Human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells attenuate collagen antibody-induced autoimmune arthritis by inducing expression of FCGIIB receptors

Bibliometric and visualization analysis of mesenchymal stem cells and rheumatoid arthritis (from 2012 to 2021)

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease that can lead to joint deformity and loss of function. Recent studies have shown great progress in the research of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in RA. However, thus far, there have been no bibliometric or visualization analyses in this field. This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the general information and research hotspots of MSCs and RA.

Methods

Articles relevant to MSCs and RA, published between 2012 and 2021, were searched using the Web of Science Core Collection database. Irrelevant publications were excluded from the analysis. Bibliometric and visualization analyses were conducted using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Scimago Graphica.

Results

A total of 577 articles were analyzed. The annual number of publications increased from 2012 to 2017 and plateaued from 2017 to 2021. China and the USA had the largest number of publications. Collaboration among different organizations mainly occurs between institutes of the same country. Stem Cell Research and Therapy and Frontiers in Immunology were the most popular journals in this field. All the top 20 co-cited authors had a positive co-citation relationship. The top references indicate that MSCs can contribute to RA research and treatment mainly via immunomodulation. From 2012 to 2021, “collagen-induced arthritis,” “immunomodulation,” and “therapy” were some of the keywords associated with MSCs and RA, while “extracellular vesicles” showed a strong keyword burst from 2019 to 2021.

Conclusion

MSCs and RA have been widely studied in different countries and institutions and by different authors over the last ten years. China and the USA had the largest number of publications. Different types of journals provide admirable sources for researchers. Some keywords, including immunomodulation and extracellular vesicles, may be hot spots in the near future. There will be more basic research and clinical translation of MSCs and RA, and substantial new treatments for RA will soon be developed.

Assessment of mesenchymal stem/stromal cell-based therapy in K/BxN serum transfer-induced arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by synovial hyperplasia and cartilage/bone destruction with systemic comorbidities. Despite advances in understanding the aetiology of RA and novel biologic drugs, a substantial number of individuals with RA remain intolerant or resistant to these therapies. In this context, mesenchymal stem/stromal cell (MSC)-based therapy has emerged as an innovative therapeutic alternative to address unresolved treatment issues for patients with RA thanks to the immunomodulatory properties of these cells. The majority of preclinical studies in MSC-based therapy have been conducted using the well-known collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) mouse model however due to its low incidence, the mouse strain restriction and the prolonged induction phase of collagen-induced arthritis, alternative experimental models of RA have been developed such as K/BxN serum transfer-induced arthritis (STIA), which mimics many of human RA features. In this study, we evaluate whether the K/BxN STIA model could be used as an alternative model to study the immunomodulatory potential of MSC-based therapy. Unexpectedly, our data suggest that adipose-derived MSC-based therapy is unsuitable for modulating the progression of K/BxN serum-transfer arthritis in mice despite the various experimental parameters tested. Based on the differences in the immune status and monocytic/macrophage balance among the different arthritic models, these results could help to identify the cellular targets of the MSCs and, most importantly to predict the RA patients that will respond positively to MSC-based therapy.

Tofacitinib in the treatment of Indian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A post hoc analysis of efficacy and safety in Phase 3 and long-term extension studies over 7 years

OBJECTIVES

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We characterized tofacitinib efficacy/safety in Indian vs rest of the world (ROW; excluding India) RA patients.

METHODS

Efficacy data were pooled for disease-modified antirheumatic drug (DMARD) inadequate responders from Phase (P)3 studies. For Indian patients, ORAL Solo and ORAL Scan; ROW (excluding India), these studies plus ORAL Step, ORAL Sync, and ORAL Standard. Safety data also included ORAL Start (P3; methotrexate-naïve) and ORAL Sequel (long-term extension [LTE] study; data cut-off March 2017) for Indian patients, and these studies plus A3921041 (LTE study; Japanese study) for ROW. Efficacy outcomes at months 3/6: American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission/low disease activity; change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events/100 patient-years) for adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were assessed throughout. Descriptive data underwent no formal comparison.

RESULTS

One-hundred-and-ninety-seven Indian and 3879 ROW patients were included. Compared with ROW patients, Indian patients were younger, had lower body mass index, shorter RA duration, and higher baseline disease activity; most Indian patients were non-smokers and all were biologic DMARD (bDMARD)-naïve. Month 3 ACR20 rates with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily/10 mg twice daily/placebo were 67.4%/82.1%/40.9% (India) and 59.0%/66.1%/28.2% (ROW), and month 6 rates were 76.2%/92.1%/88.9% (India) and 69.0%/74.2%/66.5% (ROW). Month 3/6 improvements in other outcomes were generally numerically greater with tofacitinib vs placebo, and similar in both populations. Compared with ROW, Indian patients had numerically fewer AEs/serious AEs, and similar IRs for discontinuations due to AEs and AESIs, except that tuberculosis (TB) IR was higher in Indian (IR = 1.21; 95% CI 0.49, 2.49) vs ROW patients (IR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.11, 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib efficacy/safety were similar in both populations, except TB IR, which was higher in Indian patients but in line with those in bDMARD-treated RA patients from high-risk countries (IR = 0.00-2.56; TB IR >0.05 [World Health Organization]). Limitations included the small Indian population and baseline differences between populations.