Clinical Impacts of Omalizumab on the Psychiatric Comorbidities of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Individuals with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) experience significant sleep disturbances and are at risk of anxiety and depression.

HLA-haplotype redundancy and rareness in Canadian Blood Services' Stem Cell Registry and Cord Blood Bank: Novel metrics for optimizing utility.

BACKGROUND: The utility of unrelated donor registries that support allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation could be optimized through greater understanding of redundancy and rareness of HLA phenotypes. METHODS: HLA phenotype rareness was determined using known HLA haplotype frequencies. Donor redundancy was determined through pairwise comparison of donor HLA profiles within an inventory. RESULTS: Among 61,730 registrants in the Canadian Blood Services (CBS) Stem Cell Registry (SCR) with high resolution HLA typing at 5 loci, 6.6% of HLA phenotypes were redundant with variation across ethnic groups (8.3% of Caucasian phenotypes; 8% of Native American/First Nations, 4.4% of Asia-Pacific Islanders (API), 2.1% of Hispanic, 0.7% of African-American (AFA), and 4.5% of other ethnicities). A total of 18.5% of registrants had redundant HLA phenotypes with variation across ethnic groups. All 3716 cord blood units in the CBS's cord blood bank (CBB) had high resolution HLA typing at 5 loci and 202 units were redundant (5.4%) comprising 78 HLA phenotypes, with varying rareness. Repeated HLA phenotypes were from Caucasian donors (77%), multiple ethnicity (13%), API (9%), and AFA (1%). Registrants and CBUs with AFA ethnicity had the rarest phenotypes while Caucasian ethnicity was associated with the most common HLA phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Redundancy was greater in the SCR compared to the CBB and was most common with CAU ethnicity. Recruiting non-Caucasian registrants and continued cord blood banking should reduce redundancy. A sub-inventory of redundant donors and cord blood units could support new uses for donor-supported cellular therapies that do not require HLA matching.

Clinical Outcomes of Umbilical Cord Blood Transplantation Using Ex Vivo Expansion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Studies.

Greater use of umbilical cord blood (UCB) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is limited by the number of cells in banked units. Ex vivo culture strategies have been increasingly evaluated in controlled studies, but their impact on transplantation-related outcomes remains uncertain owing to the small patient numbers in these studies, necessitating an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases to March 18, 2022. Nine cohort-controlled phase I to III trials were identified, and data of 1146 patients undergoing umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) were analyzed (308 ex vivo expanded and 838 unmanipulated controls). Expansion strategies involved cytokine cocktails plus the addition of small molecules (UM171, nicotinamide [NiCord], copper chelation, Notch ligand, or Stem regenin-1 [SR-1]) and coculture with mesenchymal stromal cells in a single-unit transplant strategy (5 studies) or a double-unit transplant strategy with 1 unmanipulated unit (4 studies). The included trials reported a median ex vivo expansion of CD34+ cells from 28-fold to 330-fold. Eight of the 9 studies demonstrated a significantly faster time to initial neutrophil and platelet engraftment using expanded cells compared with controls. Studies using UM171 and NiCord in single-unit UCBT and SR-1 or NiCord double-unit UCBT demonstrated long-term donor chimerism of the expanded unit at 100 days to 36 months post-transplantation in all single-unit recipients and in 35% to 78% of double-unit recipients. Our meta-analysis revealed a lower risk of death at the study endpoint in patients who received ex vivo expanded grafts (odds ratio [OR], .66; 95% confidence interval [CI], .47 to .95; P = .02), while the risk of grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease was unchanged (OR, .79; 95% CI, .58 to 1.08; P = .14). This review indicates that UCBT following ex vivo expansion can accelerate initial engraftment. Durable donor chimerism can be achieved after transplanting cord blood units expanded using NiCord, UM171, or SR-1; however, long term outcomes remain unclear. Larger studies with longer-term outcomes are needed to better understand the merits of specific expansion strategies on survival.

Humoral and Cellular Response of Transplant Recipients to a Third Dose of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: High rates of nonresponse to 2 doses of mRNA severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine have been reported in transplant recipients. Several studies have investigated the efficacy of a third dose in this population. However, efficacy remains unclear, as response rates vary across studies. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of a third dose of any mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in transplant recipients. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines (PROSPERO:CRD42021281498) were followed. Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to December 2, 2021, without restrictions. All full-text studies reporting on the efficacy of a third dose of any mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in pediatric and adult transplant recipients were included. The National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool for case series and the Cochrane risk of bias tool determined study quality. Meta-analysis was performed via the DerSimonian-Laird random-effect model. RESULTS: Of 84 records, 12 studies totaling 1257 patients met inclusion criteria. One study was a randomized controlled trial, whereas all other studies were observational. Across 7 studies (801 patients), humoral response after 3 doses was observed in 66.1% (95% confidence interval, 62.8%-69.4%; I2 = 0%) of transplant recipients. Triple immunosuppression, mycophenolate, antiproliferatives, and belatacept use were associated with reduced odds of humoral response in studies reporting multivariate analyses. Transplant recipients receiving a third dose displayed higher levels of neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 variants (Alpha, Beta, and Delta) compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: A third dose SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine should be strongly considered in transplant recipients. Limitations included lack of controlled studies and clinically relevant thresholds to determine response to vaccination.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of mesenchymal stromal cells to treat coronavirus disease 2019: is it too late?

BACKGROUND AIMS: Evidence regarding the extent that mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may improve clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been limited by marked inter-study heterogeneity, inconsistent product characterization and appreciable risk of bias (RoB). Given the evolution of treatment options and trajectory of the pandemic, an updated analysis of high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials is needed for a timely and conclusive understanding of the effectiveness of MSCs. METHODS: A systematic literature search through March 30, 2022, identified all English language, full-text randomized controlled trials examining the use of MSCs in the treatment of COVID-19. RESULTS: Eight studies were identified (316 patients, 165 administered MSCs and 151 controls). Controls evolved significantly over time with a broad range of comparison treatments. All studies reported mortality at study endpoint. Random effects meta-analysis revealed that MSCs decreased relative risk of death (risk ratio, 0.63, 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.94, P = 0.02, I2 = 14%) with no significant difference in absolute risk of death. MSCs decreased length of hospital stay and C-reactive protein levels and increased odds of clinical improvement at study endpoint compared with controls. Rates of adverse events and severe adverse events were similar between MSC and control groups. Only two (25%) studies reported all four International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy criteria for MSC characterization. Included studies had low (n = 7) or some (n = 1) concerns regarding RoB. CONCLUSIONS: MSCs may reduce risk of death in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 and improve secondary clinical outcomes. Variable outcome reporting, inconsistent product characterization and variable control group treatments remain barriers to higher-quality evidence and may constrain clinical usage. A master protocol is proposed and appears necessary for accelerated translation of higher-quality evidence for future applications of MSC therapy.

Can GCSF-stimulated donor lymphocyte infusions improve outcomes for relapsed disease following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI) can produce graft-versus tumor effects to treat relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation, however, durable responses remain uncommon. A systematic review and meta-analysis are needed to clarify whether DLI collected after stimulation with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF; G-DLI) can improve clinical outcomes. Sixteen studies (4 controlled) involving 585 patients were identified in a systematic search up to 17 September 2020. A meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.52-1.68, p = 0.82; n = 3 studies) or relapse-related mortality (RR: 0.72, 0.44-1.18, p = 0.19; n = 3 studies) between G-DLI and conventional DLI (C-DLI) groups. G-DLI products had similar mean CD3+ cells compared to C-DLI products, but median CD34+ cells/kg were increased. No improvement in disease progression, complete response rates, or risk of developing GVHD was observed with G-DLI, however, greater non-relapse mortality was observed compared to C-DLI. Alternative approaches to enhancing graft-versus-tumor effects are needed.

Updated Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Controlled Trials of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells to Treat COVID-19: A Framework for Accelerated Synthesis of Trial Evidence for Rapid Approval-FASTER Approval.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19; however, early evidence is based on few studies with marked interstudy heterogeneity. The second iteration of our living systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates a framework needed for synthesizing evidence from high-quality studies to accelerate consideration for approval. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted on November 15, 2021, to identify all English-language, full-text, and controlled clinical studies examining MSCs to treat COVID-19 (PROSPERO: CRD42021225431). FINDINGS: Eleven studies were identified (403 patients with severe and/or critical COVID-19, including 207 given MSCs and 196 controls). All 11 studies reported mortality and were pooled through random-effects meta-analysis. MSCs decreased relative risk of death at study endpoint (RR: 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.75]) and RR of death at 28 days after treatment (0.19 [95% CI], 0.05-0.78) compared to controls. MSCs also decreased length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD: -3.97 days [95% CI, -6.09 to -1.85], n = 5 studies) and increased oxygenation levels at study endpoint compared to controls (MD: 105.62 mmHg O2 [95% CI, 73.9-137.3,], n = 3 studies). Only 2 of 11 studies reported on all International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT) criteria for MSC characterization. Included randomized controlled trials were found to have some concerns (n = 2) to low (n = 4) risk of bias (RoB), while all non-randomized studies were found to have moderate (n = 5) RoB. INTERPRETATION: Our updated living systematic review concludes that MSCs can likely reduce mortality in patients with severe or critical COVID-19. A master protocol based on our Faster Approval framework appears necessary to facilitate the more accelerated accumulation of high-quality evidence that would reduce RoB, improve consistency in product characterization, and standardize outcome reporting.

Mesenchymal stem/stromal cell-based therapies for COVID-19: First iteration of a living systematic review and meta-analysis: MSCs and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) and their secreted products are a promising therapy for COVID-19 given their immunomodulatory and tissue repair capabilities. Many small studies were launched at the onset of the pandemic, and repeated meta-analysis is critical to obtain timely and sufficient statistical power to determine efficacy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: All English-language published studies identified in our systematic search (up to February 3, 2021) examining the use of MSC-derived products to treat patients with COVID-19 were identified. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed for all studies. Nine studies were identified (189 patients), four of which were controlled (93 patients). Three of the controlled studies reported on mortality (primary analysis) and were pooled through random-effects meta-analysis. MSCs decreased the risk of death at study endpoint compared with controls (risk ratio, 0.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.74; P = .02; I2 = 0%), although follow-up differed. Among secondary outcomes, interleukin-6 levels were most commonly reported and were decreased compared with controls (standardized mean difference, -0.69; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.22; P = .004; I2 = 0%) (n = 3 studies). Other outcomes were not reported consistently, and pooled estimates of effect were not performed. Substantial heterogeneity was observed between studies in terms of study design. Adherence to published ISCT criteria for MSC characterization was low. In two of nine studies, RoB analysis revealed a low to moderate risk of bias in controlled studies, and uncontrolled case series were of good (3 studies) or fair (2 studies) quality. CONCLUSION: Use of MSCs to treat COVID-19 appears promising; however, few studies were identified, and potential risk of bias was detected in all studies. More controlled studies that report uniform clinical outcomes and use MSC products that meet standard ISCT criteria should be performed. Future iterations of our systematic search should refine estimates of efficacy and clarify potential adverse effects.

A Portrait of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

The management of COVID-19 in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients represents a special challenge given the variable states of immune dysregulation and altered vaccine efficacy in this population. A systematic search (Ovid Medline and Embase on 1 June 2021) was needed to better understand the presenting features, prognostic factors, and treatment options. Of 897 records, 29 studies were identified in our search. Most studies reporting on adults and pediatric recipients described signs and symptoms that were typical of COVID-19. Overall, the mortality rates were high, with 21% of adults and 6% of pediatric HCT recipients succumbing to COVID-19. The factors reported to be associated with increased mortality included age (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.03-1.43, p = 0.02), ICU admission (HR = 4.42, 95% CI 2.25-8.65, p < 0.001 and HR = 2.26, 95% CI 1.22-4.20, p = 0.01 for allogeneic and autologous HCT recipients), and low platelet count (OR = 21.37, 95% CI 1.71-267.11, p = 0.01). Performance status was associated with decreased mortality (HR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93, p = 0.001). A broad range of treatments was described, although no controlled studies were identified. The risk of bias, using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, was low. Patients undergoing HCT are at a high risk of severe morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19. Controlled studies investigating potential treatments are required to determine the efficacy and safety in this population.

Use of CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing to improve chimeric antigen-receptor T cell therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Chimeric antigen-receptor T (CAR-T) cells represent great promise in cancer treatment. CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing in preclinical studies has enabled the development of enhanced CAR-T products with improved function and reduced toxicity. METHODS: A systematic review of preclinical animal studies was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of this approach. RESULTS: 3753 records were identified (to September 9, 2020), with 11 studies using CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing in combination with CAR-T therapy against human cells in animal models of acute leukemia (four studies), glioma (two studies), melanoma (two studies), and other cancers (three studies). Compared with unedited controls, gene-edited CAR-T cells reduced tumor volume in treated animals and improved survival. No adverse side effects were reported. Use of allogeneic "third-party" CAR-T cells appears feasible. Improved efficacy was achieved through both knock-in and knockout gene editing of various targets implicated in immune function. Targeting multiple genes also appears feasible. Significant heterogeneity in study design and outcome reporting was observed, and potential bias was identified in all studies. CONCLUSION: CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing enables manufacturing of CAR-T cells with improved anti-cancer effects. Future studies should reduce unintentional bias and heterogeneity of study designs and strive to augment long-term persistence of edited cells. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO; registration number CRD42020220313 registered November 30, 2020.

MSC-Derived Extracellular Vesicles to Heal Diabetic Wounds: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Preclinical Animal Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Extracellular vesicles from mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC-EVs) have shown promise in wound healing. Their use in diabetic wounds specifically, however, remains pre-clinical and their efficacy remains uncertain less clear. A systematic review of preclinical studies is needed to determine the efficacy of MSC-EVs in the treatment of diabetic wounds to accelerate the clinical translation of this cell-based therapy. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched (to June 23, 2020). All English-language, full-text, controlled interventional studies comparing MSC-EVs to placebo or a "no treatment" arm in animal models of diabetic wounds were included. Study outcomes, including wound closure (primary outcome), scar width, blood vessel number and density, and re-epithelialisation were pooled using a random effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the SYRCLE tool for pre-clinical animal studies. RESULTS: A total of 313 unique records were identified from our search, with 10 full text articles satisfying inclusion criteria (n = 136 animals). The administration of MSC-EVs improved closure of diabetic wounds compared to controls with a large observed effect (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) 5.48, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 3.55-8.13). Healing was further enhanced using MSC-EVs enriched in non-coding RNAs or microRNAs compared to controls (SMD 9.89, 95%CI 7.32-12.46). Other outcomes, such as blood vessel density and number, scar width, and re-epithelialisation were improved with the administration of MSC-EVs, with a large effect. ROB across studies was unclear. CONCLUSION: MSC-EVs, particularly following enrichment for specific RNAs, are a promising treatment for diabetic wounds in pre-clinical studies and translation to the clinical domain appears warranted. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO #CRD42020199327 [248]. Forest plot demonstrating increased wound closure rates of diabetic wounds receiving genetically modified MSC-EVs that were enriched for specific RNAs. DFO = deferoxamine. Control groups were inactive (no treatment or saline) except for 3 studies which used hydrogels without MSC-EVs as control (Li M 2016; Shi 2017; Tao 2016).

Microneedling as an adjuvant to topical therapies for melasma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Microneedling as an adjuvant to topical medications has shown promising but variable results in the treatment of melasma. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of microneedling as an adjuvant to topical therapies for the treatment of melasma. METHODS: This study followed PRISMA guidelines. All comparative, prospective studies on the use of topical interventions with microneedling for the treatment of melasma were included. Studies involving radiofrequency microneedling were excluded. RESULTS: Twelve eligible studies comprising 459 patients from 7 different countries were included. Topical therapies included topical tranexamic acid, vitamin C, platelet-rich plasma, non-hydroquinone-based depigmentation serums, and hydroquinone-based depigmenting agents. Topical therapy with microneedling improved melasma severity with a large effect (standardized mean difference >0.8) beyond 8 weeks, with best results seen at 12 weeks. Compared to topical therapy alone, topical therapy with microneedling resulted in an additional improvement in melasma severity with a moderate effect at 8 weeks and a large effect at 12-16 weeks. Microneedling was well tolerated across studies, with no serious adverse events reported. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity in study designs did not allow for a comparison of the efficacy of various topical therapies with microneedling. CONCLUSION: Microneedling is useful adjuvant to topical therapies for the treatment of melasma.

Mesenchymal Stromal Cell-derived Extracellular Vesicles in Preclinical Animal Models of Tumor Growth: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cell derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) have been implicated in the regulation of tumor growth. Studies remain preclinical with effects ranging from inhibition of tumor growth to cancer progression. A systematic review and meta-analysis is needed to clarify the effect of MSC-EVs on tumor growth to facilitate potential translation to clinical trials. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature (MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS databases to June 1, 2019) identified all pre-clinical controlled studies investigating the effect of MSC-EVs on tumor growth. Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Potential risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE tool. A random effects meta-analysis of reduction in tumor weight/volume (primary outcome) was performed. RESULTS: We identified 29 articles and 22 reported data on tumor responses that were included for meta-analysis. Studies were associated with unclear risk of bias in a large proportion of domains in accordance with the SYRCLE tool for determining risk of bias in preclinical studies. A high risk of bias was not identified in any study. MSC-EVs had a mixed response on tumor progression with some studies reporting inhibition of tumor growth and others reporting tumor progression. Overall, MSC-EVs exerted a non-significant reduction in tumor growth compared to controls (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.80, 95 % CI -1.64 to 0.03, p = 0.06, I2 = 87 %). Some studies reported increased tumor growth which aligned with their stated hypothesis and some interrogated mechanisms in cancer biology. EVs isolated from MSCs that overexpressed anti-tumor RNAs were associated with significant tumor reduction in meta-analysis (SMD - 2.40, 95 % CI -3.36 to -1.44, p < 0.001). Heterogeneity between studies was observed and included aspects of study design such as enrichment of MSC-EVs with specific anti-tumor molecules, tissue source of MSCs, method of EV isolation, characterization of MSCs and EVs, dosage and administration schedules, and tissue type and source of tumor cells studied. CONCLUSIONS: MSC-EVs are associated with mixed effects on tumor growth in animal models of cancer. In studies where anti-tumor RNAs are packaged in EVs, a significant reduction in tumor growth was observed. Reducing heterogeneity in study design may accelerate our understanding of the potential effects of MSC-EVs on cancer. [274 words] Forest plot of MSC-EV effect on tumor growth accordinggenetic modification of EVs in animal studies identified from a systematicreview of the literature. All cohorts from studies with multiple interventiongroups are presented separately with control groups divided equally among thegroups. M, modified; H, hypoxia.