The NHLBI-sponsored Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective therapies (CAESAR): a new paradigm for rigorous, accurate, and reproducible evaluation of putative infarct-sparing interventions in mice, rabbits, and pigs.

RATIONALE: Despite 4 decades of intense effort and substantial financial investment, the cardioprotection field has failed to deliver a single drug that effectively reduces myocardial infarct size in patients. A major reason is insufficient rigor and reproducibility in preclinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To develop a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical trial-like infrastructure to conduct rigorous and reproducible preclinical evaluation of cardioprotective therapies. METHODS AND RESULTS: With support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, we established the Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective therapies (CAESAR), based on the principles of randomization, investigator blinding, a priori sample size determination and exclusion criteria, appropriate statistical analyses, and assessment of reproducibility. To validate CAESAR, we tested the ability of ischemic preconditioning to reduce infarct size in 3 species (at 2 sites/species): mice (n=22-25 per group), rabbits (n=11-12 per group), and pigs (n=13 per group). During this validation phase, (1) we established protocols that gave similar results between centers and confirmed that ischemic preconditioning significantly reduced infarct size in all species and (2) we successfully established a multicenter structure to support CAESAR's operations, including 2 surgical centers for each species, a Pathology Core (to assess infarct size), a Biomarker Core (to measure plasma cardiac troponin levels), and a Data Coordinating Center-all with the oversight of an external Protocol Review and Monitoring Committee. CONCLUSIONS: CAESAR is operational, generates reproducible results, can detect cardioprotection, and provides a mechanism for assessing potential infarct-sparing therapies with a level of rigor analogous to multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trials. This is a revolutionary new approach to cardioprotection. Importantly, we provide state-of-the-art, detailed protocols ("CAESAR protocols") for measuring infarct size in mice, rabbits, and pigs in a manner that is rigorous, accurate, and reproducible.

Gene transfer as a strategy to achieve permanent cardioprotection II: rAAV-mediated gene therapy with heme oxygenase-1 limits infarct size 1 year later without adverse functional consequences.

Extensive evidence indicates that heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) exerts potent cytoprotective effects in response to stress. Previous studies have shown that gene therapy with HO-1 protects against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury for up to 8 weeks after gene transfer. However, the long-term effects of HO-1 gene therapy on myocardial ischemic injury and function are unknown. To address this issue, we created a recombinant adeno-associated viral vector carrying the HO-1 gene (rAAV/HO-1) that enables long-lasting transgene expression. Mice received injections in the anterior LV wall of rAAV/LacZ (LacZ group) or rAAV/HO-1 (HO-1 group); 1 year later, they were subjected to a 30-min coronary occlusion (O) and 4 h of reperfusion (R). Cardiac HO-1 gene expression was confirmed at 1 month and 1 year after gene transfer by immunoblotting and immunohistochemistry analyses. In the HO-1 group, infarct size (% of risk region) was dramatically reduced at 1 year after gene transfer (11.2 ± 2.1%, n = 12, vs. 44.7 ± 3.6%, n = 8, in the LacZ group; P < 0.05). The infarct-sparing effects of HO-1 gene therapy at 1 year were as powerful as those observed 24 h after ischemic PC (six 4-min O/4-min R cycles) (15.0 ± 1.7%, n = 10). There were no appreciable changes in LV fractional shortening, LV ejection fraction, or LV end-diastolic or end-systolic diameter at 1 year after HO-1 gene transfer as compared to the age-matched controls or with the LacZ group. Histology showed no inflammation in the myocardium 1 year after rAAV/HO-1-mediated gene transfer. These results demonstrate, for the first time, that rAAV-mediated HO-1 gene transfer confers long-term (1 year), possibly permanent, cardioprotection without adverse functional consequences, providing proof of principle for the concept of achieving prophylactic cardioprotection (i.e., "immunization against infarction").

Intracoronary administration of cardiac stem cells in mice: a new, improved technique for cell therapy in murine models.

A model of intracoronary stem cell delivery that enables transgenesis/gene targeting would be a powerful tool but is still lacking. To address this gap, we compared intracoronary and intramyocardial delivery of lin(-)/c-kit(+)/GFP(+) cardiac stem cells (CSCs) in a murine model of reperfused myocardial infarction (MI). Lin(-)/c-kit(+)/GFP(+) CSCs were successfully expanded from GFP transgenic hearts and cultured with no detectable phenotypic change for up to ten passages. Intracoronary delivery of CSCs 2 days post-MI resulted in significant alleviation of adverse LV remodeling and dysfunction, which was at least equivalent, if not superior, to that achieved with intramyocardial delivery. Compared with intramyocardial injection, intracoronary infusion was associated with a more homogeneous distribution of CSCs in the infarcted region and a greater increase in viable tissue in this region, suggesting greater formation of new cardiomyocytes. Intracoronary CSC delivery resulted in improved function in the infarcted region, as well as in improved global LV systolic and diastolic function, and in decreased LV dilation and LV expansion index; the magnitude of these effects was similar to that observed after intramyocardial injection. We conclude that, in the murine model of reperfused MI, intracoronary CSC infusion is at least as effective as intramyocardial injection in limiting LV remodeling and improving both regional and global LV function. The intracoronary route appears to be superior in terms of uniformity of cell distribution, myocyte regeneration, and amount of viable tissue in the risk region. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report that intracoronary infusion of stem cells in mice is feasible and effective.

Effects of Intracoronary Infusion of Escalating Doses of Cardiac Stem Cells in Rats With Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Although c-kit(pos) cardiac stem cells (CSCs) preserve left ventricular (LV) function and structure after myocardial infarction, CSC doses have been chosen arbitrarily, and the dose-effect relationship is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Rats underwent a 90-minute coronary occlusion followed by 35 days of reperfusion. Vehicle or CSCs at 5 escalating doses (0.3×10(6), 0.75×10(6), 1.5×10(6), 3.0×10(6), and 6.0×10(6) cells/heart) were given intracoronarily 4 h after reperfusion. The lowest dose (0.3×10(6)) had no effect on LV function and morphology, whereas 0.75, 1.5, and 3.0×10(6) significantly improved regional and global LV function (echocardiography and hemodynamic studies). These 3 doses had similar effects on echocardiographic parameters (infarct wall thickening fraction, LV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes, LV ejection fraction) and hemodynamic variables (LV end-diastolic pressure, LV dP/dtmax, preload adjusted maximal power, end-systolic elastance, preload recruitable stroke work) and produced similar reductions in apoptosis, scar size, infarct wall thinning, and LV expansion index and similar increases in viable myocardium in the risk region (morphometry). Infusion of 6.0×10(6) CSCs markedly increased postprocedural mortality. Green fluorescent protein and 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine staining indicated that persistence of donor cells and formation of new myocytes were negligible with all doses. CONCLUSIONS: Surprisingly, in this rat model of acute myocardial infarction, the dose-response relationship for intracoronary CSCs is flat. A minimal dose between 0.3 and 0.75×10(6) is necessary for efficacy; above this threshold, a 4-fold increase in cell number does not produce greater improvement in LV function or structure. Further increases in cell dose are harmful.