Comparison of freshly cultured versus freshly thawed (cryopreserved) mesenchymal stem cells in preclinical in vivo models of inflammation: a protocol for a preclinical systematic review and meta-analysis.
Animal model
Cryopreserved
Cultured
Fresh
Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs)
Preclinical systematic review
Thawed
Journal
Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 08 2020
19 08 2020
Historique:
received:
31
10
2019
accepted:
29
07
2020
entrez:
21
8
2020
pubmed:
21
8
2020
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are multipotent cells that demonstrate therapeutic potential for the treatment of acute and chronic inflammatory-mediated conditions. Especially for acute conditions, it is critical to have a readily available freshly thawed (cryopreserved) MSC product for rapid administration. Although controversial, some studies suggest that MSCs may lose their functionality with cryopreservation which in turn could render them non-efficacious. In controlled preclinical in vivo models of inflammation, to determine if there are differences in surrogate measures of preclinical efficacy between freshly cultured and freshly thawed MSCs METHODS/DESIGN: A systematic search for pre-clinical in vivo inflammatory model studies will compare freshly cultured to freshly thawed MSCs from any source. The primary outcomes will include measures of in vivo preclinical efficacy; secondary outcomes will include measures of in vitro MSC potency. Electronic searches for MEDLINE and EMBASE will be constructed and reviewed by the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) process. If applicable, study outcomes will be meta-analyzed using a random effects model. Risk of bias will be assessed by the SYRCLE "Risk of Bias" assessment tool for preclinical in vivo studies. The results of this systematic review will provide translational scientists, clinical trialists, health regulators, and the clinical and public community with the current pre-clinical evidence base related to the efficacy and potency of freshly cultured versus freshly thawed MSCs, help identify evidence gaps, and guide future related research. Protocol is submitted to PROSPERO for registration (pending confirmation) and will be submitted to Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies (CAMARADES) for public posting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are multipotent cells that demonstrate therapeutic potential for the treatment of acute and chronic inflammatory-mediated conditions. Especially for acute conditions, it is critical to have a readily available freshly thawed (cryopreserved) MSC product for rapid administration. Although controversial, some studies suggest that MSCs may lose their functionality with cryopreservation which in turn could render them non-efficacious.
OBJECTIVE
In controlled preclinical in vivo models of inflammation, to determine if there are differences in surrogate measures of preclinical efficacy between freshly cultured and freshly thawed MSCs METHODS/DESIGN: A systematic search for pre-clinical in vivo inflammatory model studies will compare freshly cultured to freshly thawed MSCs from any source. The primary outcomes will include measures of in vivo preclinical efficacy; secondary outcomes will include measures of in vitro MSC potency. Electronic searches for MEDLINE and EMBASE will be constructed and reviewed by the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) process. If applicable, study outcomes will be meta-analyzed using a random effects model. Risk of bias will be assessed by the SYRCLE "Risk of Bias" assessment tool for preclinical in vivo studies.
DISCUSSION
The results of this systematic review will provide translational scientists, clinical trialists, health regulators, and the clinical and public community with the current pre-clinical evidence base related to the efficacy and potency of freshly cultured versus freshly thawed MSCs, help identify evidence gaps, and guide future related research.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
Protocol is submitted to PROSPERO for registration (pending confirmation) and will be submitted to Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies (CAMARADES) for public posting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32814560
doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01437-z
pii: 10.1186/s13643-020-01437-z
pmc: PMC7437051
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
188Références
Gut. 2009 Jul;58(7):929-39
pubmed: 19136511
Gastroenterology. 2015 Oct;149(4):918-27.e6
pubmed: 26116801
Stem Cells. 2006 Nov;24(11):2466-77
pubmed: 17071860
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Blood. 2007 Nov 15;110(10):3499-506
pubmed: 17664353
Haematologica. 2011 Jul;96(7):1072-6
pubmed: 21393326
Lancet. 2004 May 1;363(9419):1439-41
pubmed: 15121408
Transplantation. 2015 Aug;99(8):1681-90
pubmed: 25822648
Curr Med Res Opin. 2019 Sep;35(9):1631-1641
pubmed: 30977685
Exp Hematol. 2002 Jan;30(1):42-8
pubmed: 11823036
Stem Cells Transl Med. 2015 Jun;4(6):615-24
pubmed: 25925837
Am J Pathol. 2012 Nov;181(5):1681-92
pubmed: 23083833
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 May 21;8:32
pubmed: 18492289
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014 Mar;20(3):375-81
pubmed: 24321746
Stem Cells. 2012 Jul;30(7):1575-8
pubmed: 22553154
Cytotherapy. 2012 Feb;14(2):147-52
pubmed: 22029655
Arch Iran Med. 2015 Jun;18(6):336-44
pubmed: 26058927
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jan;190(1):239-45
pubmed: 14749666
Chest. 2013 Jun;143(6):1590-1598
pubmed: 23172272
J Pediatr. 2014 May;164(5):966-972.e6
pubmed: 24508444
Cytotherapy. 2015 Feb;17(2):186-98
pubmed: 25593077
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010 Oct 15;182(8):1047-57
pubmed: 20558630
Blood. 2002 May 15;99(10):3838-43
pubmed: 11986244
Nutr Rev. 2007 Dec;65(12 Pt 2):S140-6
pubmed: 18240538
Lancet Respir Med. 2015 Jan;3(1):24-32
pubmed: 25529339
Cytotherapy. 2016 Feb;18(2):151-9
pubmed: 26724220
Stem Cells. 2014 Sep;32(9):2430-42
pubmed: 24805247
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010 Jun;16(6):838-47
pubmed: 20109568
Stem Cells. 2013 Oct;31(10):2033-41
pubmed: 23766124
Cytotherapy. 2015 Aug;17(8):1009-14
pubmed: 25769789
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217
Environ Int. 2016 Jul-Aug;92-93:695-706
pubmed: 26872872
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Mar 26;14:43
pubmed: 24667063
Oper Dent. 2014 Jan-Feb;39(1):E31-44
pubmed: 23937401
Transplantation. 2014 Jun 15;97(11):e66-8
pubmed: 24887752
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Jan;12(1):64-71
pubmed: 23872668
Cytotherapy. 2013 Jan;15(1):2-8
pubmed: 23260081
Trials. 2011 Mar 02;12:62
pubmed: 21366911
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018 Feb 1;197(3):337-347
pubmed: 28960096
Thorax. 2015 Jul;70(7):625-35
pubmed: 25986435
Stem Cells. 2014 May;32(5):1254-66
pubmed: 24449146
Sci Rep. 2016 May 23;6:26463
pubmed: 27212469
Nat Rev Immunol. 2008 Sep;8(9):726-36
pubmed: 19172693
N Engl J Med. 1957 Sep 12;257(11):491-6
pubmed: 13464965
Scand J Immunol. 2003 Jan;57(1):11-20
pubmed: 12542793