Harvinder S Chhabra1, Kanchan Sarda2, Geeta Jotwani3, M Gourie-Devi4, Erkan Kaptanoglu5, Susan Charlifue6, S L Yadav7, B Mohapatra8, Abhishek Srivastava8, Kedar Phadke8. 1. Spine Unit, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India. drhschhabra@isiconline.org. 2. Department of Basic Research, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India. 3. Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India. 4. Department of Neurology, Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences (IHBAS), New Delhi, India. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. 6. Craig Hospital, Englewood, CO, USA. 7. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. 8. Spine Unit, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In preclinical studies, many stem cell/cellular interventions demonstrated robust regeneration and/or repair in case of SCI and were considered a promising therapeutic candidate. However, data from clinical studies are not robust. Despite lack of substantial evidence for the efficacy of these interventions in spinal cord injury (SCI), many clinics around the world offer them as "therapy." These "clinics" claim efficacy through patient testimonials and self-advertisement without any scientific evidence to validate their claims. Thus, SCS established a panel of experts to review published preclinical studies, clinical studies and current global guidelines/regulations on usage of cellular transplants and make recommendations for their clinical use. METHODS: The literature review and draft position statement was compiled and circulated among the panel and relevant suggestions incorporated to reach consensus. This was discussed and finalized in an open forum during the SCS Annual Meeting, ISSICON. RESULTS: Preclinical evidence suggests safety and clinical potency of cellular interventions after SCI. However, evidence from clinical studies consisted of mostly case reports or uncontrolled case series/studies. Data from animal studies cannot be generalized to human SCI with regard to toxicity prediction after auto/allograft transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, cellular/stem cell transplantation for human SCI is experimental and needs to be tested through a valid clinical trial program. It is not ethical to provide unproven transplantation as therapy with commercial implications. To stop the malpractice of marketing such "unproven therapies" to a vulnerable population, it is crucial that all countries unite to form common, well-defined regulations/legislation on their use in SCI. These slides can be retrieved from Electronic Supplementary Material.
PURPOSE: In preclinical studies, many stem cell/cellular interventions demonstrated robust regeneration and/or repair in case of SCI and were considered a promising therapeutic candidate. However, data from clinical studies are not robust. Despite lack of substantial evidence for the efficacy of these interventions in spinal cord injury (SCI), many clinics around the world offer them as "therapy." These "clinics" claim efficacy through patient testimonials and self-advertisement without any scientific evidence to validate their claims. Thus, SCS established a panel of experts to review published preclinical studies, clinical studies and current global guidelines/regulations on usage of cellular transplants and make recommendations for their clinical use. METHODS: The literature review and draft position statement was compiled and circulated among the panel and relevant suggestions incorporated to reach consensus. This was discussed and finalized in an open forum during the SCS Annual Meeting, ISSICON. RESULTS: Preclinical evidence suggests safety and clinical potency of cellular interventions after SCI. However, evidence from clinical studies consisted of mostly case reports or uncontrolled case series/studies. Data from animal studies cannot be generalized to human SCI with regard to toxicity prediction after auto/allograft transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, cellular/stem cell transplantation for human SCI is experimental and needs to be tested through a valid clinical trial program. It is not ethical to provide unproven transplantation as therapy with commercial implications. To stop the malpractice of marketing such "unproven therapies" to a vulnerable population, it is crucial that all countries unite to form common, well-defined regulations/legislation on their use in SCI. These slides can be retrieved from Electronic Supplementary Material.
Authors: S C Barnett; C L Alexander; Y Iwashita; J M Gilson; J Crowther; L Clark; L T Dunn; V Papanastassiou; P G Kennedy; R J Franklin Journal: Brain Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: M F Pittenger; A M Mackay; S C Beck; R K Jaiswal; R Douglas; J D Mosca; M A Moorman; D W Simonetti; S Craig; D R Marshak Journal: Science Date: 1999-04-02 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Eva Mezey; Sharon Key; Georgia Vogelsang; Ildiko Szalayova; G David Lange; Barbara Crain Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-01-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Vieri Failli; Naomi Kleitman; Daniel P Lammertse; Jane T C Hsieh; John D Steeves; James W Fawcett; Mark H Tuszynski; Armin Curt; Michael G Fehlings; James D Guest; Andrew R Blight Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2021