Repeated intracoronary infusion of peripheral blood stem cells with G-CSF in patients with refractory ischemic heart failure--a pilot study

The Use of Hematopoietic Stem Cells for Heart Failure: A Systematic Review

The purpose of this review is to summarize the current understanding of the therapeutic effect of stem cell-based therapies, including hematopoietic stem cells, for the treatment of ischemic heart damage. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted electronic searches in MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We screened 592 studies, and included RCTs, observational studies, and cohort studies that examined the effect of hematopoietic stem cell therapy in adult patients with heart failure. Studies that involved pediatric patients, mesenchymal stem cell therapy, and non-heart failure (HF) studies were excluded from our review. Out of the 592 studies, 7 studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall, administration of hematopoietic stem cells (via intracoronary or myocardial infarct) led to positive cardiac outcomes such as improvements in pathological left-ventricular remodeling, perfusion following acute myocardial infarction, and NYHA symptom class. Additionally, combined death, rehospitalization for heart failure, and infarction were significantly lower in patients treated with bone marrow-derived hematopoietic stem cells. Our review demonstrates that hematopoietic stem cell administration can lead to positive cardiac outcomes for HF patients. Future studies should aim to increase female representation and non-ischemic HF patients.

Cell Therapy in the Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease

Heart failure is a leading cause of death in patients who have suffered a myocardial infarction. Despite the timely use of modern reperfusion therapies such as thrombolysis, surgical revascularization and balloon angioplasty, they are sometimes unable to prevent the development of significant areas of myocardial damage and subsequent heart failure. Research efforts have focused on developing strategies to improve the functional status of myocardial injury areas. Consequently, the restoration of cardiac function using cell therapy is an exciting prospect. This review describes the characteristics of various cell types relevant to cellular cardiomyoplasty and presents findings from experimental and clinical studies investigating cell therapy for coronary heart disease. Cell delivery methods, optimal dosage and potential treatment mechanisms are discussed.

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.

TNF-α Predicts Endothelial Function and Number of CD34+ Cells after Stimulation with G-CSF in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure

Patients with advanced heart failure (HF) have reduced cardiac output and impaired peripheral blood flow, which diminishes endothelial shear stress and consequently flow-mediated dilatation (FMD). The aim of our study was to find out whether endothelial dysfunction is associated with the number of CD34+ cells and TNF-α levels in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic HF after stimulation with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). We included 56 patients with advanced HF (LVEF < 35%). Eighteen patients (32.14%) had ischemic and 38 (67.86%) patients had non-ischemic HF. FMD of the brachial artery was performed before the patients underwent 5-day bone marrow stimulation with daily subcutaneous injections of G-CSF (5 μg/kg bid). On the fifth day peripheral blood CD34+ cell count was measured. No statistically significant differences were found between the patient groups in NT-proBNP levels ((1575 (425−2439) vs. 1273 (225−2239)) pg/mL; p = 0.40), peripheral blood CD34+ cell count ((67.54 ± 102.32 vs. 89.76 ± 71.21) × 106; p = 0.32), TNF-α ((8.72 ± 10.30 vs. 4.96 ± 6.16) ng/mL; p = 0.13) and FMD (6.7 ± 5.4 vs. 7.2 ± 5.9%; p = 0.76). In a linear regression model, only FMD (p = 0.001) and TNF-α (p = 0.003) emerged as statistically significant predictors of CD34+ cells counts. Our study suggests that TNF-α is a good predictor of impaired endothelial function and of CD34+ cells mobilization after G-CSF stimulation in patients with advanced HF of ischemic and non-ischemic origin.

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.

Regeneration-associated cells improve recovery from myocardial infarction through enhanced vasculogenesis, anti-inflammation, and cardiomyogenesis

Background

Considering the impaired function of regenerative cells in myocardial infarction (MI) patients with comorbidities and associated risk factors, cell therapy to enhance the regenerative microenvironment was designed using regeneration-associated cells (RACs), including endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) and anti-inflammatory cells.

Methods

RACs were prepared by quality and quantity control culture of blood mononuclear cells (QQMNCs). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMNCs) were isolated from Lewis rats and conditioned for 5 days using a medium containing stem cell factors, thrombopoietin, Flt-3 ligand, vascular endothelial growth factor, and interleukin-6 to generate QQMNCs.

Results

A 5.3-fold increase in the definitive colony-forming EPCs and vasculogenic EPCs was observed, in comparison to naïve PBMNCs. QQMNCs were enriched with EPCs (28.9-fold, P<0.0019) and M2 macrophages (160.3-fold, P<0.0002). Genes involved in angiogenesis (angpt1, angpt2, and vegfb), stem/progenitors (c-kit and sca-1), and anti-inflammation (arg-1, erg-2, tgfb, and foxp3) were upregulated in QQMNCs. For in vivo experiments, cells were administered into syngeneic rat models of MI. QQMNC-transplanted group (QQ-Tx) preserved cardiac function and fraction shortening 28 days post-MI in comparison with PBMNCs-transplanted (PB-Tx) (P<0.0001) and Control (P<0.0008) groups. QQ-Tx showed enhanced angiogenesis and reduced interstitial left ventricular fibrosis, along with a decrease in neutrophils and an increase in M2 macrophages in the acute phase of MI. Cell tracing studies revealed that intravenously administered QQMNCs preferentially homed to ischemic tissues via blood circulation. QQ-Tx showed markedly upregulated early cardiac transcriptional cofactors (Nkx2-5, 29.8-fold, and Gata-4, 5.2-fold) as well as c-kit (4.5-fold) while these markers were downregulated in PB-Tx. In QQ-Tx animals, de novo blood vessels formed a “Biological Bypass”, observed macroscopically and microscopically, while PB-Tx and Control-Tx groups showed severe fibrotic adhesion to the surrounding tissues, but no epicardial blood vessels.

Conclusion

QQMNCs conferred potent angiogenic and anti-inflammatory properties to the regenerative microenvironment, enhancing myocardiogenesis and functional recovery of rat MI hearts.

Apheresis on aged patients/donors with complicated backgrounds like ischemic heart disease, arrhythmia, and others

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) are currently one of the most important stem cell sources for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation as well as cell therapy for ischemic heart disease or critical limb ischemia. Thus, it is sometimes necessary to collect autologous PBSCs from donors who have comorbidities. In terms yield, a sufficient number of PBSCs can be collected from donors with comorbidities for performing cell therapy if their age is < 60 years or up to a maximum of 70 years, although the number of PBSCs collected from older donors would probably be lower than that obtained from younger donors. On the other hand, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration sometimes results in severe adverse events (AEs), such as ischemic heart disease and vascular thrombosis. Therefore, it is very important to perform strict medical check-ups according to the standards for donor operations in each country before apheresis. The apheresis procedure and G-CSF administration should be performed after administering the appropriate treatment. There is very less information available regarding AEs related to citrate administration during apheresis in aged donors with complicated medical histories. Medical staff should have knowledge of the electrocardiogram (ECG) QTc prolongation that occurs during apheresis owing to hypocalcemia caused by citrate administration, necessitating electrocardiographic monitoring of patients. Calcium should be administered during apheresis to prevent citrate related symptoms.

Cellular therapies for chronic ischemic heart failure

The development of stem cell therapies for chronic ischemic heart failure is highly sought after to attempt to improve morbidity and mortality of this prevalent disease. This article reviews clinical trials that investigate stem cell therapy for chronic ischemic heart failure. To generate this review article, PubMed was searched using keywords "stem cell therapy heart failure" with the article type "Clinical Trial" selected on 10/04/2016. The raw search yielded 156 articles; 53 articles were selected for inclusion in the review between the original literature search and manual research/cross-referencing. Additional reviews and original articles were also manually researched and cross-referenced. Cellular-based therapies utilizing peripheral blood progenitor cells, bone marrow cells, mesenchymal stem cells, cells of cardiac origin, and embryonic stem cells have yielded mixed results, but some studies have shown modest efficacy. Skeletal myoblasts raised concerns about safety due to arrhythmias. Optimizing cell type and delivery method will be of critical importance in enhancing efficacy of therapy within various subsets of chronic ischemic heart failure patients. Although much more work needs to be done to optimize treatment strategies, developing stem cell therapies for chronic ischemic heart failure could be of critical importance to lessen the impactful health burden that heart failure has on patients and society.

Stem cell therapy for chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure

BACKGROUND

A promising approach to the treatment of chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure is the use of stem cells. The last decade has seen a plethora of randomised controlled trials developed worldwide, which have generated conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

The critical evaluation of clinical evidence on the safety and efficacy of autologous adult bone marrow-derived stem/progenitor cells as a treatment for chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, and four ongoing trial databases for relevant trials up to 14 December 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials comparing autologous adult stem/progenitor cells with no cells in people with chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure. We included co-interventions, such as primary angioplasty, surgery, or administration of stem cell mobilising agents, when administered to treatment and control arms equally.

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 and explored substantial heterogeneity (I2 greater than 50%) through subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADEprofiler (GRADEpro), excluding studies with a high or unclear risk of selection bias. We focused our summary of findings on long-term follow-up of mortality, morbidity outcomes, and left ventricular ejection fraction measured by magnetic resonance imaging.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 randomised controlled trials involving 1907 participants (1114 cell therapy, 793 controls) in this review update. Twenty-three trials were at high or unclear risk of selection bias. Other sources of potential bias included lack of blinding of participants (12 trials) and full or partial commercial sponsorship (13 trials).Cell therapy reduced the incidence of long-term mortality (≥ 12 months) (risk ratio (RR) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 0.87; participants = 491; studies = 9; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Periprocedural adverse events associated with the mapping or cell/placebo injection procedure were infrequent. Cell therapy was also associated with a long-term reduction in the incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.97; participants = 345; studies = 5; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) and incidence of arrhythmias (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.99; participants = 82; studies = 1; low-quality evidence). However, we found no evidence that cell therapy affects the risk of rehospitalisation for heart failure (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.09; participants = 375; studies = 6; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) or composite incidence of mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and/or rehospitalisation for heart failure (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.08; participants = 141; studies = 3; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence), or long-term left ventricular ejection fraction when measured by magnetic resonance imaging (mean difference -1.60, 95% CI -8.70 to 5.50; participants = 25; studies = 1; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found low-quality evidence that treatment with bone marrow-derived stem/progenitor cells reduces mortality and improves left ventricular ejection fraction over short- and long-term follow-up and may reduce the incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction and improve New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification in people with chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure. These findings should be interpreted with caution, as event rates were generally low, leading to a lack of precision.

Repeated Intramyocardial Bone Marrow Cell Injection in Previously Responding Patients With Refractory Angina Again Improves Myocardial Perfusion, Anginal Complaints, and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

Intramyocardial bone marrow cell injection is associated with improvements in myocardial perfusion and anginal symptoms in patients with refractory angina pectoris. This study evaluates the effect of repeated intramyocardial bone marrow cell injection in patients with residual or recurrent myocardial ischemia.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twenty-three patients (17 men; 69±9 years) who had improved myocardial perfusion after the first injection but had residual or recurrent angina and ischemia on single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging were included. Patients again received intramyocardial injection of 100×10(6) autologous bone marrow mononuclear cells, 4.6±2.5 years after their first injection. No periprocedural complications occurred. Myocardial perfusion assessed using single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging improved from a summed stress score of 27.3±5.8 at baseline to 24.5±4.4 at 3 months (P=0.002) and 25.4±4.9 at 12 months of follow-up (P=0.002). Perfusion improvement after 3 months was comparable with the effect of the first injection (P=0.379). Anginal complaints improved ≤12 months after cell injection in Canadian Cardiovascular Society score (mean change at 3, 6, and 12 months: 0.6±0.9%, 0.5±0.9%, and 0.6±0.9%, respectively; Pslope=0.007, first versus repeated; P=0.188) and in quality of life score as measured by Seattle Angina Questionnaire (mean change at 3, 6, and 12 months: 7±14%, 8±14%, and 7±15%, respectively; Pslope=0.020, first versus repeated; P=0.126).

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated bone marrow cell injection in previously responding patients with refractory angina is associated with improvements in myocardial perfusion, anginal complaints, and quality of life score ≤12 months of follow-up.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.trialregister.nl. Unique identifier: NTR2664.

The hematopoietic system in the context of regenerative medicine

Hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) represent the prototype stem cell within the body. Since their discovery, HSC have been the focus of intensive research, and have proven invaluable clinically to restore hematopoiesis following inadvertent radiation exposure and following radio/chemotherapy to eliminate hematologic tumors. While they were originally discovered in the bone marrow, HSC can also be isolated from umbilical cord blood and can be "mobilized" peripheral blood, making them readily available in relatively large quantities. While their ability to repopulate the entire hematopoietic system would already guarantee HSC a valuable place in regenerative medicine, the finding that hematopoietic chimerism can induce immunological tolerance to solid organs and correct autoimmune diseases has dramatically broadened their clinical utility. The demonstration that these cells, through a variety of mechanisms, can also promote repair/regeneration of non-hematopoietic tissues as diverse as liver, heart, and brain has further increased their clinical value. The goal of this review is to provide the reader with a brief glimpse into the remarkable potential HSC possess, and to highlight their tremendous value as therapeutics in regenerative medicine.

Cell therapy for human ischemic heart diseases: critical review and summary of the clinical experiences

A decade ago, stem or progenitor cells held the promise of tissue regeneration in human myocardium, with the expectation that these therapies could rescue ischemic myocyte damage, enhance vascular density and rebuild injured myocardium. The accumulated evidence in 2014 indicates, however, that the therapeutic success of these cells is modest and the tissue regeneration involves much more complex processes than cell-related biologics. As the quest for the ideal cell or combination of cells continues, alternative cell types, such as resident cardiac cells, adipose-derived or phenotypic modified stem or progenitor cells have also been applied, with the objective of increasing both the number and the retention of the reparative cells in the myocardium. Two main delivery routes (intracoronary and percutaneous intramyocardial) of stem cells are currently used preferably for patients with recent acute myocardial infarction or ischemic cardiomyopathy. Other delivery modes, such as surgical or intravenous via peripheral veins or coronary sinus have also been utilized with less success. Due to the difficult recruitment of patients within conceivable timeframe into cardiac regenerative trials, meta-analyses of human cardiac cell-based studies have tried to gather sufficient number of subjects to present a statistical compelling statement, reporting modest success with a mean increase of 0.9-6.1% in left ventricular global ejection fraction. Additionally, nearly half of the long-term studies reported the disappearance of the initial benefit of this treatment. Beside further extensive efforts to increase the efficacy of currently available methods, pre-clinical experiments using new techniques such as tissue engineering or exploiting paracrine effect hold promise to regenerate injured human cardiac tissue.

Stem cell therapy for chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure

BACKGROUND

A promising approach to the treatment of chronic ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and heart failure is the use of stem cells. The last decade has seen a plethora of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) developed worldwide which have generated conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

The critical evaluation of clinical evidence on the safety and efficacy of autologous adult bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSC) as a treatment for chronic ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and heart failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 3), MEDLINE (from 1950), EMBASE (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1982) and the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1980), together with ongoing trial databases, for relevant trials up to 31st March 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies included RCTs comparing autologous adult stem/progenitor cells with no autologous stem/progenitor cells in participants with chronic IHD and heart failure. Co-interventions such as primary angioplasty, surgery or administration of stem cell mobilising agents, were included where administered to treatment and control arms equally.

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 fixed-effect meta-analyses. We evaluated heterogeneity using the I² statistic; we explored considerable heterogeneity (I² > 75%) using a random-effects model and subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We include 23 RCTs involving 1255 participants in this review. Risk of bias was generally low, with the majority of studies reporting appropriate methods of randomisation and blinding, Autologous bone marrow stem cell treatment reduced the incidence of mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.53, P = 0.0001, 8 studies, 494 participants, low quality evidence) and rehospitalisation due to heart failure (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.94, P = 0.04, 2 studies, 198 participants, low quality evidence) in the long term (≥12 months). The treatment had no clear effect on mortality (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.41, P = 0.30, 21 studies, 1138 participants, low quality evidence) or rehospitalisation due to heart failure (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.06, P = 0.06, 4 studies, 236 participants, low quality evidence) in the short term (< 12 months), which is compatible with benefit, no difference or harm. The treatment was also associated with a reduction in left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV) (mean difference (MD) -14.64 ml, 95% CI -20.88 ml to -8.39 ml, P < 0.00001, 3 studies, 153 participants, moderate quality evidence) and stroke volume index (MD 6.52, 95% CI 1.51 to 11.54, P = 0.01, 2 studies, 62 participants, moderate quality evidence), and an improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD 2.62%, 95% CI 0.50% to 4.73%, P = 0.02, 6 studies, 254 participants, moderate quality evidence), all at long-term follow-up. Overall, we observed a reduction in functional class (New York Heart Association (NYHA) class) in favour of BMSC treatment during short-term follow-up (MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.19, P = 0.005, 11 studies, 486 participants, moderate quality evidence) and long-term follow-up (MD -0.91, 95% CI -1.38 to -0.44, P = 0.0002, 4 studies, 196 participants, moderate quality evidence), as well as a difference in Canadian Cardiovascular Society score in favour of BMSC (MD -0.81, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.07, P = 0.03, 8 studies, 379 participants, moderate quality evidence). Of 19 trials in which adverse events were reported, adverse events relating to the BMSC treatment or procedure occurred in only four individuals. No long-term adverse events were reported. Subgroup analyses conducted for outcomes such as LVEF and NYHA class revealed that (i) route of administration, (ii) baseline LVEF, (iii) cell type, and (iv) clinical condition are important factors that may influence treatment effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found moderate quality evidence that BMSC treatment improves LVEF. Unlike in trials where BMSC were administered following acute myocardial infarction (AMI), we found some evidence for a potential beneficial clinical effect in terms of mortality and performance status in the long term (after at least one year) in people who suffer from chronic IHD and heart failure, although the quality of evidence was low.

Cell delivery routes for stem cell therapy to the heart: current and future approaches

An important factor to determine the success of stem cell therapy to the heart is the choice of cell delivery route. This will affect the fate of donor cells and subsequently influence the outcome of treatment; however, there is currently no optimum cell delivery route appropriate for every disease condition or every donor cell type. This review summarises currently available approaches for administering cells to the heart, with a particular focus on cell retention/survival and the therapeutic benefits seen in preclinical and clinical studies. Two major approaches are intracoronary and intramyocardial injection, which have been widely used for the delivery of various types of cells. Although there are advantages to both approaches, donor cell retention and survival are poor using these methods, potentially limiting therapeutic effects. Various attempts to improve current approaches, along with the development of emerging new approaches, are also described and discussed in this review.

Challenges for heart disease stem cell therapy

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of death worldwide. The use of stem cells to improve recovery of the injured heart after myocardial infarction (MI) is an important emerging therapeutic strategy. However, recent reviews of clinical trials of stem cell therapy for MI and ischemic heart disease recovery report that less than half of the trials found only small improvements in cardiac function. In clinical trials, bone marrow, peripheral blood, or umbilical cord blood cells were used as the source of stem cells delivered by intracoronary infusion. Some trials administered only a stem cell mobilizing agent that recruits endogenous sources of stem cells. Important challenges to improve the effectiveness of stem cell therapy for CVD include: (1) improved identification, recruitment, and expansion of autologous stem cells; (2) identification of mobilizing and homing agents that increase recruitment; and (3) development of strategies to improve stem cell survival and engraftment of both endogenous and exogenous sources of stem cells. This review is an overview of stem cell therapy for CVD and discusses the challenges these three areas present for maximum optimization of the efficacy of stem cell therapy for heart disease, and new strategies in progress.