With more than 17,000 people in the US sustaining a spinal cord injury (SCI) each year and an estimated combined cost to healthcare and the workforce exceeding $40 billion, the condition has significant personal and socioeconomic implications. In addition, SCIs have limited pharmacological treatment options to support the regeneration of nerve damage.
Considering the limited treatment options for this condition, the field of regenerative medicine, and specifically the use of stem cells, has recently drawn interest as a potential therapeutic treatment option for paralysis resulting from SCIs.
In this report, Bydon et al. summarize findings of the ongoing multidisciplinary phase 1 clinical trial exploring the safety and efficacy of intrathecal autologous adipose tissue-derived (AD) mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in patients with blunt, traumatic SCI.
Specifically, as part of this report, the authors describe the outcome of the first patient with C3-4 SCI treated with AD-MSCs. At the time of SCI, neurologic examination revealed complete loss of motor and sensory function below the level of injury; an injury diagnosed as an American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade A SCI.
After undergoing initial treatment, including C2-6 posterior cervical decompression and fusion, improvement in motor and sensory function was demonstrable. However, neurological gains plateaued 6 months after sustaining injury.
Upon enrollment into the CELLTOP clinical trial 9 months after injury, the patient’s neurologic status was found to be ASIA grade C and imaging revealed bilateral myelomalacia at the C3 level and at the C2-6 decompression and fusion. Additionally, an open biopsy of adipose tissue found in the abdominal wall was performed 8 weeks prior to receiving an initial intrathecal injection.
After receiving an intrathecal injection of 100 million autologous AD-MSCs 11 months after injury, the patient was observed for clinical signs of efficacy at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months following injection.
Bydon et al. observed progressive improvement in upper extremity motor scores and considerable improvement in lower extremity scores at 18 months following injection. The patient also demonstrated consistent improvement in ASIA sensory score, including improvements in pinprick and light touch scores at follow-up after 18 months. The authors reported patient improvements in Capabilities of Upper Extremity score, quality of life (as measured by Global Health Score), and in physical and occupational therapy measures. Other than a moderate headache on day 2, no other safety issues or adverse events were reported.
While further clinical trial is required, the authors conclude that intrathecal AD-MSC administration may be a relatively noninvasive and safe therapeutic option for patients with SCI to improve their neurologic status after reaching a ceiling effect in terms of spontaneous recovery.
Spinal cord injury is one of the most complicated and serious pathological impairments affecting the central nervous system. Since the human body is unable to regenerate and repair the spinal cord after injury, there is a high likelihood of suffering permanent damage and disability.
Often compounding the issue of SCI, secondary events occurring after the initial injury to the spinal cord significantly reduce cell migration and axonal regrowth and limit repair and regeneration.
Recently, transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) has been shown to promote the repair of injured spinal cord tissues in animal models. However, as Qu and Zhang highlight in this review, there remain many unanswered questions that are essential for improving the effects of this MSC therapy. As such, the authors focus this review on recent information about the behavior and function of MSCs in SCI, the function of biomaterials to direct the behavior of MSCs, and the attempt to emphasize combinational strategies such as tissue engineering for functional improvements of SCI.
There are studies showing that the migratory and homing capacities of MSCs are closely related to their engraftment and regeneration ability. Considering this, the authors highlight the importance of having MSCs migrate and integrate into host spinal cord tissue. Since MSC homing toward injured tissue is not an efficient process, and to ensure a more effective stem cell therapy outcome, it is important that these transplanted cells be introduced in a way that increases the migratory potential of healthy MSCs to the site of injured tissue.
Additionally, while transplanted cells have been identified adjacent to neurons after SCI, the surviving number of grafted and differentiated neurons was too small to be considered to contribute to functional recovery after SCI. However, data suggests that the ability of MSCs to secrete soluble factors or vesicles rather than engrafting and transdifferentiating might serve an important role in SCI repair.
The authors also point to studies that indicate MSC implantation could promote a therapeutic effect and functional recovery in experimental SCI animal models. The authors believe that this is a result of MSCs ability to differentiate into specialized neuronal and glial cell lineages after transplantation. While MSC transplantation has not yet been proven to be an effective and reliable therapy for SCI, additional studies need to be done before the therapy is utilized in clinical applications.
MSCs respond to the local environment in multiple ways and represent the most promising exosomes for neuropathic applications. Qu and Zhang conclude this review by calling for more intensive studies examining the potential benefits of combining MSCs with nerve tissue-engineered scaffolds to direct cell behaviors after SCI, including growth, migration, and differentiation.
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating pathological condition affecting motor, sensory, and autonomic function. Additionally, recovery from a traumatic SCI (TSCI) is challenging due to the central nervous system’s limited capacity to regenerate cells, myelin, and neurological connections.
While traditional therapeutic treatments have proven ineffective in assisting in recovery, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold significant promise for the treatment of TSCIs.
As part of this systematic review, Montoto-Meijide et al. analyze the efficacy, safety, and therapeutic potential of MSC-based cell therapies in TSCI.
Specifically, the authors identified 22 studies fitting the objectives of this review, which provided the information needed to analyze changes in AIS (ASIA Impairment Scale) grade; to study changes in ASIA sensory and motor score; to evaluate chances in neurophysiological and urodynamic parameters; to identify changes in neuroimaging tests; and to test for the existence of adverse effects of MSC therapy.
Typically occurring as a result of trauma related to accidents or falls, TSCIs consist of two phases, a primary and a secondary phase. Considering the progression of SCI from the primary to secondary phase, the development of a therapeutic neuroprotective approach to prevent secondary injury continues to be a priority in both clinical and basic research.
Considering this, MSCs are currently one of the most promising therapeutic options for TCI, primarily due to their capacity for neuronal differentiation and regeneration, as well as their anti-apoptotic, anti-inflammatory, and angiogenic properties.
The 22 studies analyzed as part of this review included 463 patients. When analyzed in terms of the objectives listed above, Montoto-Meijide et al. reported that in controlled studies patients who received MSC therapy improved their AIS by at least one grade, with most studies also demonstrating improvement in sensory cores and motor scores.
In terms of neuroimaging evidence, the authors reported decreased lesion cavity size and decreased lesion hyperintensity. In addition, one-third of trials reported mild or moderate adverse effects related to the route of administration, and no reported serious treatment-related adverse effects.
The authors of this review reported that their results were consistent with the findings of other recent meta-analyses conducted by other researchers and were also consistent with studies that used a large number of patients but were not included in their review.
In addition, the authors also raise several interesting points that required further study, including determining the ideal stem cell type to use, identifying the most effective route and dose of administration, and finding out which degree and stage of development of the TSCL is most receptive to MSC therapy.
While MSC therapy continues to demonstrate promising potential results, Montoto-Meijide et al. also highlight future potential therapies currently in development. These therapies include gene therapies, nanomaterials, and neurostimulation combined with rehabilitation; all three of these potential treatments have shown promise when used in patients with SCI.
Limitations of this review include the relative newness of cell therapy in TSCI made it difficult to find relative studies and most of the studies used did not have a control group, were not randomized, showed low methodological quality, and lacked detail about the process and/or patient follow-up. Considering this, the authors emphasize the need for multi-center, randomized, and controlled trials with larger numbers of patients over a long period of time as a way to draw firm conclusions regarding this therapy.
Montoto-Meijide et al. conclude the positive changes in AIS grade and in ASIA sensory and motor scores, in addition to the short- and medium-term safety of this therapy, demonstrate the potential benefit of MSC therapy in TSCI patients.
Source: Montoto-Meijide R, Meijide-Faílde R, Díaz-Prado SM, Montoto-Marqués A. Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy in Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(14):11719. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241411719
The National Institute of Health estimates that nearly 250,000 people in the United States are currently living with a spinal cord injury (SCI). Most often a result of an accident, SCIs typically result in the loss of neurons and axonal damage resulting in the loss of function.
SCIs can be divided into two distinct phases, the initial physical injury and the secondary injury which typically occurs hours to days later. In most cases of SCI, damage to the axonal and tissue damage is caused by compression and/or contusion to the spinal cord. The secondary SCI injury occurs in the hours and days after the initial injury and is characterized by persistent inflammation, glial scar formation, demyelination of surrounding neurons, and death of cells. Over time, research has demonstrated that, in all aspects of secondary injury, the inflammatory response is the major cause and leads to widespread cell damage and lesion expansion.
Recent research has demonstrated that stem cells, including mesenchymal stem cells, neural stem/progenitor, and embryonic stem cells, possess anti-inflammatory properties and promote functional recovery after SCI by inducing macrophages M1/M2 phenotype transformation.
In this review, Cheng and He discuss the general features of macrophages in response to SCI, the phenotype, and function of macrophages in SCI, and the effects of stem cells on macrophage polarization and its role in stem cell-based therapies for SCI.
Macrophages accumulate in and around an SCI and play a very important role in neuroinflammation. Considering that recent research demonstrates the different, but important, contributions M1 and M2 macrophages make toward repairing tissue damage, this process is thought to be a promising therapeutic treatment for controlling the inflammation occurring after initial SCI.
According to this review, there are both positive and negative effects of macrophages on tissue repair and regeneration after an SCI. Interestingly, some studies show that infiltrating macrophages has harmful effects, especially in the early stages of an SCI. On the other hand, studies also indicated that macrophages have beneficial effects on tissue repair. These results included findings indicating that activated macrophages could provide a beneficial microenvironment that is good for the regeneration of sensory axons.
While the exact reason for the opposite effects of macrophages on the pathological process of SCI is not yet known, it’s thought to be because of the different phenotypes of macrophages – M1 (classical activation) and M2 (alternative activation).
Additionally, studies have demonstrated that M2 macrophages are important for efficient remyelination after CNS injury, while M1 macrophages hinder neurogenesis and inhibit neurite outgrowth and induce growth cone collapse of cortical neurons.
Considering these findings, the authors point out that polarization of macrophages to M2 is beneficial – and often preferred to M1- to facilitate the recovery after SCI. These findings have also demonstrated stem cell therapy to hold tremendous potential for therapeutic uses in the treatment/recovery after a spinal cord injury.
There is accumulating evidence indicating that the current preference of M2 macrophages compared to M1 macrophages correlates with remission of SCI in cases receiving SCI interventions including anti-inflammatory therapies and stem cells. The authors of this review conclude that while the exact process by which stem cells regulate macrophage polarization has yet to be determined, stem cells can alter macrophage polarization and promote functional recovery postinjury.
The National Institute of Health estimates that nearly 250,000 people in the United States are currently living with a spinal cord injury (SCI). Most often a result of an accident, SCIs typically result in the loss of neurons and axonal damage resulting in the loss of function.
SCIs can be divided into two distinct phases, the initial physical injury and the secondary injury which typically occurs hours to days later. In most cases of SCI, damage to the axonal and tissue damage is caused by compression and/or contusion to the spinal cord. The secondary SCI injury occurs in the hours and days after the initial injury and is characterized by persistent inflammation, glial scar formation, demyelination of surrounding neurons, and death of cells. Over time, research has demonstrated that, in all aspects of secondary injury, the inflammatory response is the major cause and leads to widespread cell damage and lesion expansion.
Recent research has demonstrated that stem cells, including mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), neural stem/progenitor, and embryonic stem cells, possess anti-inflammatory properties and promote functional recovery after SCI by inducing macrophages M1/M2 phenotype transformation.
In this review, Cheng and He discuss the general feature of macrophages in response to SCI, the phenotype, and function of macrophages in SCI, and the effects of stem cells on macrophage polarization and its role in stem cell-based therapies for SCI.
Macrophages accumulate in and around an SCI and play a very important role in neuroinflammation. Considering that recent research demonstrates the different, but important, contributions M1 and M2 macrophages make toward repairing tissue damage, this process is thought to be a promising therapeutic treatment for controlling the inflammation occurring after initial SCI.
According to this review, there are both positive and negative effects of macrophages on tissue repair and regeneration after an SCI. Interestingly, some studies show that infiltrating macrophages has harmful effects, especially in the early stages of an SCI. On the other hand, studies also indicated that macrophages have beneficial effects on tissue repair. These results included findings indicating that activated macrophages could provide a beneficial microenvironment that is good for the regeneration of sensory axons.
While the exact reason for the opposite effects of macrophages on the pathological process of SCI is not yet known, it’s thought to be because of the different phenotypes of macrophages – M1 (classical activation) and M2 (alternative activation).
Additionally, studies have demonstrated that M2 macrophages are important for efficient remyelination after CNS injury, while M1 macrophages hinder neurogenesis and inhibit neurite outgrowth and induce growth cone collapse of cortical neurons.
Considering these findings, the authors point out that polarization of macrophages to M2 is beneficial – and often preferred to M1- to facilitate the recovery after SCI. These findings have also demonstrated stem cell transplantation to hold tremendous potential for therapeutic uses in the treatment/recovery after SCI.
There is accumulating evidence indicating that the current preference of M2 macrophages compared to M1 macrophages correlates with remission of SCI in cases receiving SCI interventions including anti-inflammatory therapies and stem cells. The authors of this review conclude that while the exact process by which stem cells regulate macrophage polarization has yet to be determined, stem cells can alter macrophage polarization and promote functional recovery postinjury.
Spinal cord injury (SCI) often results in damage to the spinal cord or the nerves found within the spinal column. Currently estimated to affect over 17,000 new patients each year in the United States, with 81% of these patients being male, the most common causes of SCIs are motor vehicle accidents, falls, acts of violence, and sports/recreational activities.
Current SCI treatment methods are unable to support the regeneration of the spinal cord and often lead to permanent nerve damage that affects motor and sensory function. The nature of SCI injuries often leaves patients unable to function at pre-injury levels and results in significant impacts on issues related to physical, mental, and socioeconomic health.
As more is learned about the potential benefits of regenerative medicine in the regeneration and repair of damaged cells and tissue, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have emerged as potential candidates for the therapy management of SCIs; primarily because of their ability to release bioactive factors, their antiapoptotic effects, ability to inhibit scaring, and their ability to produce angiogenic effects.
Fracaro et al.’s review provides information about the damage from primary and secondary events after SCI, traditional treatments, and results of pre-clinical and clinical trials examining the use of MSCs as an SCI-tissue regeneration strategy.
Before sustaining an SCI, a wide range of inflammatory cells – all except for microglia – are found in blood vessels and throughout the spinal cord. Upon injury, it is common to observe immediate neuronal and glial death at the site of the injury followed by the development of an inflammatory process in the vascular and medullary region; it is this secondary response that results in the deterioration of the spinal cord and a general worsening of the condition. In the weeks and months following injury, remaining neutrophils and lymphocytes are found in the intravascular region, inactivated microglia remain in white matter, and macrophages are found in gray matter.
Traditional SCI treatments have demonstrated an inability to completely regenerate nervous tissue. Most of these traditional treatment methods attempt to reduce side effects and protect injured nerve tissue. Commonly used SCI treatments frequently include decompression surgery to relieve pressure and reduce hypoxia and ischemia; intravenous application of methylprednisolone sodium succinate (MPSS) to inhibit lipid peroxidation; neuroprotective agents to reduce cell dysfunction and death; and electrostimulation as a way to inhibit inflammation and reduce secondary injuries.
Despite the different techniques mentioned above, cell-based therapy is the only promising treatment aimed at regeneration. Stromal cells, and specifically MSCs, have demonstrated the potential for self-regeneration, differentiation, and immunomodulation. Although research has yet to determine exactly how MSCs promote functional recovery after SCI, they are widely thought to work through secreting different factors and biomolecules. MSCs have also demonstrated the ability to reduce inflammation, which is a very common secondary event occurring after SCI trauma.
The authors conclude this review by pointing out that a better understanding of the regenerative effects of stromal cells in the nervous system is required in order for the future development of cell-based therapies for patients with SCI.
This website and its contents are not intended to treat, cure, diagnose, or prevent any disease. Stemedix, Inc. shall not be held liable for the medical claims made by patient testimonials or videos. They are not to be viewed as a guarantee for each individual. The efficacy for some products presented have not been confirmed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Subscribe To Our Newsletter
Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates from our team.
You have Successfully Subscribed!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
Thanks for your interest!
Request Information Packet
We'll send your FREE information packet that outlines our entire personalized, stress-free stem cell treatment process!
St. Petersburg, Florida
