Dataset Information

Allogeneic adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells in ischaemic stroke (AMASCIS-02): a phase IIb, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Stroke is a serious public health problem, given it is a major cause of disability worldwide despite the spread of recanalisation therapies. Enhancement of brain plasticity with stem cell administration is a promising innovative therapy to reduce sequelae in these patients.

Methods and analysis

We have developed a phase IIb, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial protocol to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous administration of allogeneic adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs) in patients with acute ischaemic stroke, concurrently with conventional stroke treatment. Thirty patients will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to receive either intravenous placebo or allogeneic AD-MSCs as soon as possible within the first 4 days from stroke symptom onset. Patients will be followed up to 24 months after randomisation. The primary objective is the safety assessment of early intravenous administration of allogeneic AD-MSCs by reporting all adverse events and neurological or systemic complications in both treatment groups. Secondary objectives assess efficacy of early intravenous AD-MSC treatment in acute ischaemic stroke by evaluating changes in the modified Rankin Scale and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale throughout the follow-up period. In addition, brain repair biomarkers will be measured at various visits.

Ethics and dissemination

This clinical trial has been approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of La Paz University Hospital (Madrid, Spain) and by the Spanish Agency of Medication and Health Products and has been registered in Eudra CT (2019-001724-35) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04280003). Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications in Open Access format and at conference presentations.

SUBMITTER: de Celis-Ruiz E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8354278 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn animal models of ischaemic stroke, 25% albumin reduced brain infarction and improved neurobehavioural outcome. In a pilot clinical trial, albumin doses as high as 2 g/kg were safely tolerated. We aimed to assess whether albumin given within 5 h of the onset of acute ischaemic stroke increased the proportion of patients with a favourable outcome.MethodsWe did a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial between Feb 27, 2009, and Sept 10, 2012, at 69 sites in the USA, 13 sites in Canada, two sites in Finland, and five sites in Israel. Patients aged 18-83 years with ischaemic (ie, non-haemorrhagic) stroke with a baseline National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score of 6 or more who could be treated within 5 h of onset were randomly assigned (1:1), via a central web-based randomisation process with a biased coin minimisation approach, to receive 25% albumin (2 g [8 mL] per kg; maximum dose 750 mL) or the equivalent volume of isotonic saline. All study personnel and participants were masked to the identity of the study drug. The primary endpoint was favourable outcome, defined as either a modified Rankin scale score of 0 or 1, or an NIHSS score of 0 or 1, or both, at 90 days. Analysis was by intention to treat. Thrombolytic therapies were permitted. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00235495.Findings422 participants were randomly assigned to receive albumin and 419 to receive saline. On Sept 12, 2012, the trial was stopped early for futility (n=841). The primary outcome did not differ between patients in the albumin group and those in the saline group (186 [44%] vs 185 [44%]; risk ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·84-1·10, adjusted for baseline NIHSS score and thrombolysis stratum). Mild-to-moderate pulmonary oedema was more common in patients given albumin than in those given saline (54 [13%] of 412 vs 5 [1%] of 412 patients); symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage within 24 h was also more common in patients in the albumin group than in the placebo group (17 [4%] of 415 vs 7 [2%] of 414 patients). Although the rate of favourable outcome in patients given albumin remained consistent at 44-45% over the course of the trial, the cumulative rate of favourable outcome in patients given saline rose steadily from 31% to 44%.InterpretationOur findings show no clinical benefit of 25% albumin in patients with ischaemic stroke; however, they should not discourage further efforts to identify effective strategies to protect the ischaemic brain, especially because of preclinical literature showing convincing proof-of-principle for the possibility of this outcome.FundingNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, US National Institutes of Health; and Baxter Healthcare Corporation.

Project description:IntroductionWe evaluated the anti-interleukin-36 receptor antibody spesolimab in patients with moderate-to-severe palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP).MethodsThis phase IIb trial comprised a loading dose period to week (W) 4, then maintenance dosing to W52. Patients were randomised 2:1:1:1:2 to subcutaneous spesolimab 3000 mg to W4 then 600 mg every 4 weeks (q4w), spesolimab 3000 mg to W4 then 300 mg q4w, spesolimab 1500 mg to W4 then 600 mg q4w, spesolimab 1500 mg to W4, 300 mg q4w to W16 then 300 mg every 8 weeks (q8w), or placebo switching to spesolimab 600 mg q4w at W16. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change from baseline in Palmoplantar Pustular Area and Severity Index (PPP ASI) at W16. Secondary endpoints included a Palmoplantar Pustular Physician's Global Assessment (PPP PGA) score of 0/1. Safety (including adverse events [AEs], local tolerability) was assessed.Results152 patients were treated. The primary endpoint was not met; mean differences for spesolimab versus placebo ranged from - 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: - 31.5%, 2.2%) to - 5.3% (95% CI: - 19.1%, 8.6%); none reached significance. At W16, 23 (21.1%) and two (4.7%) patients in the combined spesolimab and placebo groups, respectively, achieved PPP PGA 0/1 (mean difference 16.4%; 95% CI: 3.8%, 25.7%), increasing to 59 (54.1%; combined spesolimab) and 12 (27.9%; placebo switch to spesolimab) patients at W52. Non-Asian patients had significant improvements in the primary endpoint (mean difference - 17.7%; nominal P = 0.0394) and PPP PGA 0/1 at W16 with spesolimab versus placebo. Rates of AEs and AE-related discontinuations were similar for spesolimab and placebo. Local tolerability events and injection-site reactions were more frequent with spesolimab than placebo.ConclusionThe primary objective to demonstrate a non-flat dose-response relationship and proof-of-concept was not achieved; improvements with spesolimab occurred in secondary endpoints and in non-Asian patients, indicating potential modest benefits. Spesolimab was generally well tolerated (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04015518).