Search

Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have not demonstrated impact on systolic recovery compared to placebo. However, recent studies suggest that timing of G-CSF therapy is crucial., Methods: Timing of G-CSF treatment was analyzed in the STEMMI MRI subpopulation including 54 patients with STEMI treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) <12 h after symptom onset. Patients were randomized to double blind treatment with G-CSF (10 microg/kg/day) or placebo. Treatment was initiated from 17 to 65 h (mean 30) after PCI. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was evaluated with MRI., Results: Recovery of LVEF from baseline to 6 months was not associated with time from PCI to G-CSF. An identical improvement in LVEF was found in the placebo group and the G-CSF group (p=0.8). There was no correlation between time from PCI to G-CSF and maximum plasma concentration of CD34+ cells (r=-0.3, p=0.1). Similar results were found from data on recovery of the infarction size and change in the systolic wall thickening., Conclusions: In the time window from 17 to 65 h after STEMI treated with PCI, the timing of G-CSF treatment does not seem to affect the recovery of LVEF. It remains to be determined if very early, or very late G-CSF treatment might be effective., (Copyright (c) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recombinant granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilized pluripotent cells from the bone marrow are proposed to have a regenerative potential. Though, a report of excessive instent restenosis, in patients treated with G-CSF before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) warrants caution., Methods: Patients (n=59) enrolled in the STEMMI trial, a randomized and double blind study, comparing G-CSF and placebo after large ST-elevation myocardial infarctions, had an intracoronary ultrasound imaging at 6 months follow-up with a quantitative analysis of instent neointimal hyperplasia., Results: During G-CSF treatment leukocyte counts, and CD34+ and CD45-/CD34- cell fractions in peripheral blood increased markedly (p<0.0001 vs. placebo). At follow-up, there were no differences in intracoronary late lumen loss, expressed as neointima volume per mm of stent (1.6 mm(3)± 1.2 [G-CSF group] vs. 1.9 mm(3)± 1.3 [placebo group]; p=0.38), and in minimal instent lumen area (5.4 mm(2)± 2.4 vs. 5.3 mm(2)± 2.6, p=0.90). In the placebo group, plasma concentration of stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1) increased significantly after STEMI. This SDF-1 response was completely suppressed during G-CSF treatment. A rebound increase of SDF-1 was observed after withdrawal of G-CSF (p=0.001). Plasma concentration of SDF-1 at the time of stent implantation correlated positively to neointimal hyperplasia (p=0.025)., Conclusions: G-CSF treatment, initiated after PCI, does not lead to excessive instent neointimal hyperplasia or restenosis in patients with STEMI. The timing of G-CSF, in relation to the PCI, might be important, as G-CSF influences SDF-1., (Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Angiogenic growth factors and stem cell therapies have demonstrated varying results in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. A reason could be that these mechanisms are already up-regulated due to reduced blood supply to the myocardium. The objective of this study was to examine if plasma concentrations of circulating stem cells and angiogenic cytokines in patients with severe stable chronic coronary artery disease were correlated to the clinical severity of the disease., Methods: Fifty-four patients with severe coronary artery disease and reversible ischemia at stress myocardial perfusion scintigraphy were prospectively included. The severity of the disease was quantified by an exercise tolerance test, Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina classification, and Seattle Angina Pectoris Questionnaire. Fifteen persons without coronary artery disease served as control subjects., Results: Plasma concentration of VEGF-A, FGF-2, SDF-1, and circulating CD34+ and CD34-/CD45- cells were similar in the two groups, but early stem cell markers (CD105, CD73, CD166) and endothelial markers (CD31, CD144, VEGFR2) were significantly different between patients and control subjects (p<0.005-0.001). Diabetic patients had higher concentration of SDF-1 (2528 vs. 2150 pg/ml, p=0.004). We found significant correlations between both VEGF-A, FGF-2, and CD34+ to disease severity, including degree of reversible ischemia, angina stability score, and exertional dyspnoea., Conclusions: Plasma concentrations of circulating stem cells and angiogenic cytokines have large inter-individual variations, which probably exclude them from being useful as indicators of myocardial ischemic burden.

Objectives: A phase I safety and efficacy study with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilization of bone marrow stem cells to induce vasculogenesis in patients with severe ischemic heart disease (IHD) was conducted., Design, Patients and Results: 29 patients with IHD participated in the study. Thirteen patients were treated with G-CSF for 6 days and 16 patients served as controls. G-CSF treatment was without any serious adverse events. Four patients were "poor mobilizers" with a maximal increase in CD34+ cells to 5,000+/-700/mL blood (mean+/-S.D.) compared to 28,900+/-5,100/mL blood in "mobilizers". At the follow-up, G-CSF treated had improved in CCS classification, NTG consumption and angina attacks, but the controls only in CCS classification. No difference was seen between the two groups. The decline in NTG consumption tended to be significant in "mobilizers" compared to controls. Myocardial perfusion was unchanged at adenosine stress single photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) or magnetic resonance images (MRI). Left ventricular ejection fraction decreased from 57% to 52% (p<0.01, MRI) and from 48% to 44% (p=0.07, SPECT) in G-CSF treated, but was unchanged measured with echocardiography., Conclusions: Treatment by G-CSF improved symptoms but not signs of myocardial ischemia in patients with severe IHD. The effects seemed related to mobilization of stem cells. An adverse effect on ejection fraction could not be excluded.