Safety Study of Local Administration of Autologous Bone Marrow Stromal Cells in Chronic Paraplegia (CME-LEM1)

March 28, 2019 updated by: Jesús Vaquero Crespo, M.D., Puerta de Hierro University Hospital

Phase I Pilot Study to Evaluate the Security of Local Administration of Autologous Stem Cells Obtained From the Bone Marrow Stroma, in Traumatic Injuries of the Spinal Cord

The purpose of this study is to confirm the security, and detect the effect of the local administration in damaged nervous tissue, of autologous bone marrow stromal cells.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

It is a clinical trial phase I, single center, non-randomized, uncontrolled, open prospective follow-up of a cohort of patients with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI) who were treated with autologous stromal cells of the bone marrow administrated locally (subarachnoid and intramedullar) by intrathecal microinjection and three months later, by lumbar subarachnoid administration. The minimum follow-up duration for each patient is 12 months after the first administration, or until death, if it occurs it before.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

12

Phase

  • Phase 1

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Madrid
      • Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain, 28222
        • Hospital Puerta de Hierro

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 60 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Male or female with ages between 18 years and 60 years with of age or older functional sequelae chronically established by traumatic injury of the spinal cord (spinal segments between the vertebral bodies C6 and L1) and considered irreversible (not respond to any other treatment). In this study, the lesion is considered chronically established, when there are no signs of functional recovery after a minimum follow-up period of 6 months after the spinal cord injury. The upper age limit is justified by the low potential of in vitro expansion of bone marrow stromal cells over 60 years.
  • Complete paraplegia, with loss of motor and sensory function below the lesion (grade A in the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment (ASIA) Scale .
  • Spinal injury MRI morphologically visible, and without images that suggest spinal cord transection, with separation of the both ends of the spinal cord.
  • Tracking evolutionary possibility after treatment protocol and to comply physiotherapy maintained throughout the follow up period.
  • Written informed Consent according to good clinical practice (GCP) and local regulations, obtained before any study procedure.
  • Hematological parameters and creatinine, serum glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase (SGOT) and serum glutamate pyruvate transaminase (SGPT) in normal range according to laboratory standards, are accepted, however, small non-significant deviations according to the investigator.

Exclusion criteria:

  • Pregnancy and lactation
  • Systemic disease represents an added risk to treatment
  • Patients with questions about their possible cooperation in rehabilitation-physiotherapy treatments later, or negative report psychological assessment prior.
  • Neuroimaging data showing spinal cord section with separation of the terminal portion of the spinal cord
  • Current neoplastic disease diagnosed or treated in the previous five years
  • Patients treated with hematopoietic growth factors or requiring stable anticoagulation
  • Added neurodegenerative disease
  • History of substance abuse, psychiatric illness or allergy to protein products used in the process of cell expansion
  • HIV positive serology and syphilis
  • Hepatitis B or Hepatitis C active According to the investigator's opinion if there are findings on physical examination, abnormal clinical test results or other medica relevant entries, social or psychosocial factors which might influence negatively the study.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Mesenchymal stromal cell therapy
Autologous bone marrow adult mesenchymal stem cells expanded in vitro. Administered by Intrathecal injection (subarachnoid and intramedullary). Depending on centromedullary post-traumatic injury: bone marrow stromal stem cells administration (MSCs) at the minimum dose of 100x106 followed by subarachnoid administration of 30x106 MSCs,3 months later
Stem cells administration locally
Other Names:
  • BMMSCs= Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Safety-Number of Adverse Events
Time Frame: Up to 12 months

Clinical evaluation of possible adverse effects is performed daily at the first week after the first administration of stem cells and weekly until the 6 months follow-up visit and then at month 9 and 12. .

  • During the first stem cells administration (during surgery): Changes in vital signs (ECG, Blood Pressure (BP), Heart Rate (HR) were evaluated
  • During the second stem cells administration: Changes in vital signs (BP, HR), headache and meningeal irritation were evaluated
  • During the first weeks, after the first and the second administrations, the possibility of meningeal irritation, headache and infectious complications were considerate.

MedDRA stardards are followed

Up to 12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Efficacy-Sensitivity Recovery Using ASIA Scale
Time Frame: sensitivity before surgery (baseline visit) and 3, 6, 9, 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)

Sensitivity recovery was measured using the ASIA (American Spinal Injury Association) scale to measure the Surface sensitivity (LTS), pain sensitivity (PPS), and the degree of motor function in key muscles (MS). The sum of MS, LTS, and PPS configure total ASIA score. A minimum possible score is 0 points. A maximum possible score is 224 points for a patient with normal sensation.

ASIA score was obtained before surgery, and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after surgery. Mean and standard deviation for the 12 patients were obtained at all the time points and statistically analyzed.

sensitivity before surgery (baseline visit) and 3, 6, 9, 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Efficacy-Changes in the Level of Chronic Pain Based on the IANR-SCIFRS Scale (Pain Section)
Time Frame: Changes in the level of Chronic pain before surgery (baseline visit) and 3, 6, 9, 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)

Changes in the level of chronic pain, measured by the pain section of the IANR-SCIFRS (Spinal cord injury functional rating scale (SCI-FRS) of the international association of neuroestoratology (IANR). The minimum posible score is 0, and the máximum posible score is 48, being a score of 48 a normal functioning across all categories, and 0 a severe degree of functional hándicap (significant impact of daily life).

Pain is classified as no pain; mild pain, ordinary pain killer, effective;severe pain, narcotics required; extreme pain, uncontrolled.

Changes in the level of Chronic pain before surgery (baseline visit) and 3, 6, 9, 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Efficacy- Changes in the Neurophysiological Parameters Measured as the Number of Patients With SSEPs (Somatosensory Evoked Potentials)
Time Frame: Changes in the level neurophysiological parameters improvement (baseline visit) and 6, 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Changes in the neurophysiological parameters (SSEPs, somatosensory evoked potentials) measured as number of patients WITH SSEPs, each patient through underwent neurophysiological studies before treatment, as well as six and 12 months after surgery, paying attention mainly to the presence or abscence of somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), the presence or absence of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by magnetic stimulation over the scalp, and to electromyographic (EMG) recording of motor unit potentials in infralesional muscles. Previous to cell therapy in any of the patients SSEPs were recorded.
Changes in the level neurophysiological parameters improvement (baseline visit) and 6, 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Efficacy-Urodynamic Studies in Terms of máximum Cystometric Capacity
Time Frame: Urodynamic studies before surgery and 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Urodynamic studies in terms of voluntary micturition in flowmetry or in pressure/flow test, increase in bladder compliance. detrusor pressure (decrease on detrusor pressure is considered a clinical improvement). The neurogenic bladder is one of the biggest problems associated with SCI (spinal cord injury), with important personal and social implications.
Urodynamic studies before surgery and 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Efficacy-modification of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
Time Frame: changes in the spinal cord morphology on neuroimaging studies before surgery and 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)
Number of patients with a decrease in volume and hyperintensity of intramedullary lesions. In general, in the areas of SCI, variable degree of spinal cord atrophy and hiperintense images are observed. These images corresponds to cysts, gliosis and myelomalacia. After cell administration a reduction of supposed cyst and a decrease or disappearance of hyperintense lesions suggest a patient improvement.
changes in the spinal cord morphology on neuroimaging studies before surgery and 12 months after surgery (follow-up period)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Jesus JV Vaquero Crespo, Dr., Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

March 1, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

April 1, 2014

Study Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 7, 2013

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 25, 2013

First Posted (Estimate)

July 26, 2013

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 29, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 28, 2019

Last Verified

March 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

nonymized individual data of participants will be shared with Authorities at the end of the Clinical Development Plan by the CTD (Common Technical Document). Results will be published in a scientific publication.

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Spinal Cord Injury

Clinical Trials on Mesenchymal stromal cell therapy

Subscribe