Dataset Information

Human mesenchymal stem cells treatment for severe COVID-19: 1-year follow-up results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The long-term consequences of human umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cell (UC-MSC) treatment for COVID-19 patients are yet to be reported. This study assessed the 1-year outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19, who were recruited in our previous UC-MSC clinical trial.

Methods

In this prospective, longitudinal, cohort study, 100 patients enrolled in our phase 2 trial were prospectively followed up at 3-month intervals for 1 year to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of UC-MSC treatment. The primary endpoint was an altered proportion of whole-lung lesion volumes measured by high-resolution CT. Other imaging outcomes, 6 min walking distance (6-MWD), lung function, plasma biomarkers, and adverse events were also recorded and analyzed. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04288102).

Findings

MSC administration improved in whole-lung lesion volume compared with the placebo with a difference of -10.8% (95% CI: -20.7%, -1.5%, p = 0.030) on day 10. MSC also reduced the proportion of solid component lesion volume compared with the placebo at each follow-up point. More interestingly, 17.9% (10/56) of patients in the MSC group had normal CT images at month 12, but none in the placebo group (p = 0.013). The incidence of symptoms was lower in the MSC group than in the placebo group at each follow-up time. Neutralizing antibodies were all positive, with a similar median inhibition rate (61.6% vs. 67.6%) in both groups at month 12. No difference in adverse events at the 1-year follow-up and tumor markers at month 12 were observed between the two groups.

Interpretation

UC-MSC administration achieves a long-term benefit in the recovery of lung lesions and symptoms in COVID-19 patients.

Funding

The National Key R&D Program of China, the Innovation Groups of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the National Science and Technology Major Project.

SUBMITTER: Shi L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8709782 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLong-term effects of human mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) treatment on COVID-19 patients have not been fully characterized. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a MSC treatment administered to severe COVID-19 patients enrolled in our previous randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT04288102).MethodsA total of 100 patients experiencing severe COVID-19 received either MSC treatment (n = 65, 4 × 107 cells per infusion) or a placebo (n = 35) combined with standard of care on days 0, 3, and 6. Patients were subsequently evaluated 18 and 24 months after treatment to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of the MSC treatment. Outcomes measured included: 6-min walking distance (6-MWD), lung imaging, quality of life according to the Short Form 36 questionnaire (SF-36), COVID-19-related symptoms, titers of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies, tumor markers, and MSC-related adverse events (AEs).FindingsTwo years after treatment, a marginally smaller proportion of patients had a 6-MWD below the lower limit of the normal range in the MSC group than in the placebo group (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.04-0.80, Fisher's exact test, p = 0.015). At month 18, the general health score from the SF-36 was higher in the MSC group than in the placebo group (50.00 vs. 35.00, 95% CI: 0.00-20.00, Wilcoxon rank sum test, p = 0.018). Total severity score of lung imaging and the titer of neutralizing antibodies were similar between the two groups at months 18 and 24. There was no difference in AEs or tumor markers at the 2-year follow-up between the two groups.InterpretationLong-term safety was observed for the COVID-19 patients who received MSC treatment. However, efficacy of MSC treatment was not significantly sustained through the end of the 2-year follow-up period.FundingThe National Key Research and Development Program of China (2022YFA1105604, 2020YFC0860900, 2022YFC2304401), the specific research fund of The Innovation Platform for Academicians of Hainan Province (YSPTZX202216) and the Fund of National Clinical Center for Infectious Diseases, PLA General Hospital (NCRC-ID202105,413FZT6).

Project description:BackgroundA large, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of repeat BCG found 49% efficacy against leprosy but no protection against tuberculosis after 6-9 years' follow-up in 1995. We report here additional follow-up, which resulted in greatly increased tuberculosis case numbers, and allowed subgroup analysis.MethodsNearly 47 000 individuals of all ages living in northern Malawi with a BCG vaccine scar were randomly assigned (1:1) between 1986 and 1989 to receive a second BCG or placebo. The investigators and project staff remained masked to all interventions. Enhanced passive surveillance ensured ascertainment of tuberculosis and leprosy to the end of 2018. Tuberculosis case definitions included rigorous microbiological or histological confirmation. Prespecified subgroup analyses were by tuberculosis type, age at vaccination, time since vaccination, previous tuberculin reactivity, HIV status and Mycobacterium tuberculosis lineage. The original trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN11311670.FindingsIn follow-up until Dec 31, 2018, 824 participants had developed tuberculosis, including 786 with pulmonary disease, of whom 383 (63%) of 607 with known HIV status were HIV positive. There was no effect of a second BCG overall (odds ratio [OR] 0·92; 95% CI 0·80-1·05), or for pulmonary (0·93; 0·81-1·07), or lymph node tuberculosis (0·60; 0·31-1·17). The OR was lower for those with known HIV-negative tuberculosis (0·77; 0·59-1·00), for those vaccinated as children (aged <5 years, 0·74; 0·41-1·35; aged 5-14 years, 0·77; 0·60-0·99), and for cases arising at least 20 years after vaccination (0·79; 0·63-1·01). There were no differences by tuberculin status at vaccination, or lineage. There was no evidence of protection against leprosy beyond 10 years after vaccination (although there have been only nine diagnostically certain cases since 1995).InterpretationThere was no evidence that repeat BCG vaccination provides appreciable protection against overall tuberculosis in this rural African population with a high prevalence of HIV. Subgroup effects should not be overinterpreted given the multiple analyses done. However, the evidence for modest protection against HIV-negative tuberculosis, and for a delayed benefit in those vaccinated as children, is consistent with other observations in the literature.FundingLEPRA, Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundThe novel coronavirus is still mutating, and the pandemic continues. Meanwhile, many COVID-19 survivors have residual postinfection clinical manifestations. Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (hUC-MSCs) have been shown to be effective in the early stages of COVID-19.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate long-term safety and efficacy of treatment in patients with severe COVID-19 patients who had received hUC-MSCs therapy.MethodsTwenty-five discharged patients who had severe COVID-19 (including the standard treatment group and the standard treatment plus hUC-MSCs group) were enrolled in a 1-year follow-up. The assessment considered adverse effects (including effects on liver and kidney function, coagulation, ECG, tumor marker, and so on), pulmonary function, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), postinfection sequelae and serum concentration of Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6), malondialdehyde (MDA), H2S, carnitine, and N-6 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (N-6 LC-PUFAs).Measurements and main resultsPulmonary ventilation function had significantly improved at the 1-year follow-up in both the hUC-MSCs group and the control group compared with the 3-month follow-up (P < 0.01). Fatigue (60% [15/25]) remained the most common symptom at the 1-year follow-up. The rate of fatigue relief was significantly reduced in the hUC-MSCs group (25% [2/8]) compared to the control group (76.5% [13/17]) (P = 0.028). The level of KL-6 was significantly lower in the hUC-MSCs group (2585.5 ± 186.5 U/ml) than in the control group (3120.7 ± 158.3 U/ml) (P < 0.001). Compared with the control group, the hUC-MSCs group had a lower level of MDA (9.27 ± 0.54 vs. 9.91 ± 0.72 nmol/ml, P = 0.036). No obvious adverse effects were observed in the hUC-MSCs treatment group at 1 year after discharge.ConclusionsIntravenous transplantation of hUC-MSCs was a safe approach in the long term in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19. In addition, hUC-MSCs had a positive effect on postinfection sequelae in COVID-19 survivors.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registration; ChiCTR2000031494; Registered 02 April 2020-Retrospectively registered, http://www.medresman.org.

Project description:Study designA randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial.ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of cervical interlaminar epidural injections of local anesthetic with or without steroids for the management of axial or discogenic pain in patients without disc herniation, radiculitis, or facet joint pain.Summary of background dataCervical discogenic pain without disc herniation is a common cause of suffering and disability in the adult population. Once conservative management has failed and facet joint pain has been excluded, cervical epidural injections may be considered as a management tool. Despite a paucity of evidence, cervical epidural injections are one of the most commonly performed nonsurgical interventions in the management of chronic axial or disc-related neck pain.MethodsOne hundred and twenty patients without disc herniation or radiculitis and negative for facet joint pain as determined by means of controlled diagnostic medial branch blocks were randomly assigned to one of the 2 treatment groups. Group I patients received cervical interlaminar epidural injections of local anesthetic (lidocaine 0.5%, 5 mL), whereas Group II patients received 0.5% lidocaine, 4 mL, mixed with 1 mL or 6 mg of nonparticulate betamethasone. The primary outcome measure was ≥ 50% improvement in pain and function. Outcome assessments included numeric rating scale (NRS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), opioid intake, employment, and changes in weight.ResultsSignificant pain relief and functional improvement (≥ 50%) was present at the end of 2 years in 73% of patients receiving local anesthetic only and 70% receiving local anesthetic with steroids. In the successful group of patients, however, defined as consistent relief with 2 initial injections of at least 3 weeks, significant improvement was illustrated in 78% in the local anesthetic group and 75% in the local anesthetic with steroid group at the end of 2 years. The results reported at the one-year follow-up were sustained at the 2-year follow-up.ConclusionsCervical interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids may provide significant improvement in pain and functioning in patients with chronic discogenic or axial pain that is function-limiting and not related to facet joint pain.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether theta/beta-ratio (TBR) electroencephalographic biofeedback (neurofeedback [NF]) has a specific effect on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) beyond nonspecific benefit.MethodIn a 2-site double-blind randomized clinical trial, 144 children aged 7 to 10 years with rigorously diagnosed moderate/severe ADHD and theta/beta-ratio (TBR) ≥4.5 were randomized 3:2 to deliberate TBR downtraining versus a control of equal duration, intensity, and appearance. Two early dropouts left 142 children for modified intent-to-treat analysis. The control used prerecorded electroencephalograms with the participant's artifacts superimposed. Treatment was programmed via Internet by an off-site statistician-guided co-investigator. Fidelity was 98.7% by trainers/therapists and 93.2% by NF expert monitor. The primary outcome was parent- and teacher-rated inattention; analysis was mixed-effects regression. Because the expense and effort of NF can be justified only by enduring benefit, follow-ups were integrated.ResultsBlinding was excellent. Although both groups showed significant improvement (p < .001, d = 1.5) in parent/teacher-rated inattention from baseline to treatment end and 13-month follow-up, NF was not significantly superior to the control condition at either time point on this primary outcome (d = 0.01, p = .965 at treatment end; d = 0.23, p = .412 at 13-month follow-up). Responders (Clinical Global Impression-Improvement [CGI-I] = 1-2) were 61% of NF and 54% of controls (p = .36). Adverse events were distributed proportionally between treatments. The 13-month follow-up found nonsignificant improvement from treatment end for NF (d = 0.1), with mild deterioration for controls (d = -0.07). NF required significantly less medication at follow-up (p = .012).ConclusionThis study does not support a specific effect of deliberate TBR NF at either treatment end or 13-month follow-up. Participants will be reassessed at 25-month follow-up.Clinical trial registration informationDouble-Blind 2-Site Randomized Clinical Trial of Neurofeedback for ADHD; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT02251743.

Project description:BackgroundAntenatal corticosteroids for women at risk of preterm birth reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality, but there is limited evidence regarding their effects on long-term health. This study assessed cardiovascular outcomes at 50 years after antenatal exposure to corticosteroids.Methods and findingsWe assessed the adult offspring of women who participated in the first randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of antenatal betamethasone for the prevention of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (1969 to 1974). The first 717 mothers received 2 intramuscular injections of 12 mg betamethasone or placebo 24 h apart and the subsequent 398 received 2 injections of 24 mg betamethasone or equivalent volume of placebo. Follow-up included a health questionnaire and consent to access administrative data sources. The co-primary outcomes were the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (any of hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, gestational diabetes mellitus, or prediabetes) and age at first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation, stroke, admission for peripheral vascular disease, and admission for heart failure). Analyses were adjusted for gestational age at entry, sex, and clustering. Of 1,218 infants born to 1,115 mothers, we followed up 424 (46% of survivors; 212 [50%] female) at mean (standard deviation) age 49.3 (1.0) years. There were no differences between those exposed to betamethasone or placebo for cardiovascular risk factors (159/229 [69.4%] versus 131/195 [67.2%]; adjusted relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.89, 1.18;]; p = 0.735) or age at first MACE (adjusted hazard ratio 0.58, 95% CI [0.23, 1.49]; p = 0.261). There were also no differences in the components of these composite outcomes or in any of the other secondary outcomes. Key limitations were follow-up rate and lack of in-person assessments.ConclusionsThere is no evidence that antenatal corticosteroids increase the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors or incidence of cardiovascular events up to 50 years of age. Established benefits of antenatal corticosteroids are not outweighed by an increase in adult cardiovascular disease.

Project description:BackgroundTrials of BCG vaccination to prevent or reduce severity of COVID-19 are taking place in adults, some of whom have been previously vaccinated, but evidence of the beneficial, non-specific effects of BCG come largely from data on mortality in infants and young children, and from in-vitro and animal studies, after a first BCG vaccination. We assess all-cause mortality following a large BCG revaccination trial in Malawi.MethodsThe Karonga Prevention trial was a population-based, double-blind, randomised controlled in Karonga District, northern Malawi, that enrolled participants between January, 1986, and November, 1989. The trial compared BCG (Glaxo-strain) revaccination versus placebo to prevent tuberculosis and leprosy. 46 889 individuals aged 3 months to 75 years were randomly assigned to receive BCG revaccination (n=23 528) or placebo (n=23 361). Here we report mortality since vaccination as recorded during active follow-up in northern areas of the district in 1991-94, and in a demographic surveillance follow-up in the southern area in 2002-18. 7389 individuals who received BCG (n=3746) or placebo (n=3643) lived in the northern follow-up areas, and 5616 individuals who received BCG (n=2798) or placebo (n=2818) lived in the southern area. Year of death or leaving the area were recorded for those not found. We used survival analysis to estimate all-cause mortality.FindingsFollow-up information was available for 3709 (99·0%) BCG recipients and 3612 (99·1%) placebo recipients in the northern areas, and 2449 (87·5%) BCG recipients and 2413 (85·6%) placebo recipients in the southern area. There was no difference in mortality between the BCG and placebo groups in either area, overall or by age group or sex. In the northern area, there were 129 deaths per 19 694 person-years at risk in the BCG group (6·6 deaths per 1000 person-years at risk [95% CI 5·5-7·8]) versus 133 deaths per 19 111 person-years at risk in the placebo group (7·0 deaths per 1000 person-years at risk [95% CI 5·9-8·2]; HR 0·94 [95% CI 0·74-1·20]; p=0·62). In the southern area, there were 241 deaths per 38 399 person-years at risk in the BCG group (6·3 deaths per 1000 person-years at risk [95% CI 5·5-7·1]) versus 230 deaths per 38 676 person-years at risk in the placebo group (5·9 deaths per 1000 person-years at risk [95% CI 5·2-6·8]; HR 1·06 [95% CI 0·88-1·27]; p=0·54).InterpretationWe found little evidence of any beneficial effect of BCG revaccination on all-cause mortality. The high proportion of deaths attributable to non-infectious causes beyond infancy, and the long time interval since BCG for most deaths, might obscure any benefits.FundingBritish Leprosy Relief Association (LEPRA); Wellcome Trust.

Project description:BackgroundLynch syndrome is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer and with a broader spectrum of cancers, especially endometrial cancer. In 2011, our group reported long-term cancer outcomes (mean follow-up 55·7 months [SD 31·4]) for participants with Lynch syndrome enrolled into a randomised trial of daily aspirin versus placebo. This report completes the planned 10-year follow-up to allow a longer-term assessment of the effect of taking regular aspirin in this high-risk population.MethodsIn the double-blind, randomised CAPP2 trial, 861 patients from 43 international centres worldwide (707 [82%] from Europe, 112 [13%] from Australasia, 38 [4%] from Africa, and four [<1%] from The Americas) with Lynch syndrome were randomly assigned to receive 600 mg aspirin daily or placebo. Cancer outcomes were monitored for at least 10 years from recruitment with English, Finnish, and Welsh participants being monitored for up to 20 years. The primary endpoint was development of colorectal cancer. Analysis was by intention to treat and per protocol. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN59521990.FindingsBetween January, 1999, and March, 2005, 937 eligible patients with Lynch syndrome, mean age 45 years, commenced treatment, of whom 861 agreed to be randomly assigned to the aspirin group or placebo; 427 (50%) participants received aspirin and 434 (50%) placebo. Participants were followed for a mean of 10 years approximating 8500 person-years. 40 (9%) of 427 participants who received aspirin developed colorectal cancer compared with 58 (13%) of 434 who received placebo. Intention-to-treat Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed a significantly reduced hazard ratio (HR) of 0·65 (95% CI 0·43-0·97; p=0·035) for aspirin versus placebo. Negative binomial regression to account for multiple primary events gave an incidence rate ratio of 0·58 (0·39-0·87; p=0·0085). Per-protocol analyses restricted to 509 who achieved 2 years' intervention gave an HR of 0·56 (0·34-0·91; p=0·019) and an incidence rate ratio of 0·50 (0·31-0·82; p=0·0057). Non-colorectal Lynch syndrome cancers were reported in 36 participants who received aspirin and 36 participants who received placebo. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses showed no effect. For all Lynch syndrome cancers combined, the intention-to-treat analysis did not reach significance but per-protocol analysis showed significantly reduced overall risk for the aspirin group (HR=0·63, 0·43-0·92; p=0·018). Adverse events during the intervention phase between aspirin and placebo groups were similar, and no significant difference in compliance between intervention groups was observed for participants with complete intervention phase data; details reported previously.InterpretationThe case for prevention of colorectal cancer with aspirin in Lynch syndrome is supported by our results.FundingCancer Research UK, European Union, MRC, NIHR, Bayer Pharma AG, Barbour Foundation.