpoints and induce restoration of cardiac function or clinical symptoms.

Therapeutic Angiogenesis Using Autologous CD34-Positive Cells for Vascular Diseases

CD34 is a cell surface marker, which is expressed in various somatic stem/progenitor cells such as bone marrow (BM)-derived hematopoietic stem cells and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), skeletal muscle satellite cells, epithelial hair follicle stem cells, and adipose tissue mesenchymal stem cells. CD34+ cells in BM and peripheral blood are known as a rich source of EPCs. Thus, vascular regeneration therapy using granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilized- or BM CD34+ cells has been carried out in patients with various vascular diseases such as chronic severe lower limb ischemia, acute myocardial infarction, refractory angina, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and dilated cardiomyopathy as well as ischemic stroke. Pilot and randomized clinical trials demonstrated the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of the CD34+ cell therapy in peripheral arterial, cardiovascular, and cerebrovascular diseases. This review provides an overview of the preclinical and clinical reports of CD34+ cell therapy for vascular regeneration.

Contemporary Challenges of Regenerative Therapy in Patients with Ischemic and Non-Ischemic Heart Failure

It has now been almost 20 years since first clinical trials of stem cell therapy for heart repair were initiated. While initial preclinical data were promising and suggested that stem cells may be able to directly restore a diseased myocardium, this was never unequivocally confirmed in the clinical setting. Clinical trials of cell therapy did show the process to be feasible and safe. However, the clinical benefits of this treatment modality in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic heart failure have not been consistently confirmed. What is more, in the rapidly developing field of stem cell therapy in patients with heart failure, relevant questions regarding clinical trials' protocol streamlining, optimal patient selection, stem cell type and dose, and the mode of cell delivery remain largely unanswered. Recently, novel approaches to myocardial regeneration, including the use of pluripotent and allogeneic stem cells and cell-free therapeutic approaches, have been proposed. Thus, in this review, we aim to outline current knowledge and highlight contemporary challenges and dilemmas in clinical aspects of stem cell and regenerative therapy in patients with chronic ischemic and non-ischemic heart failure.

Cell administration routes for heart failure: a comparative re-evaluation of the REGENERATE-DCM and REGENERATE-IHD trials

Aims: Given the logistical issues surrounding intramyocardial cell delivery, we sought to address the efficacy of the simpler, more accessible intracoronary route by re-evaluating REGENERATE-DCM and REGENERATE-IHD (autologous cell therapy trials for heart failure; n = 150). Methods: A retrospective statistical analysis was performed on the trials' combined data. The following end points were evaluated: left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide concentration (NT-proBNP), New York Heart Association class (NYHA) and quality of life. Results: This demonstrated a new efficacy signal for intracoronary delivery, with significant benefits to: LVEF (3.7%; p = 0.01), NT-proBNP (median -76 pg/ml; p = 0.04), NYHA class (48% patients; p = 0.01) and quality of life (12 ± 19; p = 0.006). The improvements in LVEF, NYHA and quality of life scores remained significant compared to the control group. Conclusion: The efficacy and logistical simplicity of intracoronary delivery should be taken into consideration for future trials.

Case report: Cytokine therapy and an intracoronary autologous bone marrow-derived cell infusion with Impella support in a patient with dilated cardiomyopathy and a severely reduced ejection fraction

Introduction

This is the first reported case of a patient with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and severely impaired left ventricular function to receive a combined treatment of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy and an intracoronary delivery of autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells with percutaneous circulatory assistance (the Impella CP device; Abiomed, Danvers, MA).

Main symptoms and outcome

Three months post-treatment, the gentleman in his early 70s demonstrated an improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (13–17%) and a reduction in New York Heart Association class from III to class I. There was also an improvement in his 6-minute walk test (147–357 meters), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide level (14,099–7,129 ng/l) and quality of life scores. There were no safety concerns during the treatment or follow-up.

Conclusion

This case report suggests combined cell and cytokine therapy with adjunctive circulatory support could be a safe and promising treatment for patients with DCM and severely reduced ejection fraction.

A PILOT CLINICAL TRIAL OF CELL THERAPY IN HEART FAILURE WITH PRESERVED EJECTION FRACTION

Aims

We investigated the effects of CD34⁺ cell therapy in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

Methods and results

In a prospective pilot study, we enrolled 30 patients with HFpEF. In Phase 1, patients were treated with medical therapy for 6 months. Thereafter, all patients underwent CD34⁺ cell transplantation. Using electroanatomical mapping, we measured local mechanical diastolic delay and myocardial viability to guide the targeting of cell injections. Patients were followed for 6 months after cell transplantation (Phase 2), and the primary endpoint was the difference in change in E/e′ between Phase 1 and Phase 2. In Phase 1, the decrease in E/e′ was significantly less pronounced than in Phase 2 (−0.33 ± 1.72 vs. −3.77 ± 2.66, p = 0.001). During Phase 1, there was no significant change in global systolic strain (GLS; from −12.5 ± 2.4% to −12.8 ± 2.6%, p = 0.77), N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP; from 1463 ± 1247 pg/ml to 1298 ± 931 pg/ml, p = 0.31), or 6‐min walk test (6MWT; from 391 ± 75 m to 402 ± 93 m, p = 0.42). In Phase 2, an improvement was noted in NT‐proBNP (from 1298 ± 931 pg/ml to 887 ± 809 pg/ml, p = 0.02) and 6MWT (from 402 ± 93 m to 438 ± 72 m, p = 0.02). Although GLS did not change significantly in Phase 2 (from −12.8 ± 2.6% to −13.8 ± 2.7%, p = 0.36), we found improved local systolic strain at cell injection sites (−3.4 ± 6.8%, p = 0.005).

Conclusions

In this non‐randomized trial, transendocardial CD34⁺ cell therapy in HFpEF was associated with an improvement in E/e′, NT‐proBNP, exercise capacity, and local myocardial strain at the cell injection sites.

Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02923609.

Endothelial repair by stem and progenitor cells

The integrity of the endothelial barrier is required to maintain vascular homeostasis and fluid balance between the circulatory system and surrounding tissues and to prevent the development of vascular disease. However, the origin of the newly developed endothelial cells is still controversial. Stem and progenitor cells have the potential to differentiate into endothelial cell lines and stimulate vascular regeneration in a paracrine/autocrine fashion. The one source of new endothelial cells was believed to come from the bone marrow, which was challenged by the recent findings. By administration of new techniques, including genetic cell lineage tracing and single cell RNA sequencing, more solid data were obtained that support the concept of stem/progenitor cells for regenerating damaged endothelium. Specifically, it was found that tissue resident endothelial progenitors located in the vessel wall were crucial for endothelial repair. In this review, we summarized the latest advances in stem and progenitor cell research in endothelial regeneration through findings from animal models and discussed clinical data to indicate the future direction of stem cell therapy.

Stem cell therapy for dilated cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Stem cell therapy (SCT) has been proposed as an alternative treatment for dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), nonetheless its effectiveness remains debatable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of SCT in adults with non-ischaemic DCM.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Embase for relevant trials in November 2020. We also searched two clinical trials registers in May 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing stem/progenitor cells with no cells in adults with non-ischaemic DCM. We included co-interventions such as the administration of stem cell mobilizing agents. Studies were classified and analysed into three categories according to the comparison intervention, which consisted of no intervention/placebo, cell mobilization with cytokines, or a different mode of SCT. The first two comparisons (no cells in the control group) served to assess the efficacy of SCT while the third (different mode of SCT) served to complement the review with information about safety and other information of potential utility for a better understanding of the effects of SCT.

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. We could not explore potential effect modifiers through subgroup analyses as they were deemed uninformative due to the scarce number of trials available. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We created summary of findings tables using GRADEpro GDT. We focused our summary of findings on all-cause mortality, safety, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), performance status, and major adverse cardiovascular events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs involving 762 participants (452 cell therapy and 310 controls). Only one study was at low risk of bias in all domains. There were many shortcomings in the publications that did not allow a precise assessment of the risk of bias in many domains. Due to the nature of the intervention, the main source of potential bias was lack of blinding of participants (performance bias). Frequently, the format of the continuous data available was not ideal for use in the meta-analysis and forced us to seek strategies for transforming data in a usable format. We are uncertain whether SCT reduces all-cause mortality in people with DCM compared to no intervention/placebo (mean follow-up 12 months) (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.31; I² = 0%; studies = 7, participants = 361; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether SCT increases the risk of procedural complications associated with cells injection in people with DCM (data could not be pooled; studies = 7; participants = 361; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether SCT improves HRQoL (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.62, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.23; I² = 72%; studies = 5, participants = 272; very low-certainty evidence) and functional capacity (6-minute walk test) (mean difference (MD) 70.12 m, 95% CI -5.28 to 145.51; I² = 87%; studies = 5, participants = 230; very low-certainty evidence). SCT may result in a slight functional class (New York Heart Association) improvement (data could not be pooled; studies = 6, participants = 398; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported major adverse cardiovascular events as defined in our protocol. SCT may not increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmia (data could not be pooled; studies = 8, participants = 504; low-certainty evidence). When comparing SCT to cell mobilization with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), we are uncertain whether SCT reduces all-cause mortality (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.31; I² = 39%; studies = 3, participants = 195; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether SCT increases the risk of procedural complications associated with cells injection (studies = 1, participants = 60; very low-certainty evidence). SCT may not improve HRQoL (MD 4.61 points, 95% CI -5.62 to 14.83; studies = 1, participants = 22; low-certainty evidence). SCT may improve functional capacity (6-minute walk test) (MD 140.14 m, 95% CI 119.51 to 160.77; I² = 0%; studies = 2, participants = 155; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported MACE as defined in our protocol or ventricular arrhythmia. The most commonly reported outcomes across studies were based on physiological measures of cardiac function where there were some beneficial effects suggesting potential benefits of SCT in people with non-ischaemic DCM. However, it is unclear if this intermediate effects translates into clinical benefits for these patients. With regard to specific aspects related to the modality of cell therapy and its delivery, uncertainties remain as subgroup analyses could not be performed as planned, making it necessary to wait for the publication of several studies that are currently in progress before any firm conclusion can be reached.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether SCT in people with DCM reduces the risk of all-cause mortality and procedural complications, improves HRQoL, and performance status (exercise capacity). SCT may improve functional class (NYHA), compared to usual care (no cells). Similarly, when compared to G-CSF, we are also uncertain whether SCT in people with DCM reduces the risk of all-cause mortality although some studies within this comparison observed a favourable effect that should be interpreted with caution. SCT may not improve HRQoL but may improve to some extent performance status (exercise capacity). Very low-quality evidence reflects uncertainty regarding procedural complications. These suggested beneficial effects of SCT, although uncertain due to the very low certainty of the evidence, are accompanied by favourable effects on some physiological measures of cardiac function. Presently, the most effective mode of administration of SCT and the population that could benefit the most is unclear. Therefore, it seems reasonable that use of SCT in people with DCM is limited to clinical research settings. Results of ongoing studies are likely to modify these conclusions.

All Roads Lead to Rome (the Heart): Cell Retention and Outcomes From Various Delivery Routes of Cell Therapy Products to the Heart

In the past decades, numerous preclinical studies and several clinical trials have evidenced the feasibility of cell transplantation in treating heart diseases. Over the years, different delivery routes of cell therapy have emerged and broadened the width of the field. However, a common hurdle is shared by all current delivery routes: low cell retention. A myriad of studies confirm that cell retention plays a crucial role in the success of cell-mediated cardiac repair. It is important for any delivery route to maintain donor cells in the recipient heart for enough time to not only proliferate by themselves, but also to send paracrine signals to surrounding damaged heart cells and repair them. In this review, we first undertake an in-depth study of primary theories of cell loss, including low efficiency in cell injection, "washout" effects, and cell death, and then organize the literature from the past decade that focuses on cell transplantation to the heart using various cell delivery routes, including intracoronary injection, systemic intravenous injection, retrograde coronary venous injection, and intramyocardial injection. In addition to a recapitulation of these approaches, we also clearly evaluate their strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, we conduct comparative research on the cell retention rate and functional outcomes of these delivery routes. Finally, we extend our discussion to state-of-the-art bioengineering techniques that enhance cell retention, as well as alternative delivery routes, such as intrapericardial delivery. A combination of these novel strategies and more accurate assessment methods will help to address the hurdle of low cell retention and boost the efficacy of cell transplantation to the heart.

Cell Therapy in Patients with Heart Failure: A Comprehensive Review and Emerging Concepts

This review summarizes the results of clinical trials of cell therapy in patients with heart failure (HF). In contrast to acute myocardial infarction (where results have been consistently negative for more than a decade), in the setting of HF the results of Phase I–II trials are encouraging, both in ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Several well-designed Phase II studies have met their primary endpoint and demonstrated an efficacy signal, which is remarkable considering that only one dose of cells was used. That an efficacy signal was seen 6–12 months after a single treatment provides a rationale for larger, rigorous trials. Importantly, no safety concerns have emerged. Amongst the various cell types tested, mesenchymal stromal cells derived from bone marrow (BM), umbilical cord, or adipose tissue show the greatest promise. In contrast, embryonic stem cells are not likely to become a clinical therapy. Unfractionated BM cells and cardiosphere-derived cells have been abandoned. The cell products used for HF will most likely be allogeneic. New approaches, such as repeated cell treatment and intravenous delivery, may revolutionize the field. As is the case for most new therapies, the development of cell therapies for HF has been slow, plagued by multifarious problems, and punctuated by many setbacks; at present, the utility of cell therapy in HF remains to be determined. What the field needs is rigorous, well-designed Phase III trials. The most important things to move forward are to keep an open mind, avoid preconceived notions, and let ourselves be guided by the evidence.

Can Stem Cells Improve Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Heart Failure? A Literature Review of Skeletal Myoblasts and Bone Marrow-Derived Cells

Heart failure is a life-threatening condition that affects millions worldwide and is only expected to get worse with an ageing population. Current treatment regimens rely on medical therapy and heart transplantation as a last resort. Stem cells have been undergoing clinical trials worldwide as a hope for a new and safe clinical treatment. Skeletal myoblasts and bone marrow-derived stem cells are two types of stem cells being tested. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy of these two types of stem cells for heart failure therapy. Data were searched in PubMed using both regular and Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) keywords (stem cells, therapy, heart failure) and then filtered using inclusion/exclusion criteria (language, species, publication date, and age). In total, 31 research articles were reviewed (14 clinical trials, four randomized control trials, nine review articles, one case report, one comparative study, one systematic review, and one categorized as a systematic review and meta-analysis). Both skeletal myoblasts and bone marrow-derived stem cells showed mixed results in improving left ventricular ejection fraction in heart failure patients in the majority of studies. Larger studies need to be done to further investigate the efficacy of stem cells as a therapy for heart failure.

Larger End-Diastolic Volume Associates With Response to Cell Therapy in Patients With Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and the response to cell therapy in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NICM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Five-year registry data from 133 consecutive patients with NICM who underwent CD34⁺ cell treatment were analyzed. All patients received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor; CD34⁺ cells were collected by apheresis and delivered by transendocardial injections. Patients with baseline LVEDV less than 200 mL (group A; n=72) and patients with LVEDV 200 to 370 mL (group B; n=54) were included. Patients with LVEDV greater than 370 mL were excluded (n=7). Favorable ejection fraction response was pre-defined by improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) greater than or equal to 5% at 1 y post-cell therapy.

RESULTS

At baseline, groups A and B were comparable with regards to age (52±11 y in group A vs 53±10 y in group B; P=.95), sex (male: 79% vs 83%, respectively; P=.55), creatinine (1.07±0.28 mg/dL vs 1.03±0.21 mg/dL, respectively; P=.21), or N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide (1454±1658 pg/mL vs 1589±1338 pg/mL, respectively; P=.80). Baseline LVEF was higher in group A (32.8±8.7%) than in group B (30.2±8.7%; P=.03). During follow-up, there were four deaths in group A (5.6%), and 2 in group B (3.7%, P=.63). At 1-year post-cell therapy, LVEDV decreased significantly in group B (-56±30 mL; P=.003), but not in group A (+12±97 mL; P=.13). On multivariate analysis, baseline LVEDV was an independent correlate of favorable response in LVEF to therapy (P=.02).

CONCLUSION

Larger LVEDV was associated with more pronounced increase in LVEF after transendocardial CD34⁺ cell therapy in NICM patients, informing target individuals with the highest likelihood of regenerative response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02445534.

Stem Cell Therapy for Chronic and Advanced Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss recent advances in the field of cell therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) of ischemic (iCMP) and nonischemic (dCMP) etiology, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and in advanced heart failure patients undergoing mechanical circulatory support (LVAD).

RECENT FINDINGS

In HFrEF patients (iCMP and dCMP cohorts), autologous and/or allogeneic cell therapy was shown to improve myocardial performance, patients' functional capacity, and neurohumoral activation. In HFpEF patient population, the concept of cell therapy in novel and remains largely unexplored. However, initial data are very encouraging and suggest at least a similar benefit in improvements of myocardial performance (also diastolic function of the left ventricle), exercise capacity, and neurohumoral activation. Recently, cell therapy was explored in the sickest population of advanced heart failure patients undergoing LVAD support also showing a potential benefit in promoting myocardial reverse remodeling and recovery. In the past decade, several cell therapy-based clinical trials showed promising results in various chronic and advanced heart failure patient cohorts. Future cell treatment strategies should aim for more personalized therapeutic approaches by defining optimal stem cell type or their combination, dose, and delivery method for an individual patient adjusted for patient's age and stage/duration of heart failure.

Clinical Safety Profile of Transendocardial Catheter Injection Systems: A Plea for Uniform Reporting

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to characterize the clinical safety profile of transendocardial injection catheters (TIC) reported in the published literature.

BACKGROUND

Transendocardial delivery is a minimally invasive approach to deliver potential therapeutic agents directly into the myocardium. The rate of adverse events across TIC is uncertain.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed for trial publications using TIC. Procedure-associated adverse event data were abstracted, pooled and compared across catheters for active treatment and placebo injected patients. The transendocardial injection associated serious adverse events (TEI-SAE) was defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days and cardiac perforation causing death or requiring evacuation, serious intraprocedural arrhythmias and serious coronary artery or peripheral vascular complications.

RESULTS

The search identified 4 TIC systems: a helical needle (HN), an electro-anatomically tracked straight needle (EAM-SN), a straight needle without tracking elements (SN), and a curved needle (CN). Of 1799 patients who underwent transendocardial injections, the combined TEI-SAE was 3.4% across all catheters, and 1.1%, 3.3%, 7.1%, and 8.3% for HN, EAM-SN, SN and CN, respectively. However, TIC procedure duration and post procedural cardiac biomarker levels were reported in only 24% and 36% of published trials, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Transendocardial injection is associated with varied TEI-SAE but the data are very limited. The HN catheter appeared to be associated with lower TEI-SAE, versus other catheters. Procedure duration and post procedure cardiac biomarker levels were under-reported. Clearly, standardized, procedure-related event reporting for trials involving transcatheter delivery would improve our understanding of complications across different systems.