Search

Background: Mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) are a promising cell-free therapy for acute lung injury (ALI). To date, no studies have investigated their biodistribution in ALI or discerned the timing of administration for maximal lung targeting, which are crucial considerations for clinical translation. Our study aimed to characterize a mouse model of ALI and establish the distribution kinetics and optimal timing of MSC-EV delivery during lung injury., Methods: MSC-EVs were isolated by ultracentrifugation alone (U/C) or tangential flow filtration with ultracentrifugation (TFF-U/C) and characterized by nanoparticle tracking analysis and western blot. A lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced mouse model of ALI was established to study the inflammatory response over 72 h. ALI was assessed by histological lung injury score, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid cell count and inflammatory cytokines. For biodistribution studies, ALI mice were intravenously administered fluorescently labeled MSC-EVs to determine the optimal timing of administration and organ-specific biodistribution. Live in vivo and ex vivo fluorescence imaging was conducted at various timepoints post-EV injection., Results: EVs isolated by either ultracentrifugation alone or TFF-U/C displayed comparable size distribution (~ 50-350 nm) and EV marker expression (CD63/81). TFF-U/C generated a 5.4-fold higher particle concentration and 3.9-fold higher total protein when compared to ultracentrifugation alone. From the inflammatory time-course study, cell count and IL-1β peaked in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid at 24 h after ALI induction. MSC-EVs delivered at 24 h (as opposed to 0.5 h, 5 h or 10 h) after disease induction resulted in a 2.7-4.4-fold higher lung uptake of EVs. Biodistribution studies comparing organ-specific MSC-EV uptake showed progressive lung accumulation up to 48 h post-delivery (threefold higher than the spleen/liver), with a decline at 72 h. Importantly, lung EV fluorescence at 48 h in ALI mice was significantly elevated as compared to control mice. The lung tropism of MSC-EVs was further validated as therapeutically inert EVs derived from HEK293T cells accumulated mainly to the spleen and liver with a 5.5-fold lower distribution to the lungs as compared to MSC-EVs., Conclusion: MSC-EVs exhibit maximal lung accumulation when administered during heightened inflammation at 24 h after ALI induction. This lung tropism suggests that MSC-EVs may serve as a practical rescue treatment for acute inflammatory respiratory conditions., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background and Objective: Mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) are a promising treatment for bone injuries, although studies remain preclinical. A systematic review and meta-analysis can assess the efficacy of MSC-EVs and identify treatment aspects associated with enhanced bone repair., Methods: English language, preclinical, controlled, in vivo studies identified in our systematic search (up to May 8, 2020) examining the use of MSC-EVs in bone healing were included. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the SYRCLE tool. Aggregate Data Meta-Analysis was performed to determine the effect of MSC-EVs on Bone Volume/Total Volume (BV/TV) and New Bone Formation (NBF)., Results: Thirteen studies were included. Twelve reported either BV/TV or NBF and were included in meta-analysis. ROB was unclear in all studies. Overall, MSC-EVs displayed benefit in terms of bone healing for both BV/TV (22.2% mean difference (MD); 95% CI: 15.8-28.5%, p < 0.001) and NBF (26.1% MD; 10.3-41.8%, p = 0.001) versus controls. Substantial heterogeneity, however, was observed between studies. MSC-EVs were reported to activate multiple signaling pathways including mTOR/AKT, AMPK and BMP2. Subgroup analysis indicated no significant difference in the improvement of BV/TV when using modified EVs isolated after gene transfection, preconditioning (p = 0.61), or using EVs in combination with a tissue scaffold and/or hydrogel versus other delivery methods (p = 0.20)., Conclusion: Use of MSC-EVs to promote healing of bone injury appears promising, however, heterogeneity between studies and the potential for reporting bias limits confidence in the extent of benefit. Reducing bias between studies and addressing aspects of potential reporting bias should augment confidence in future meta-analyses and propel the field towards clinical studies. Forest Plot analysis assessing the percentage change in bone volume (BV) / total volume (TV) in the presence (experimental) or absence (control) of MSC-EVs., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Mesenchymal stromal cell derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) have been implicated in the regulation of tumor growth. Studies remain preclinical with effects ranging from inhibition of tumor growth to cancer progression. A systematic review and meta-analysis is needed to clarify the effect of MSC-EVs on tumor growth to facilitate potential translation to clinical trials., Methods: A systematic search of the literature (MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS databases to June 1, 2019) identified all pre-clinical controlled studies investigating the effect of MSC-EVs on tumor growth. Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Potential risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE tool. A random effects meta-analysis of reduction in tumor weight/volume (primary outcome) was performed., Results: We identified 29 articles and 22 reported data on tumor responses that were included for meta-analysis. Studies were associated with unclear risk of bias in a large proportion of domains in accordance with the SYRCLE tool for determining risk of bias in preclinical studies. A high risk of bias was not identified in any study. MSC-EVs had a mixed response on tumor progression with some studies reporting inhibition of tumor growth and others reporting tumor progression. Overall, MSC-EVs exerted a non-significant reduction in tumor growth compared to controls (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.80, 95 % CI -1.64 to 0.03, p = 0.06, I 2  = 87 %). Some studies reported increased tumor growth which aligned with their stated hypothesis and some interrogated mechanisms in cancer biology. EVs isolated from MSCs that overexpressed anti-tumor RNAs were associated with significant tumor reduction in meta-analysis (SMD - 2.40, 95 % CI -3.36 to -1.44, p < 0.001). Heterogeneity between studies was observed and included aspects of study design such as enrichment of MSC-EVs with specific anti-tumor molecules, tissue source of MSCs, method of EV isolation, characterization of MSCs and EVs, dosage and administration schedules, and tissue type and source of tumor cells studied., Conclusions: MSC-EVs are associated with mixed effects on tumor growth in animal models of cancer. In studies where anti-tumor RNAs are packaged in EVs, a significant reduction in tumor growth was observed. Reducing heterogeneity in study design may accelerate our understanding of the potential effects of MSC-EVs on cancer. [274 words] Forest plot of MSC-EV effect on tumor growth accordinggenetic modification of EVs in animal studies identified from a systematicreview of the literature. All cohorts from studies with multiple interventiongroups are presented separately with control groups divided equally among thegroups. M, modified; H, hypoxia., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Extracellular vesicles from mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC-EVs) have shown promise in wound healing. Their use in diabetic wounds specifically, however, remains pre-clinical and their efficacy remains uncertain less clear. A systematic review of preclinical studies is needed to determine the efficacy of MSC-EVs in the treatment of diabetic wounds to accelerate the clinical translation of this cell-based therapy., Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched (to June 23, 2020). All English-language, full-text, controlled interventional studies comparing MSC-EVs to placebo or a "no treatment" arm in animal models of diabetic wounds were included. Study outcomes, including wound closure (primary outcome), scar width, blood vessel number and density, and re-epithelialisation were pooled using a random effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the SYRCLE tool for pre-clinical animal studies., Results: A total of 313 unique records were identified from our search, with 10 full text articles satisfying inclusion criteria (n = 136 animals). The administration of MSC-EVs improved closure of diabetic wounds compared to controls with a large observed effect (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) 5.48, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 3.55-8.13). Healing was further enhanced using MSC-EVs enriched in non-coding RNAs or microRNAs compared to controls (SMD 9.89, 95%CI 7.32-12.46). Other outcomes, such as blood vessel density and number, scar width, and re-epithelialisation were improved with the administration of MSC-EVs, with a large effect. ROB across studies was unclear., Conclusion: MSC-EVs, particularly following enrichment for specific RNAs, are a promising treatment for diabetic wounds in pre-clinical studies and translation to the clinical domain appears warranted., Registration: PROSPERO #CRD42020199327 [248]. Forest plot demonstrating increased wound closure rates of diabetic wounds receiving genetically modified MSC-EVs that were enriched for specific RNAs. DFO = deferoxamine. Control groups were inactive (no treatment or saline) except for 3 studies which used hydrogels without MSC-EVs as control (Li M 2016; Shi 2017; Tao 2016)., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Preclinical studies suggest mesenchymal stromal cell extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) reduce inflammation and improve organ function in lung diseases; however, an objective analysis of all available data is needed prior to translation. Using rigorous meta-research methods, we determined the effectiveness of MSC-EVs for preclinical respiratory diseases and identified experimental conditions that may further refine this therapy. A systematic search of MEDLINE/Embase identified 1167 records. After screening, 52 articles were included for data extraction and evaluated for risk of bias and quality of reporting in study design. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted for acute lung injury (ALI; N = 23), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD; N = 8) and pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH; N = 7). Subgroup analyses identified EV methods/characteristics that may be associated with improved efficacy. Data is presented as standardized mean differences (SMD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For ALI, MSC-EVs markedly reduced lung injury (SMD -4.33, CI -5.73 to -2.92), vascular permeability (SMD -2.43, CI -3.05 to -1.82), and mortality (RR 0.39, CI 0.22 to 0.68). Small EVs were more consistently effective than large EVs whereas no differences were observed between tissue sources, immunocompatibility or isolation techniques. For BPD, alveolarization was improved by MSC-EVs (SMD -1.45, CI -2.08 to -0.82) with small EVs more consistently beneficial then small/large EVs. In PAH, right ventricular systolic pressure (SMD -4.16, CI -5.68 to -2.64) and hypertrophy (SMD -2.80, CI -3.68 to -1.91) were significantly attenuated by EVs. In BPD and PAH, EVs isolated by ultracentrifugation demonstrated therapeutic benefit whereas tangential flow filtration (N = 2) displayed minimal efficacy. Lastly, risk of bias and quality of reporting for experimental design were consistently unclear across all studies. Our findings demonstrate clear potential of MSC-EVs to be developed as therapy for acute and chronic lung diseases. However, greater transparency in research design and direct comparisons of isolation technique and EV subtypes are needed to generate robust evidence to guide clinical translation. Protocol Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020145334., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Extracellular Vesicles published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles.)

Introduction: Treating and preventing graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) remains a significant challenge. The use of mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) appears promising and a systematic review of preclinical studies is needed to accelerate the design of translational studies., Methods: We identified 4 eligible studies from a systematic review performed on December 1, 2018. In brief, eligible studies included the treatment or prevention of GVHD in animal models and the use of MSC-EVs. Study design and outcome data were extracted and reporting was evaluated using the SYRCLE tool to identify potential bias., Results: Two studies assessed the efficacy of MSC-EVs in treatment of GVHD and 2 studies address prevention. Mice treated with MSC-EVs showed improved median survival, GVHD clinical scores and histology scores as compared to untreated mice with GVHD. Prophylactic treatment with MSC-EVs attenuated GVHD severity and improved median survival as compared to no treatment or saline., Conclusion: Our systematic review provides important insight regarding the potential of MSC-EVs to treat or prevent GVHD. Although few studies were identified, improved survival and attenuated histologic findings of GVHD were observed in mice after MSC-EV administration for the treatment and prevention of GVHD. Dosing of EVs and route of administration remain inconsistent, however, and scalability of EV isolation for clinical studies remains a challenge. Standardized outcome reporting is needed to pool results for metanalysis. Graphical abstract.

Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) can reduce inflammation, promote healing, and improve organ function, thereby providing a potential "cell-free" therapy. Prior to clinical translation, it is critical to synthesize existing evidence on preclinical methods and efficacy. To address these issues, we used gold standard systematic review methodology to consolidate information from all published animal studies investigating MSC-EVs as an intervention. A systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase identified 206 studies. Data were extracted in duplicate for methodology, experimental design, interventional traits, modifications, and outcomes. MSC-EVs were used to treat a variety of diseases and demonstrated benefits in 97% of studies. Adverse effects were reported in only three studies, two demonstrating tumor growth. A quarter of articles modified EVs to enhance efficacy, with 72% leading to markedly improved outcomes as compared to unmodified EVs. However, several key methodological concerns were evident. Only 60% of studies used nomenclature consistent with the size definitions of EVs. Ultracentrifugation (70%) and isolation kits (23%) were the most common isolation techniques with noted differences in yield and purity. EVs were inconsistently dosed by protein (68%) or particle concentration (16%). Two-thirds of studies administered xenogeneic EVs, suggesting immunocompatibility. Less than 25% of studies assessed EV biodistribution. Approaches for determining size, protein markers, and morphology were highly heterogeneous, with only 12 and 4 studies meeting the MISEV 2014 and 2018 recommendations, respectively. Knowledge gaps identified from this systematic review highlight important opportunities to improve preclinical design and methodology in the rapidly growing field of EV therapeutics.

Background: Over the past decade, mesenchymal stromal cells have been increasingly investigated for their therapeutic potential in several different illnesses. However, cell therapy can be limited by potentially serious adverse events including cell embolus formation and tumorigenesis. Importantly, the protective effects of mesenchymal stromal cells are largely mediated by paracrine mechanisms including release of extracellular vesicles. This systematic review intends to synthesize the current knowledge of mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles as a therapeutic option for preclinical models of disease, inflammation, or injury., Methods: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS databases will be conducted. Interventional preclinical in vivo studies using extracellular vesicles derived from any tissue source of mesenchymal stromal cells will be included. Studies will be screened by abstract, and full-text by two independent reviewers. Eligible studies will undergo data extraction with subcategorization into domains based on disease. Methods utilized for extracellular vesicle characterization and isolation will be collected, as well as information on interventional traits, such as tissue source of mesenchymal stromal cells, dosage regimen, and vesicle modifications. Reported outcomes will be collected to determine which diseases studied may be impacted most from treatment with mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles., Discussion: This systematic review will summarize preclinical studies investigating the therapeutic efficacy of both small and large extracellular vesicles derived by mesenchymal stromal cells. Extracellular vesicles represent a possibility to harness the benefits of mesenchymal stromal cells with added benefits of reduced manufacturing costs and an improved safety profile. Hence, there has been an exponential increase in interest for developing this cell-free therapy with hundreds of preclinical studies published to date. However, a vast amount of heterogeneity between groups relates to methods of extracellular vesicle isolation, characterization, and study design. This review will capture this heterogeneity and identify the most commonly used and optimal approaches to evaluate mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicle treatment. A meta-analysis of outcomes within each disease domain will help elucidate which fields of research demonstrate promise for developing extracellular vesicles as a novel cell-free therapy. Summarizing this robust information on extracellular vesicles as an intervention can provide guidance for designing preclinical studies with hopes of future clinical translation.

Evidence regarding the extent that mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may improve clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been limited by marked inter-study heterogeneity, inconsistent product characterization and appreciable risk of bias (RoB). Given the evolution of treatment options and trajectory of the pandemic, an updated analysis of high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials is needed for a timely and conclusive understanding of the effectiveness of MSCs. A systematic literature search through March 30, 2022, identified all English language, full-text randomized controlled trials examining the use of MSCs in the treatment of COVID-19. Eight studies were identified (316 patients, 165 administered MSCs and 151 controls). Controls evolved significantly over time with a broad range of comparison treatments. All studies reported mortality at study endpoint. Random effects meta-analysis revealed that MSCs decreased relative risk of death (risk ratio, 0.63, 95% confidence interval, 0.42–0.94, P = 0.02, I2 = 14%) with no significant difference in absolute risk of death. MSCs decreased length of hospital stay and C-reactive protein levels and increased odds of clinical improvement at study endpoint compared with controls. Rates of adverse events and severe adverse events were similar between MSC and control groups. Only two (25%) studies reported all four International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy criteria for MSC characterization. Included studies had low (n = 7) or some (n = 1) concerns regarding RoB. MSCs may reduce risk of death in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 and improve secondary clinical outcomes. Variable outcome reporting, inconsistent product characterization and variable control group treatments remain barriers to higher-quality evidence and may constrain clinical usage. A master protocol is proposed and appears necessary for accelerated translation of higher-quality evidence for future applications of MSC therapy. Forest plot demonstrating significantly decreased relative risk of death at study endpoint in patients administered MSCs (experimental) compared with patients not administered MSCs (control). Control groups received standard of care for COVID-19 at the time of hospital admission, which varied depending on the institution. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) and their secreted products are a promising therapy for COVID-19 given their immunomodulatory and tissue repair capabilities. Many small studies were launched at the onset of the pandemic, and repeated meta-analysis is critical to obtain timely and sufficient statistical power to determine efficacy. All English-language published studies identified in our systematic search (up to February 3, 2021) examining the use of MSC-derived products to treat patients with COVID-19 were identified. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed for all studies. Nine studies were identified (189 patients), four of which were controlled (93 patients). Three of the controlled studies reported on mortality (primary analysis) and were pooled through random-effects meta-analysis. MSCs decreased the risk of death at study endpoint compared with controls (risk ratio, 0.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.74; P =.02; I 2 = 0%), although follow-up differed. Among secondary outcomes, interleukin-6 levels were most commonly reported and were decreased compared with controls (standardized mean difference, –0.69; 95% CI, –1.15 to –0.22; P =.004; I 2 = 0%) (n = 3 studies). Other outcomes were not reported consistently, and pooled estimates of effect were not performed. Substantial heterogeneity was observed between studies in terms of study design. Adherence to published ISCT criteria for MSC characterization was low. In two of nine studies, RoB analysis revealed a low to moderate risk of bias in controlled studies, and uncontrolled case series were of good (3 studies) or fair (2 studies) quality. Use of MSCs to treat COVID-19 appears promising; however, few studies were identified, and potential risk of bias was detected in all studies. More controlled studies that report uniform clinical outcomes and use MSC products that meet standard ISCT criteria should be performed. Future iterations of our systematic search should refine estimates of efficacy and clarify potential adverse effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]