Evidence for clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications among adults with peripheral artery disease: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: International guidelines recommend that adults with peripheral artery disease (PAD) be prescribed antiplatelet, statin and antihypertensive medications. However, it is unclear how often people with PAD are underprescribed these drugs, which characteristics predict clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications, and whether underprescription and non-adherence are associated with adverse health and health system outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews from 2006 onwards. Two investigators will independently review abstracts and full-text studies. We will include studies that enrolled adults and reported the incidence and/or prevalence of clinician underprescription of or patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications among people with PAD; adjusted risk factors for underprescription of/non-adherence to these medications; and adjusted associations between underprescription/non-adherence to these medications and outcomes. Outcomes will include mortality, major adverse cardiac and limb events (including revascularisation procedures and amputations), other reported morbidities, healthcare resource use and costs. Two investigators will independently extract data and evaluate study risk of bias. We will calculate summary estimates of the incidence and prevalence of clinician underprescription/patient non-adherence across studies. We will also conduct subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regression to determine if estimates vary by country, characteristics of the patients and treating clinicians, population-based versus non-population-based design, and study risks of bias. Finally, we will calculate pooled adjusted risk factors for underprescription/non-adherence and adjusted associations between underprescription/non-adherence and outcomes. We will use Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation to determine estimate certainty. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as we are studying published data. This systematic review will synthesise existing evidence regarding clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications in adults with PAD. Results will be used to identify evidence-care gaps and inform where interventions may be required to improve clinician prescribing and patient adherence to prescribed medications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022362801.

Prediction Models for Forecasting Risk of Development of Surgical Site Infection after Lower Limb Revascularization Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common and potentially preventable complication of lower limb revascularization surgery associated with increased healthcare resource utilization and patient morbidity. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate multivariable prediction models designed to forecast risk of SSI development after these procedures. METHODS: After protocol registration (CRD42022331292), we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (inception to April 4th, 2023) for studies describing multivariable prediction models designed to forecast risk of SSI in adults after lower limb revascularization surgery. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was performed to summarize predictors included in the models and their calibration and discrimination, validation status, and clinical applicability. RESULTS: Among the 6,671 citations identified, we included 5 studies (n = 23,063 patients). The included studies described 5 unique multivariable prediction models generated through forward selection, backward selection, or Akaike Information Criterion-based methods. Two models were designed to predict any SSI and 3 Szyilagyi grade II (extending into subcutaneous tissue) SSI. Across the 5 models, 18 adjusted predictors (10 of which were preoperative, 3 intraoperative, and 5 postoperative) significantly predicted any SSI and 14 adjusted predictors significantly predict Szilagyi grade II SSI. Female sex, obesity, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease significantly predicted SSI in more than one model. All models had a "good fit" according to the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (P > 0.05). Model discrimination was quantified using the area under the curve, which ranged from 0.66 to 0.75 across models. Two models were internally validated using non-exhaustive twofold cross-validation and bootstrap resampling. No model was externally validated. Three studies had a high overall risk of bias according to the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). CONCLUSIONS: Five multivariable prediction models with moderate discrimination have been developed to forecast risk of SSI development after lower limb revascularization surgery. Given the frequency and consequences of SSI after these procedures, development and external validation of novel prediction models and comparison of these models to the existing models evaluated in this systematic review is warranted.

Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection after Lower Limb Revascularisation Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Studies.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and meta-analyse adjusted risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI) after lower limb revascularisation surgery. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to 28 April 2022). REVIEW METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. After protocol registration, databases were searched. Studies reporting adjusted risk factors for SSI in adults who underwent lower limb revascularisation surgery for peripheral artery disease were included. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were pooled using random effects models. GRADE was used to assess certainty. RESULTS: Among 6 377 citations identified, 50 studies (n = 271 125 patients) were included. The cumulative incidence of SSI was 12 (95% confidence interval [CI] 10 - 13) per 100 patients. Studies reported 139 potential SSI risk factors adjusted for a median of 12 (range 1 - 69) potential confounding factors. Risk factors that increased the pooled adjusted odds of SSI included: female sex (pooled OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.20 - 1.64; high certainty); dependent functional status (pooled OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03 - 1.35; low certainty); being overweight (pooled OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.29 - 2.56; moderate certainty), obese (pooled OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.44 - 3.36; high certainty), or morbidly obese (pooled OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.08 - 2.52; moderate certainty); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (pooled OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.17 - 1.71; high certainty); chronic limb threatening ischaemia (pooled OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.22 - 2.29; moderate certainty); chronic kidney disease (pooled OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.18 - 3.83; moderate certainty); intra-operative (pooled OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 - 1.49), peri-operative (pooled OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.27 - 2.90), or post-operative (pooled OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.44 - 3.39) blood transfusion (moderate certainty for all); urgent or emergency surgery (pooled OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.22 - 3.70; moderate certainty); vein bypass and or patch instead of endarterectomy alone (pooled OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.33 - 2.59; moderate certainty); an operation lasting ≥ 3 hours (pooled OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.33 - 2.59; moderate certainty) or ≥ 5 hours (pooled OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.18 - 2.17; moderate certainty); and early or unplanned re-operation (pooled OR 4.50, 95% CI 2.18 - 9.32; low certainty). CONCLUSION: This systematic review identified evidence informed SSI risk factors following lower limb revascularisation surgery. These may be used to develop improved SSI risk prediction tools and to identify patients who may benefit from evidence informed SSI prevention strategies.

A Meta-Analysis to Derive Population-Based Quality Benchmarks of the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection after Lower Limb Revascularization Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The reported incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) after lower limb revascularization surgery varies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies reporting the incidence of SSI in adults who underwent these surgeries in high-income countries to derive SSI quality benchmarks. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (inception-to-April 28th, 2022) for population-based studies estimating the cumulative incidence of SSI among adults who underwent lower limb revascularization surgery for peripheral artery disease (PAD) in high-income countries. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We used random-effects models to pool data and GRADE to assess certainty. RESULTS: Among 6,258 citations, we included 53 studies (n = 757,726 patients); 8 of which (n = 435,769 patients) reported nonoverlapping data that were meta-analyzed. The pooled cumulative incidence of any SSI was 6.0 in 100 patients [95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.3-8.0 in 100 patients; n = 8 studies; n = 435,769 patients; moderate certainty]. The cumulative incidence of Szilagyi grade I (cellulitis), grade II (subcutaneous tissue), and grade III (prosthetic graft) SSI was 6.5 in 100 patients (95% CI = 4.3-8.6 in 100 patients; n = 2 studies; n = 39,645 patients; low certainty), 2.1 in 100 patients (95% CI = 2.0-2.3 in 100 patients; n = 2 studies; low certainty), and 0.4 in 100 patients (95% CI = 0.4-0.4 in 100 patients; n = 1 study; n = 333,275 patients; low certainty), respectively. The pooled cumulative incidence of any early (in-hospital/≤30-days) and late (>30-days) SSI was 6.2 in 100 patients (95% CI = 4.4-8.0 in 100 patients; n = 7 studies; n = 431,273 patients; moderate certainty) and 3.7 in 100 patients (95% CI = 2.2-5.2 in 100 patients; n = 2 studies; n = 10,565 patients; low certainty), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review derived population-based benchmarks of the incidence of any SSI; Szilagyi I, II, and III SSI; and early and late SSI after lower limb revascularization surgery. These may be used by practicing surgeons and healthcare leaders/administrators to guide quality improvement efforts in the United States and perhaps other countries.

Registered clinical trials investigating treatment with cell-derived extracellular vesicles: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Interest in cell-based therapy using extracellular vesicles (EVs) is intensifying, building upon promising preclinical research and a handful of published clinical studies. Registered clinical trials remain small, heterogeneous in design and underpowered to determine safety and efficacy on their own. A scoping review of registered studies can identify opportunities to pool data and perform meta-analysis. METHODS: Registered trials were identified by searching clinical trial databases (Clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) on June 10, 2022. RESULTS: Seventy-three trials were identified and included for analysis. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) were the most common cell type from which EVs were derived (49 studies, 67%). Among the 49 identified MSC-EV studies, 25 were controlled trials (51%) with a combined total of 3094 participants anticipated to receive MSC-derived EVs (2225 in controlled studies). Although EVs are being administered to treat a broad range of conditions, trials treating patients with coronavirus disease-2019 and/or acute respiratory distress syndrome were observed most commonly. Despite heterogeneity between studies, we anticipate that at least some of the studies could be combined in meaningful meta-analysis and that a combined sample size of 1000 patients would provide the ability to detect a ≥5% difference in mortality with MSC-EVs compared to controls and could be achieved by December 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review identifies potential barriers that may stall clinical translation of EV-based treatment, and our analysis calls for more standardized product characterization, use of quantifiable product quality attributes and consistent outcome reporting in future clinical trials.

Efficacy of Strategies Intended to Prevent Surgical Site Infection After Lower Limb Revascularization Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of strategies intended to prevent surgical site infection (SSI) after lower limb revascularization surgery. BACKGROUND: SSIs are common, costly complications of lower limb revascularization surgery associated with significant morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (inception to April 28, 2022). Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies intended to prevent SSI after lower limb revascularization surgery for peripheral artery disease. We used random-effects models to pool data and GRADE to assess certainty. RESULTS: Among 6258 identified citations, we included 26 RCTs (n=4752 patients) that evaluated 12 strategies to prevent SSI. Preincision antibiotics [risk ratio (RR)=0.25; 95% CI, 0.11-0.57; n=4 studies; I2 statistic=7.1%; high certainty] and incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) (RR=0.54; 95% CI, 0.38-0.78; n=5 studies; I2 statistic=7.2%; high certainty) reduced pooled risk of early (≤30 days) SSI. iNPWT also reduced the risk of longer-term (>30 days) SSI (pooled-RR=0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.73; n=2 studies; I2 =0%; low certainty). Strategies with uncertain effects on risk of SSI included preincision ultrasound vein mapping (RR=0.58; 95% CI, 0.33-1.01; n=1 study); transverse groin incisions (RR=0.33; 95% CI, 0.097-1.15; n=1 study), antibiotic-bonded prosthetic bypass grafts (RR=0.74; 95% CI, 0.44-1.25; n=1 study; n=257 patients), and postoperative oxygen administration (RR=0.66; 95% CI, 0.42-1.03; n=1 study) (low certainty for all). CONCLUSIONS: Preincision antibiotics and iNPWT reduce the risk of early SSI after lower limb revascularization surgery. Confirmatory trials are required to determine whether other promising strategies also reduce SSI risk.

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.

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.

Systematic Scoping Review of Studies Reporting Unexpected Donor-Derived Abnormalities from Recipients of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Proposed Framework for Donor Disclosure.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is used increasingly to treat blood and immune-based disorders. Post-transplantation testing of HCT recipients can lead to unexpected molecular, cytogenetic, and other information in donor-derived cells, raising questions regarding the potential impact on donor health. This study was conducted to identify the breadth of donor-derived abnormalities identified by testing HCT recipients and to determine the extent to which disclosure and donor follow-up are described. A systematic search and scoping review were conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) extension for scoping review guidelines in OVID MEDLINE and Embase (1947 to May 24, 2021). We identified 38 studies (63 donor-recipient pairs) addressing nonleukemic abnormalities to complement existing literature describing donor cell leukemia and donor-derived myelodysplasia. Donors were unrelated adults (n = 20), related family members (n = 28), cord blood donors (n = 6), or not reported (n = 9). Acquired cytogenetic, molecular, and morphologic abnormalities were reported. Donor origin was confirmed by cytogenetic analysis via karyotyping, fluorescence in situ hybridization, single tandem repeat PCR, and other techniques. A disease in donor-derived cells was described in 35 recipients (56.5%). Despite the relevance for testing and disclosure to donors, only 22 cases (32%) mentioned donor follow-up, and in 5 cases the donor developed a disease associated with the identified abnormality. Unrelated donor disclosure was mentioned in 3 of 26 cases (12%), with the findings reported back to the registry. Incidental abnormalities identified in transplanted donor cells may contribute to the post-transplantation risk of illness in the recipient and may be relevant to donor health. A framework for donor disclosure is proposed that incorporates consideration of analytic validity of the testing, potential significance of the finding, and the extent to which the abnormality is actionable. Adoption of effective processes to safeguard both donor and recipient health outcomes related to this issue is needed.

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).

MSC-Derived Extracellular Vesicles in Preclinical Animal Models of Bone Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) are a promising treatment for bone injuries, although studies remain preclinical. A systematic review and meta-analysis can assess the efficacy of MSC-EVs and identify treatment aspects associated with enhanced bone repair. METHODS: English language, preclinical, controlled, in vivo studies identified in our systematic search (up to May 8, 2020) examining the use of MSC-EVs in bone healing were included. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the SYRCLE tool. Aggregate Data Meta-Analysis was performed to determine the effect of MSC-EVs on Bone Volume/Total Volume (BV/TV) and New Bone Formation (NBF). RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included. Twelve reported either BV/TV or NBF and were included in meta-analysis. ROB was unclear in all studies. Overall, MSC-EVs displayed benefit in terms of bone healing for both BV/TV (22.2% mean difference (MD); 95% CI: 15.8-28.5%, p < 0.001) and NBF (26.1% MD; 10.3-41.8%, p = 0.001) versus controls. Substantial heterogeneity, however, was observed between studies. MSC-EVs were reported to activate multiple signaling pathways including mTOR/AKT, AMPK and BMP2. Subgroup analysis indicated no significant difference in the improvement of BV/TV when using modified EVs isolated after gene transfection, preconditioning (p = 0.61), or using EVs in combination with a tissue scaffold and/or hydrogel versus other delivery methods (p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: Use of MSC-EVs to promote healing of bone injury appears promising, however, heterogeneity between studies and the potential for reporting bias limits confidence in the extent of benefit. Reducing bias between studies and addressing aspects of potential reporting bias should augment confidence in future meta-analyses and propel the field towards clinical studies. Forest Plot analysis assessing the percentage change in bone volume (BV) / total volume (TV) in the presence (experimental) or absence (control) of MSC-EVs.

Mesenchymal stromal cells as a therapeutic intervention for COVID-19: a living systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have significant immunomodulatory and tissue repair capabilities, mediated partly by conditioned media or through secreted extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs). Infection with SARS-CoV-2 can cause mild to life-threatening illness due to activated immune responses that may be dampened by MSCs or their secretome. Many clinical studies of MSCs have been launched since the beginning of the global pandemic, however, few have been completed and most lack power to assess efficacy. Repeated systematic searches and meta-analyses are needed to understand, in real time, the extent of potential benefit in different patient populations as the evidence emerges. METHODS: This living systematic review will be maintained to provide up-to-date information as the pandemic evolves. A systematic literature search of Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases will be performed. All clinical studies (e.g., randomized, pseudorandomized and non-randomized controlled trials, uncontrolled trials, and case series) employing MSCs or their secretome as a therapeutic intervention for COVID-19 will be included. Patients must have confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Study screening and data extraction will be performed in duplicate. Information concerning interventions, patient populations, methods of MSC isolation and characterization, primary and secondary clinical and/or laboratory outcomes, and adverse events will be extracted. Key clinical outcomes will be pooled through random-effects meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of MSCs and their secreted products for COVID-19. DISCUSSION: Our systematic review and subsequent updates will inform the scientific, medical, and health policy communities as the pandemic evolves to guide decisions on the appropriate use of MSC-related products to treat COVID-19. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD 42021225431.

Persistence of CRISPR/Cas9 gene edited hematopoietic stem cells following transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies.

Gene editing blood-derived cells is an attractive approach to cure selected monogenic diseases but remains experimental. A systematic search of preclinical controlled studies is needed to determine the persistence of edited cells following reinfusion. All studies identified in our systematic search (to 20 October 2020) examining the use of CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing in blood-derived cells for transplantation were included. Meta-analysis was performed to determine the engraftment and persistence of gene edited cells. A total of 3538 preclinical studies were identified with 15 published articles meeting eligibility for meta-analysis. These in vivo animal studies examined editing of hemoglobin to correct sickle cell disease (eight studies), inducing resistance to acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (two studies), and six other monogenic disorders (single studies). CRISPR-Cas9 edited hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells demonstrated equivalent early engraftment compared to controls in meta-analysis but persistence of gene-edited cells was reduced at later time points and in secondary transplant recipients. Subgroup analysis in studies targeting the hemoglobin gene revealed a significant reduction in the persistence of gene-edited cells whether homology-directed repair or nonhomologous end-joining were used. No adverse side effects were reported. Significant heterogeneity in study design and outcome reporting was observed and the potential for bias was identified in all studies. CRISPR-Cas9 gene edited cells engraft similarly to unedited hematopoietic cells. Persistence of gene edited cells, however, remains a challenge and improved methods of targeting hematopoietic stem cells are needed. Reducing heterogeneity and potential risk of bias will hasten the development of informative clinical trials.