| Literature DB >> 21887230 |
Sandra Boy1, Sophie Sauerbruch, Mathias Kraemer, Thorsten Schormann, Felix Schlachetzki, Gerhard Schuierer, Ralph Luerding, Burkhard Hennemann, Evelyn Orso, Andreas Dabringhaus, Jürgen Winkler, Ulrich Bogdahn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Regenerative strategies in the treatment of acute stroke may have great potential. Hematopoietic growth factors mobilize hematopoietic stem cells and may convey neuroprotective effects. We examined the safety, potential functional and structural changes, and CD34(+) cell-mobilization characteristics of G-CSF treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21887230 PMCID: PMC3162562 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023099
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
|
|
|
| moderate acute stroke within MCA (middle cerebral artery) territory, specified as M2-occlusion dominant and non-dominant hemispheres | previous treatment with Abciximab (Rheopro |
Baseline characteristics of intention-to-treat population.
| Patient No. | Sex | Age, yr | Location | Lysis | MRS | Stroke risk factors | ||||||
| ACA | MCA | VBT | Yes | no | Pre-stroke | Smoking | Hypertension | Diabetes | Lipids | |||
| G-CSF Dose 2.5 µg/kg (BW) | ||||||||||||
| 1 | M | 59 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 2 | M | 57 | + | + | 0 | − | − | − | − | |||
| 3 | M | 56 | + | + | 0 | − | − | − | − | |||
| 4 | M | 57 | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | − | |||
| 5 | F | 55 | + | + | 0 | − | − | − | − | |||
| 6 | F | 54 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 7 | F | 61 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 8 | M | 65 | + | + | 0 | + | − | − | − | |||
| G-CSF Dose 5 µg/kg (BW) | ||||||||||||
| 9 | F | 32 | + | + | 0 | − | − | − | − | |||
| 10 | M | 54 | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | |||
| 11 | M | 64 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 12 | F | 46 | + | + | 0 | − | − | − | − | |||
| 13 | F | 55 | + | + | 0 | + | + | − | + | |||
| 14 | M | 52 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| G-CSF Dose 10 µg/kg (BW) | ||||||||||||
| 15 | M | 53 | + | + | 0 | + | − | − | + | |||
| 16 | M | 59 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 17 | M | 64 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 18 | M | 62 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 19 | M | 64 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
| 20 | F | 35 | + | + | 0 | − | + | − | − | |||
Note: M = male; F = female; BW = Body weight ; ACA = anterior cerebral artery, MCA = middle cerebral artery, VBT = vertebrobasilar territory; MRS = modified Rankin scale.
Serious adverse events with time of onset, duration and outcome; ICP = intracranial pressure; ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate.
| SAE Term | Patient No. | Date of onset | Number of G-CSF doses received | Duration (days) | Relationship | Symptoms/AEs associated with SAE | Patient follow-up |
| Intracranial hemorrhage 3 hrs after first s.c. injection of 5 µg/kg G-CSF, 12 hrs after ischemia; patient was treated with iv heparin with ptt 44 secStudy medication withdrawn. | 11 | 11 Jan 2004 | 1 | 17 | Unlikely | Nausea, vomiting, and hemiplegia | Repeated hemorrhages without definite diagnosis of coagulation abnormality or thrombocyte dysfunction |
| Increasing edema in the area of infarction with rise of intracranial pressure about 20 hrs after fourth s. c. injection of 10 µg/kg G-CSF, about 110–120 hrs after ischemia | 16 | 07 Jul 2005 | 4 | 10 | Unlikely | First nausea, vomiting and increasing hemiparesis. Intubation and application of ICP sensor on 07/07/2005. Pneumonia with increase of CRP under ventilation. | Stabilization under anti-edematous and antibiotic therapy. Extubation after five days. |
| Pectanginous symptomatology about 12 hrs after second s.c. injection of 5 µg/kg G-CSF, about 48 hrs after ischemia; study medication withdrawn | 17 | 08 Nov 2006 | 2 | 1 | Unlikely | No | Controls of cardiac enzymes and ECG revealed no pathology. |
| Suspected endocarditis. Strongly accelerated ESR 10 hrs after first s.c. injection of 5 µg/kg G-CSF, about 21 hrs after ischemia Echocardiography showed moderate mitral regurgitation with thickening of leaflets; these results raised suspicion of Libman-Sacks endocarditis. Study medication withdrawn. | 20 | 04 Sep 2008 | 1 | 1 | Unlikely | Fatigue | Controls of ESR the next days showed normalized values. Further diagnostics revealed no autoimmune disease |
Figure 1Scores over time.
MRS (Modified Rankin Scale) scores over time as median with minimum and maximum in three different dosage groups (A). NIHSS (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale) scores over time as median with minimum and maximum in three different dosage groups (B).
Figure 2Absolute CD34+ cell count/µl over time as median with minimum and maximum over time in the three different dosage groups.
Figure 3VGM volume fields in Patients 12 (left) and 13 (right).
Left: The first MRI, obtained within 48 hours after stroke onset, is compared to MRIs obtained 4 days (A), 3 months (B), and 5 years (C) later. After 5 years, volume increases can be detected in a spotlike distribution (arrow) within the infarcted area. Right: Volume fields are shown from MRIs obtained 5 days (A), 3 months (B), and 5 years after the first MRI had been obtained immediately after stroke onset. A small area of volume increase (arrow) within the original ischemic zone, first seen after 3 months, still persists.
Neuropsychological assessment.
| Differences between Day 7 and Day 90 in standard deviations | ||||||||||
| Patient No. | 2 | 3 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 13 | 18 | 19 | Mean difference | statistical significance |
| Long-term memory | ||||||||||
| Wechsler Logical Memory II | 0.7 | 1.4 | −0.3 | 0.8 | 2 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0 | 0.8 | p<0.05 |
| Wechsler Logical Memory I | 0.8 | 1 | −0.5 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.8 | −0.1 | 0.6 | not significant |
| Rey Complex figure Delay | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.8 | −0.5 | 2.2 | 0.9 | 0.5 | −0.1 | 0.7 | p<0.05 |
| Working memory | ||||||||||
| Digit span backward | 0 | 0.8 | 0 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.4 | not significant |
| Digit span forward | 0 | 1.8 | −0.9 | −0.9 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 0 | 0.9 | 0.3 | not significant |
| Block span | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | −2.9 | 0 | not significant |
| Attention | ||||||||||
| Trail making Test B | 1 | 0.8 | 0 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.5 | −0.2 | 0 | 0.8 | p<0.05 |
| Ruff 2&7 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.2 | n.a. | 1.1 | −0.7 | 0.5 | not significant |
| Lexical Fluency | 0.8 | −0.1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.8 | 0.2 | −0.5 | 0.4 | not significant |
| Semantic fluency | 0.4 | 2.2 | 1.8 | −0.7 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.1 | −0.6 | 0.6 | not significant |
| Visual perception | ||||||||||
| Rey Complex Figure Copy | 1.4 | 0.3 | 0 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 0.8 | −0.3 | 0.2 | not significant |
| Trail Making Test A | −0.4 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0 | 0.9 | −0.4 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.4 | not significant |
| Full scale IQ | −0.8 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.5 | −0.5 | 0.3 | not significant |
Negative values used to describe a loss from Day 7 to Day 90; positive values to describe an improvement. A difference in z-scores under or above z = ±1 is bigger than one standard deviation.
n.a. = not administered. Significance computed using the Wilcoxon test for repeated measures.