Charlotte Beerts1,2, Carlien Brondeel2, Glenn Pauwelyn1, Eva Depuydt1, Liesa Tack1, Luc Duchateau3, Yangfeng Xu2, Jimmy H Saunders2, Kathelijne Peremans2, Jan H Spaas4,5. 1. Global Stem cell Technology NV, Noorwegenstraat 4, 9940, Evergem, Belgium. 2. Department of Medical Imaging and Orthopedics of Domestic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium. 3. Biometrics Research Center, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium. 4. Global Stem cell Technology NV, Noorwegenstraat 4, 9940, Evergem, Belgium. jan.spaas@boehringer-ingelheim.com. 5. Department of Medical Imaging and Orthopedics of Domestic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium. jan.spaas@boehringer-ingelheim.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stem cell treatments in dogs have been investigated as a potential innovative alternative to current conventional therapies for a variety of conditions. So far, the precise mode of action of the MSCs has yet to be determined. The aim of this study was to gain more insights into the pharmacokinetics of MSCs by evaluating their biodistribution in healthy dogs after different injection routes. METHODS: Three different studies were performed in healthy dogs to evaluate the biodistribution pattern of radiolabelled equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells following intravenous, intramuscular and subcutaneous administration in comparison with free 99mTechnetium. The labelling of the equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells was performed using stannous chloride as a reducing agent. Whole-body scans were obtained using a gamma camera during a 24-h follow-up. RESULTS: The labelling efficiency ranged between 59.58 and 83.82%. Free 99mTechnetium accumulation was predominantly observed in the stomach, thyroid, bladder and salivary glands, while following intravenous injection, the 99mTechnetium-labelled equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells majorly accumulated in the liver throughout the follow-up period. After intramuscular and subcutaneous injection, the injected dose percentage remained very high at the injection site. CONCLUSIONS: A distinct difference was noted in the biodistribution pattern of the radiolabelled equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells compared to free 99mTechnetium indicating equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells have a specific pharmacokinetic pattern after systemic administration in healthy dogs. Furthermore, the biodistribution pattern of the used xenogeneic equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells appeared to be different from previously reported experiments using different sources of mesenchymal stem cells.
BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stem cell treatments in dogs have been investigated as a potential innovative alternative to current conventional therapies for a variety of conditions. So far, the precise mode of action of the MSCs has yet to be determined. The aim of this study was to gain more insights into the pharmacokinetics of MSCs by evaluating their biodistribution in healthy dogs after different injection routes. METHODS: Three different studies were performed in healthy dogs to evaluate the biodistribution pattern of radiolabelled equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells following intravenous, intramuscular and subcutaneous administration in comparison with free 99mTechnetium. The labelling of the equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells was performed using stannous chloride as a reducing agent. Whole-body scans were obtained using a gamma camera during a 24-h follow-up. RESULTS: The labelling efficiency ranged between 59.58 and 83.82%. Free 99mTechnetium accumulation was predominantly observed in the stomach, thyroid, bladder and salivary glands, while following intravenous injection, the 99mTechnetium-labelled equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells majorly accumulated in the liver throughout the follow-up period. After intramuscular and subcutaneous injection, the injected dose percentage remained very high at the injection site. CONCLUSIONS: A distinct difference was noted in the biodistribution pattern of the radiolabelled equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells compared to free 99mTechnetium indicating equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells have a specific pharmacokinetic pattern after systemic administration in healthy dogs. Furthermore, the biodistribution pattern of the used xenogeneic equine peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells appeared to be different from previously reported experiments using different sources of mesenchymal stem cells.
Authors: Jan H Spaas; Catharina De Schauwer; Pieter Cornillie; Evelyne Meyer; Ann Van Soom; Gerlinde R Van de Walle Journal: Vet J Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 2.688
Authors: E M Pérez-Merino; J M Usón-Casaús; C Zaragoza-Bayle; J Duque-Carrasco; L Mariñas-Pardo; M Hermida-Prieto; R Barrera-Chacón; M Gualtieri Journal: Vet J Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 2.688
Authors: Robert Daems; Lore Van Hecke; Ilona Schwarzkopf; Eva Depuydt; Sarah Y Broeckx; Michael David; Charlotte Beerts; Peter Vandekerckhove; Jan H Spaas Journal: Stem Cells Int Date: 2019-06-02 Impact factor: 5.443
Authors: Michalina Alicka; Katarzyna Kornicka-Garbowska; Katarzyna Kucharczyk; Martyna Kępska; Michael Rӧcken; Krzysztof Marycz Journal: Stem Cell Res Ther Date: 2020-01-03 Impact factor: 6.832