Dataset Information

A prospective multicenter phase I/II clinical trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of NOVOCART Disc plus autologous disc chondrocyte transplantation in the treatment of nucleotomized and degenerative lumbar disc to avoid secondary disease: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Intervertebral disc degeneration is emphasized as an important cause of low back pain. Current surgical treatment provides relief to the accompanying pain and disability but does not restore the biological function of the intervertebral disc. NOVOCART™ Disc plus, an autologous cell compound for autologous disc chondrocyte transplantation, was developed to reduce the degenerative sequelae after lumbar disc surgery or to prophylactically avoid degeneration in adjacent discs.This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical phase I/II combination study. A total of 120 adult patients are allocated in a ratio of 2:1:1. Sample size and power calculations were performed to detect the minimal clinically important difference of 10 units, with an expected standard deviation of 12 in the Oswestry Disability Index, which is the primary outcome parameter. Secondary outcome parameters include the visual analog scale and the EQ-5D questionnaire. Changes in physical and mental health are evaluated using the Short Form-12 (SF-12). Moreover, radiological and functional outcomes are evaluated. The major inclusion criterion is a single lumbar disc herniation that requires sequestrectomy. Transplantation is performed 90 days thereafter. Study data generation (study sites) and data storage, processing, and statistical analysis are clearly separated.In this phase-I/II study, NDplus is being investigated for its clinical applicability, safety, and efficacy in the repair of herniated, nucleotomized discs, and of adjacent degenerated discs, if present. To date, autologous disc chondrocytes have not been transplanted into degenerative discs without previous disc herniation. As such, this is the first study to investigate a therapeutic as well as a prophylactic approach to treat degenerative discs of the lumbar spine.EudraCT No: 2010-023830-22, ID NCT01640457 , 8 November 2010.

SUBMITTER: Tschugg A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4768412 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A prospective multicenter phase I/II clinical trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of NOVOCART Disc plus autologous disc chondrocyte transplantation in the treatment of nucleotomized and degenerative lumbar disc to avoid secondary disease: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Tschugg Anja A Michnacs Felix F Strowitzki Martin M Meisel Hans Jörg HJ Thomé Claudius C

Trials 20160226 1

<h4>Background</h4>Intervertebral disc degeneration is emphasized as an important cause of low back pain. Current surgical treatment provides relief to the accompanying pain and disability but does not restore the biological function of the intervertebral disc. NOVOCART™ Disc plus, an autologous cell compound for autologous disc chondrocyte transplantation, was developed to reduce the degenerative sequelae after lumbar disc surgery or to prophylactically avoid degeneration in adjacent discs.<h4> ...[more]

PMID: 26920137

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a common cause of lower back pain with radicular symptoms and has a significant socioeconomic impact given the associated disability. Limited effective conservative therapeutic options result in many turning to surgical alternatives for management, which vary in the rate of success and also carry an increased risk of morbidity and mortality associated with the procedures. Several animal based studies and a few human pilot studies have demonstrated safety and suggest efficacy in the treatment of DDD with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). The use of bone marrow-derived MSCs for the treatment of DDD is promising and in the present study we report on the safety and efficacy findings from a registry based proof of concept study using a percutaneous intradiscal injection of cultured MSCs for the management of DDD with associated radicular symptoms. METHODS:Thirty-three patients with lower back pain and disc degeneration with a posterior disc bulge diagnosed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) met the inclusion criteria and were treated with culture-expanded, autologous, bone marrow-derived MSCs. Prospective registry data was obtained at multiple time intervals up to 6 years post-treatment. Collected outcomes included numeric pain score (NPS), a modified single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) rating, functional rating index (FRI), measurement of the intervertebral disc posterior dimension, and adverse events. RESULTS:Three patients reported pain related to procedure that resolved. There were no serious adverse events (i.e. death, infection, or tumor) associated with the procedure. NPS change scores relative to baseline were significant at 3, 36, 48, 60, and 72 months post-treatment. The average modified SANE ratings showed a mean improvement of 60% at 3 years post-treatment. FRI post-treatment change score averages exceeded the minimal clinically important difference at all time points except 12 months. Twenty of the patients treated underwent post-treatment MRI and 85% had a reduction in disc bulge size, with an average reduction size of 23% post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Patients treated with autologous cultured MSCs for lower back pain with radicular symptoms in the setting of DDD reported minor adverse events and significant improvements in pain, function, and overall subjective improvement through 6 years of follow-up. NCT03011398. A Clinical Registry of Orthobiologics Procedures. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03011398?term=orthobiologics&rank=1.

Project description:BackgroundDuring lumbar spinal fusion, spacer cages are implanted to provide vertebral stability, restore sagittal alignment, and maintain disc and foraminal height. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is commonly used by most spine surgeons. Silicon nitride (Si3N4) is a less well-known alternative although it was first used as a spacer in lumbar fusion over 30 years ago. The present study was designed to see if Si3N4 cages would perform similarly to PEEK in a randomized controlled trial.MethodsA non-inferiority multicenter 100-patient study was designed where both the observer and patient were blinded. Single- or double-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation using an oblique PEEK or Si3N4 cage was performed. The primary non-inferiority outcome was the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). Secondary measures included the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) for back and leg pain, SF-36 Physical and Mental Function indices, patient and surgeon Likert scores on perceived recovery, and X-ray and CT radiological evaluations for subsidence, segmental motion, and fusion. Follow-up evaluations occurred at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months.ResultsAfter exclusions for protocol violations and canceled surgeries, 92 patients were randomized (i.e., 48 for PEEK and 44 for Si3N4). There were no differences in baseline demographics, pre-operative disabilities, or pain scores between the groups. Both treatment arms showed significant improvements in disability, pain, and recovery scores. No significant differences were observed for subsidence, segmental motion, or fusion. For the primary outcome (i.e., RMDQ scores), the non-inferiority of Si3N4 compared to PEEK could not be established using the original protocol criteria. However, the comparison was undermined by larger than anticipated patient fallout coupled with higher than expected RMDQ score standard deviations. A post hoc analysis coupled with a more extensive review of the literature was conducted which resulted in the selection of a revised clinically justified non-inferiority margin; and using this method, the non-inferiority of Si3N4 was affirmed.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that the use of either PEEK or Si3N4 cages is safe and effective for patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion for chronic degenerative disc disease.

Project description:ImportanceConflicting evidence and large practice variation are present in the surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. More than 90% of surgical procedures in the United States include instrumented fusion compared with 50% or less in other countries.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether the effectiveness of microdecompression alone is noninferior to decompression with instrumented fusion in a real-world setting.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter comparative effectiveness study with a noninferiority design assessed prospective data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. From September 19, 2007, to December 21, 2015, 1376 patients at 35 Norwegian orthopedic and neurosurgical departments underwent surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis without scoliosis. After excluding patients undergoing laminectomy alone, fusion without instrumentation, or surgery in more than 2 levels and those with a former operation at the index level, 794 patients were included in the analyses, regardless of missing or incomplete follow-up data, before propensity score matching. Data were analyzed from March 20 to October 30, 2018.ExposuresMicrodecompression alone or decompression with instrumented fusion.Main outcomes and measuresA reduction from baseline of 30% or greater in the Oswestry Disability Index at 12-month follow-up.ResultsAfter propensity score matching, 570 patients (413 female [72%]; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [9.5] years) were included for comparison, with 285 undergoing microdecompression (mean [SD] age, 64.6 [9.8] years; 205 female [72%]) and 285 undergoing decompression with instrumented fusion (mean [SD] age, 64.8 [9.2] years; 208 female [73%]). The proportion of each type of procedure varied between departments. However, changes in outcome scores varied within patients but not between departments. The proportion of patients with improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index of at least 30% was 150 of 219 (68%) in the microdecompression group and 155 of 215 (72%) in the instrumentation group. The 95% CI (-12% to 5%) for the difference of -4% was above the predefined margin of noninferiority (-15%). Microdecompression alone was associated with shorter operation time (mean [SD], 89 [44] vs 180 [65] minutes; P < .001) and shorter hospital stay (mean [SD], 2.5 [2.4] vs 6.4 [3.0] days; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, the clinical effectiveness of microdecompression alone was noninferior to that of decompression with instrumented fusion. Microdecompression alone was also associated with shorter durations of surgery and hospital stay, supporting the suggestion that the less invasive procedure should be considered for most patients.

Project description:BackgroundThis study compared 7-year safety and efficacy outcomes of activL and ProDisc-L lumbar total disc replacements in patients with symptomatic, single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). The objectives are to report 7-year outcomes of the trial, evaluate the outcomes for patients lost to follow-up, and determine whether early outcomes predict long-term outcomes.MethodsThis was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled investigational device exemption study. Eligible patients with symptomatic, single-level lumbar DDD had failed ≥6 months of nonsurgical management. Patients (N = 283) were randomized to receive activL (n = 218) or ProDisc-L (n = 65). At 7 years, data were available from 206 patients (activL, 160; ProDisc-L, 46). Logistic regression models were fit to predict 7-year outcomes for patients lost to follow-up after 2 years.ResultsAt 7 years, the activL group was noninferior to the ProDisc-L group on the primary composite endpoint (P = .0369). Both groups showed significant reductions in back/leg pain severity and improvements in disability index and quality-of-life relative to baseline (P < .0001). In both groups, opioid use was significantly reduced at 7 years (0%) relative to baseline (P < .01), and the overall reoperation rates were low (4.6%). activL patients showed a significantly better range of motion (ROM) for flexion-extension rotation than ProDisc-L patients (P = .0334). A significantly higher proportion of activL patients did not report serious adverse events (activL, 62%; ProDisc-L, 43%; P = .011). Predictive modeling indicated that >70% of patients (depending on outcome) lost to follow-up after 2 years would show clinically significant improvement at 7 years if improvements were achieved at 2 years.ConclusionsThe benefits of activL and ProDisc-L are maintained after 7 years, with significant improvements from baseline observed in pain, function, and opioid use. activL is more effective at preserving ROM than ProDisc-L and has a more favorable safety profile. Improvements in other primary and secondary outcomes were similar between both disc designs.Level of evidence1.

Project description:BackgroundPolyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages have been widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disorders, and show good clinical results. Still, complications such as subsidence and migration of the cage are frequently seen. A lack of osteointegration and fibrous tissues surrounding PEEK cages are held responsible. Ceramic implants made of silicon nitride show better biocompatible and osteoconductive qualities, and therefore are expected to lower complication rates and allow for better fusion.Purpose of this study is to show that fusion with the silicon nitride cage produces non-inferior results in outcome of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at all follow-up time points as compared to the same procedure with PEEK cages.Methods/designThis study is designed as a double blind multi-center randomized controlled trial with repeated measures analysis. 100 patients (18-75 years) presenting with symptomatic lumbar degenerative disorders unresponsive to at least 6 months of conservative treatment are included. Patients will be randomly assigned to a PEEK cage or a silicon nitride cage, and will undergo a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation. Primary outcome measure is the functional improvement measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. Secondary outcome parameters are the VAS leg, VAS back, SF-36, Likert scale, neurological outcome and radiographic assessment of fusion. After 1 year the fusion rate will be measured by radiograms and CT. Follow-up will be continued for 2 years. Patients and clinical observers who will perform the follow-up visits will be blinded for type of cage used during follow-up. Analyses of radiograms and CT will be performed independently by two experienced radiologists.DiscussionIn this study a PEEK cage will be compared with a silicon nitride cage in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders. To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial in which the silicon nitride cage is compared with the PEEK cage in patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders.Trial registrationNCT01557829.

Dataset Information

A prospective multicenter phase I/II clinical trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of NOVOCART Disc plus autologous disc chondrocyte transplantation in the treatment of nucleotomized and degenerative lumbar disc to avoid secondary disease: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

A prospective multicenter phase I/II clinical trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of NOVOCART Disc plus autologous disc chondrocyte transplantation in the treatment of nucleotomized and degenerative lumbar disc to avoid secondary disease: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure