Preclinical systematic review & meta-analysis of cyclosporine for the treatment of myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Meta-analysis cyclosporine A (CsA) ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) preclinical models systematic review

Journal

Annals of translational medicine
ISSN: 2305-5839
Titre abrégé: Ann Transl Med
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101617978

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Historique:
received: 03 02 2022
accepted: 24 05 2022
entrez: 21 10 2022
pubmed: 22 10 2022
medline: 22 10 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Though best known for its immunosuppressant effects, cyclosporine A (CsA) has also been studied as a treatment to mitigate ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) by its inhibition of the mitochondria permeability transition pore (mPTP). Despite numerous preclinical studies supporting its benefit in reducing infarct size following myocardial IRI, large randomized controlled clinical trials have been unable to show a beneficial effect. Exploring existing preclinical data can give us the opportunity to revisit some the assumptions that may have led to the failure of these studies to translate clinically. Herein, we present a systematic review of preclinical studies testing CsA to attenuate myocardial IRI (PROSPERO CRD42020159620). We conducted a systematic search of health research databases Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Web of Science BIOSIS, and Scopus, as well as Cochrane and PROSPERO systematic review databases, on March 9, 2022 for non-human We identified 71 studies, 59 of which were studies of coronary occlusion. Overall, 75% of studies reported a clear positive effect of CsA in mitigating myocardial IRI by some clinically relevant parameter (e.g., infarct size). A meta-analysis including 43 coronary occlusion studies showed an overall reduction in infarct size with CsA treatment (16.09%; 95% CI: -18.50% to -13.67%). Subgroup meta-analyses identified species, age, timing of administration, and duration of ischemia as factors potentially affecting the efficacy of CsA in the setting of myocardial IRI. Our systematic review and meta-analysis identifies questions that have yet to be answered by preclinical studies, highlighting important differences between these and clinical studies that should be addressed prior to proceeding with any further clinical studies using CsA to treat IRI in the heart or other organs. We also use the example of CsA to highlight general considerations for researchers attempting to translate animal studies into the clinical setting.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Though best known for its immunosuppressant effects, cyclosporine A (CsA) has also been studied as a treatment to mitigate ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) by its inhibition of the mitochondria permeability transition pore (mPTP). Despite numerous preclinical studies supporting its benefit in reducing infarct size following myocardial IRI, large randomized controlled clinical trials have been unable to show a beneficial effect. Exploring existing preclinical data can give us the opportunity to revisit some the assumptions that may have led to the failure of these studies to translate clinically. Herein, we present a systematic review of preclinical studies testing CsA to attenuate myocardial IRI (PROSPERO CRD42020159620).
Methods UNASSIGNED
We conducted a systematic search of health research databases Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Web of Science BIOSIS, and Scopus, as well as Cochrane and PROSPERO systematic review databases, on March 9, 2022 for non-human
Results UNASSIGNED
We identified 71 studies, 59 of which were studies of coronary occlusion. Overall, 75% of studies reported a clear positive effect of CsA in mitigating myocardial IRI by some clinically relevant parameter (e.g., infarct size). A meta-analysis including 43 coronary occlusion studies showed an overall reduction in infarct size with CsA treatment (16.09%; 95% CI: -18.50% to -13.67%). Subgroup meta-analyses identified species, age, timing of administration, and duration of ischemia as factors potentially affecting the efficacy of CsA in the setting of myocardial IRI.
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
Our systematic review and meta-analysis identifies questions that have yet to be answered by preclinical studies, highlighting important differences between these and clinical studies that should be addressed prior to proceeding with any further clinical studies using CsA to treat IRI in the heart or other organs. We also use the example of CsA to highlight general considerations for researchers attempting to translate animal studies into the clinical setting.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36267756
doi: 10.21037/atm-22-618
pii: atm-10-18-954
pmc: PMC9577743
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

954

Informations de copyright

2022 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-22-618/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Références

Br J Pharmacol. 2012 Apr;165(7):2034-43
pubmed: 21950961
Pharmacol Ther. 1993 Feb-Mar;57(2-3):291-345
pubmed: 8361996
J Mol Cell Cardiol. 1991 Dec;23(12):1351-4
pubmed: 1811053
J Immunol. 2013 Dec 15;191(12):5785-91
pubmed: 24319282
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2013 Mar 1;304(5):H649-59
pubmed: 23275621
Transplantation. 1992 Feb;53(2):308-11
pubmed: 1738923
Lancet. 1979 Nov 17;2(8151):1033-6
pubmed: 91781
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Feb 2;67(4):365-374
pubmed: 26821623
J Bioenerg Biomembr. 1987 Jun;19(3):297-303
pubmed: 3114244
Xenobiotica. 2000 Dec;30(12):1131-52
pubmed: 11307970
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011 May;55(5):622-30
pubmed: 21827445
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Mar 26;14:43
pubmed: 24667063
PLoS Biol. 2015 Oct 13;13(10):e1002273
pubmed: 26460723
Surgery. 1980 Oct;88(4):594-600
pubmed: 6999652
N Engl J Med. 2015 Sep 10;373(11):1021-31
pubmed: 26321103
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2011 Oct-Dec;25(4):493-504
pubmed: 22217983
Biochem Pharmacol. 2015 Mar 1;94(1):22-9
pubmed: 25623731
Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2010 Dec;20(10):706-12
pubmed: 19819119
N Engl J Med. 2008 Jul 31;359(5):473-81
pubmed: 18669426
Sci Rep. 2016 Feb 10;6:20467
pubmed: 26861678
Diabetologia. 2021 Apr;64(4):737-748
pubmed: 33483761
Life Sci. 2020 Feb 1;242:117242
pubmed: 31891723
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Jun 15;10(12):e019521
pubmed: 34056918
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 May 7;8(9):e012188
pubmed: 31041869
Eur J Biochem. 1996 May 15;238(1):166-72
pubmed: 8665934
Surgery. 1980 Jul;88(1):168-73
pubmed: 6992318

Auteurs

Joshua Hefler (J)

Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Braulio A Marfil-Garza (BA)

Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
National Institutes of Medical Sciences & Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico.
CHRISTUS-LatAm Hub Excellence & Innovation Center, Monterrey, Mexico.

Sandra Campbell (S)

John W. Scott Health Sciences Library, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Darren H Freed (DH)

Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

A M James Shapiro (AMJ)

Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Clinical Islet Transplant Program, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Classifications MeSH