RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cardiosphere-derived cells (CDCs) reduce scarring after myocardial infarction, increase viable myocardium, and boost cardiac function in preclinical models. We aimed to assess safety of such an approach in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. METHODS: In the prospective, randomised CArdiosphere-Derived aUtologous stem CElls to reverse ventricUlar dySfunction (CADUCEUS) trial, we enrolled patients 2-4 weeks after myocardial infarction (with left ventricular ejection fraction of 25-45%) at two medical centres in the USA. An independent data coordinating centre randomly allocated patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive CDCs or standard care. For patients assigned to receive CDCs, autologous cells grown from endomyocardial biopsy specimens were infused into the infarct-related artery 1·5-3 months after myocardial infarction. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients at 6 months who died due to ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or sudden unexpected death, or had myocardial infarction after cell infusion, new cardiac tumour formation on MRI, or a major adverse cardiac event (MACE; composite of death and hospital admission for heart failure or non-fatal recurrent myocardial infarction). We also assessed preliminary efficacy endpoints on MRI by 6 months. Data analysers were masked to group assignment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00893360. FINDINGS: Between May 5, 2009, and Dec 16, 2010, we randomly allocated 31 eligible participants of whom 25 were included in a per-protocol analysis (17 to CDC group and eight to standard of care). Mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 39% (SD 12) and scar occupied 24% (10) of left ventricular mass. Biopsy samples yielded prescribed cell doses within 36 days (SD 6). No complications were reported within 24 h of CDC infusion. By 6 months, no patients had died, developed cardiac tumours, or MACE in either group. Four patients (24%) in the CDC group had serious adverse events compared with one control (13%; p=1·00). Compared with controls at 6 months, MRI analysis of patients treated with CDCs showed reductions in scar mass (p=0·001), increases in viable heart mass (p=0·01) and regional contractility (p=0·02), and regional systolic wall thickening (p=0·015). However, changes in end-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, and LVEF did not differ between groups by 6 months. INTERPRETATION: We show intracoronary infusion of autologous CDCs after myocardial infarction is safe, warranting the expansion of such therapy to phase 2 study. The unprecedented increases we noted in viable myocardium, which are consistent with therapeutic regeneration, merit further assessment of clinical outcomes. FUNDING: US National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and Cedars-Sinai Board of Governors Heart Stem Cell Center.
Asunto(s)
Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Miocardio/citología , Trasplante de Células Madre , Cicatriz/etiología , Cicatriz/patología , Vasos Coronarios , Femenino , Corazón/fisiopatología , Humanos , Infusiones Intraarteriales , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio/patología , Infarto del Miocardio/fisiopatología , Miocardio/patología , Regeneración , Volumen Sistólico , Trasplante Autólogo , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda/etiología , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) derived myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI) has recently been shown to detect coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) in women with signs and symptoms of ischemia and no obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this study was to determine the inter-scan reproducibility of MPRI in this patient group in order to assess its diagnostic robustness in serial scans and assess its utility as a marker of potential therapies for CMD. METHODS: Rest/stress perfusion CMR was performed at 1.5T using a standardized protocol in 17 women with signs and symptoms of ischemia and no obstructive CAD on two separate days (within 90 days of each other). The same pharmacological stress agent (adenosine/regadenoson) was used for both scans. MPRI was calculated from time-intensity curves of the whole myocardium and blood pool at stress and rest. One experienced observer, blinded to clinical data, performed all measurements. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficient of variation (CoV), and Bland-Altman plots were determined. RESULTS: Mean age was 53±10 years old and BMI 28±7 kg/m2; 47% had hypertension, 4% diabetes, 9% hyperlipidemia and 10% family history of CAD. Mean MPRI for the 17 women was higher for scan 2 compared to scan 1 (1.98±0.3 vs. 1.65±0.78, respectively, p<0.001); and this relationship persisted even when corrected for resting rate pressure product (RPP) (2.42±0.81 vs. 1.97±0.92, respectively, 0.002), The mean bias for MPRI between sequential scans was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.18 to 0.49, limits of agreement: -0.31, 0.98 and when corrected for resting RPP it was 0.45 (95% CI: 0.21 to 0.68, limits of agreement: -0.52, 1.41), ICC and CoV also indicated modest inter-scan reproducibility (ICC 0.57; CoV 20.3%), but both measures were comparable to values seen in prior studies in CAD populations and healthy volunteers. CONCLUSION: Inter-scan reproducibility of CMRI-derived MPRI in women with suspected CMD is modest, with relatively wide limits of agreement. This variability is similar to that seen in other populations, suggesting that some caution must be exercised when using absolute MPRI cut-offs in isolation for the diagnosis of CMD or repeated measures of MPRI to track response to therapy. Additional work is ongoing to improve reproducibility from both biological and technological standpoints.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Digital wearable devices provide a "real-world" assessment of physical activity and quantify intervention-related changes in clinical trials. However, the value of digital wearable device-recorded physical activity as a clinical trial outcome is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Because late sodium channel inhibition (ranolazine) improves stress laboratory exercise duration among angina patients, we proposed that this benefit could be quantified and translated during daily life by measuring digital wearable device-determined step count in a clinical trial. METHODS: We conducted a substudy in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of participants with angina and coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) with no obstructive coronary artery disease to evaluate the value of digital wearable device monitoring. Ranolazine or placebo were administered (500-1000 mg twice a day) for 2 weeks with a subsequent 2-week washout followed by crossover to ranolazine or placebo (500-1000 mg twice a day) for an additional 2 weeks. The outcome of interest was within-subject difference in Fitbit Flex daily step count during week 2 of ranolazine versus placebo during each treatment period. Secondary outcomes included within-subject differences in angina, quality of life, myocardial perfusion reserve, and diastolic function. RESULTS: A total of 43 participants were enrolled in the substudy and 30 successfully completed the substudy for analysis. Overall, late sodium channel inhibition reduced within-subject daily step count versus placebo (mean 5757 [SD 3076] vs mean 6593 [SD 339], P=.01) but did not improve angina (Seattle Angina Questionnaire-7 [SAQ-7]) (P=.83). Among the subgroup with improved angina (SAQ-7), a direct correlation with increased step count (r=.42, P=.02) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: We report one of the first studies to use digital wearable device-determined step count as an outcome variable in a placebo-controlled crossover trial of late sodium channel inhibition in participants with CMD. Our substudy demonstrates that late sodium channel inhibition was associated with a decreased step count overall, although the subgroup with angina improvement had a step count increase. Our findings suggest digital wearable device technology may provide new insights in clinical trial research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01342029; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01342029 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6uyd6B2PO).