Percutaneous administration of allogeneic bone-forming cells for the treatment of delayed unions of fractures: a pilot study

Marc Jayankura, Arndt Peter Schulz, Olivier Delahaut, Richard Witvrouw, Lothar Seefried, Bruno Vande Berg, Guy Heynen, Wendy Sonnet, Marc Jayankura, Arndt Peter Schulz, Olivier Delahaut, Richard Witvrouw, Lothar Seefried, Bruno Vande Berg, Guy Heynen, Wendy Sonnet

Abstract

Background: Overall, 5-10% of fractures result in delayed unions or non-unions, causing major disabilities and a huge socioeconomic burden. Since rescue surgery with autologous bone grafts can cause additional challenges, alternative treatment options have been developed to stimulate a deficient healing process. This study assessed the technical feasibility, safety and preliminary efficacy of local percutaneous implantation of allogeneic bone-forming cells in delayed unions of long bone fractures.

Methods: In this phase I/IIA open-label pilot trial, 22 adult patients with non-infected delayed unions of long bone fractures, which failed to consolidate after 3 to 7 months, received a percutaneous implantation of allogeneic bone-forming cells derived from bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (ALLOB; Bone Therapeutics) into the fracture site (50 × 106 to 100 × 106 cells). Patients were monitored for adverse events and need for rescue surgery for 30 months. Fracture healing was monitored by Tomographic Union Score (TUS) and modified Radiographic Union Score. The health status was evaluated using the Global Disease Evaluation (GDE) score and pain at palpation using a visual analogue scale. The presence of reactive anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies was evaluated.

Results: During the 6-month follow-up, three serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in two patients, of which two were considered as possibly treatment-related. None of the 21 patients in the per-protocol efficacy population needed rescue surgery within 6 months, but 2/21 (9.5%) patients had rescue surgery within 30 months post-treatment. At 6 months post-treatment, an improvement of at least 2 points in TUS was reached in 76.2% of patients, the GDE score improved by a mean of 48%, and pain at palpation at the fracture site was reduced by an average of 61% compared to baseline. The proportion of blood samples containing donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies increased from 8/22 (36.4%) before treatment to 13/22 (59.1%) at 6 months post-treatment, but no treatment-mediated allogeneic immune reactions were observed.

Conclusion: This pilot study showed that the percutaneous implantation of allogeneic bone-forming cells was technically feasible and well tolerated in patients with delayed unions of long bone fractures. Preliminary efficacy evidence is supporting the further development of this treatment.

Trial registration: NCT02020590 . Registered on 25 December 2013. ALLOB-DU1, A pilot Phase I/IIa, multicentre, open proof-of-concept study on the efficacy and safetyof allogeneic osteoblastic cells (ALLOB®) implantation in non-infected delayed-union fractures.

Keywords: Allogeneic; Bone marrow Mesenchymal stem cells; Cell therapy; Delayed union; Fracture; Long bone; Treatment.

Conflict of interest statement

MJ, APS, OD, RW and LS declare having received fees for the study conduct from Bone Therapeutics to cover their principal investigator activities.

BVB declares having received fees for consultancy and radiological reading from Bone Therapeutics.

GH is an employee of Bone Therapeutics and owns shares in the company.

WS is an employee of Bone Therapeutics.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design. 1A second set of X-ray images could have been performed 1 month later during screening if pre-study images were not available; 2if CT scan and/or X-ray of less than 2 weeks at the time of screening were available and of sufficient quality, they could have been used as baseline images; 3GDE by both patient and physician; 4GDE by the patient only; 5GDE by the investigator; 6visual analogue scale; 7Likert scale; 8weight-bearing score (Likert scale); 9blood sampling for the biomarkers and auto-immunity using the blood sampling kits (in the initiation kit); 10evaluated before implantation and 24 and 48 h post-implantation. W, weeks; M, months; EoS, end of the study; D, days; CT, computed tomography; GDE; Global Disease Evaluation; AE, adverse event; SAE, serious adverse event. The dashed line represents the long-term safety follow-up period
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flow of participants through the study. N, number of participants
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Evolution of mean A total TUS (CT scan) and B mRUS (X-ray) (per-protocol efficacy population). TUS, Tomographic Union Score; CT, computed tomography; mRUS, modified Radiographic Union Score. Error bars represent the standard deviation. **Significantly higher mean total TUS/mRUS than the mean total TUS/mRUS at baseline (least square means analysis with time and baseline as fixed effects provided p-values ≤ 0.01)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Change from baseline in mean GDE score evaluated by the patient (per-protocol efficacy population). GDE, Global Disease Evaluation. Error bars represent the standard deviation. **Significantly lower mean GDE score than the mean GDE score at baseline (least square means analysis with time and baseline as fixed effects provided p-values ≤ 0.01)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Change from baseline in mean pain at palpation score (per-protocol efficacy population). Error bars represent the standard deviation. *Significantly lower mean pain at palpation score than the mean pain at palpation score at baseline (least square means analysis with time and baseline as fixed effects provided p-values ≤ 0.05)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Mean weight-bearing score for long bones of the lower extremities (per-protocol efficacy population). Error bars represent the standard deviation

References

    1. Schindeler A, McDonald MM, Bokko P, Little DG. Bone remodeling during fracture repair: the cellular picture. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2008;19(5):459–466. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2008.07.004.
    1. Kostenuik P, Mirza FM. Fracture healing physiology and the quest for therapies for delayed healing and nonunion. J Orthop Res. 2017;35(2):213–223. doi: 10.1002/jor.23460.
    1. Einhorn TA, Gerstenfeld LC. Fracture healing: mechanisms and interventions. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2015;11(1):45–54. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2014.164.
    1. Panteli M, Pountos I, Jones E, Giannoudis PV. Biological and molecular profile of fracture non-union tissue: current insights. J Cell Mol Med. 2015;19(4):685–713. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12532.
    1. Andrzejowski P, Giannoudis PV. The ‘diamond concept’ for long bone non-union management. J Orthop Traumatol. 2019;20(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s10195-019-0528-0.
    1. Giannoudis PV, Einhorn TA, Marsh D. Fracture healing: the diamond concept. Injury. 2007;38(Suppl 4):S3–S6. doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(08)70003-2.
    1. Patel RA, Wilson RF, Patel PA, Palmer RM. The effect of smoking on bone healing: a systematic review. Bone Joint Res. 2013;2(6):102–111. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.26.2000142.
    1. Gomez-Barrena E, Rosset P, Lozano D, Stanovici J, Ermthaller C, Gerbhard F. Bone fracture healing: cell therapy in delayed unions and nonunions. Bone. 2015;70:93–101. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2014.07.033.
    1. Emara KM, Diab RA, Emara AK. Recent biological trends in management of fracture non-union. World J Orthop. 2015;6(8):623–628. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v6.i8.623.
    1. Mills LA, Aitken SA, Simpson A. The risk of non-union per fracture: current myths and revised figures from a population of over 4 million adults. Acta Orthop. 2017;88(4):434–439. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1321351.
    1. Zura R, Xiong Z, Einhorn T, Watson JT, Ostrum RF, Prayson MJ, Della Rocca GJ, Mehta S, McKinley T, Wang Z, Steen RG. Epidemiology of fracture nonunion in 18 human bones. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(11):e162775. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.2775.
    1. Wang W, Yeung KWK. Bone grafts and biomaterials substitutes for bone defect repair: a review. Bioact Mater. 2017;2(4):224–247. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.05.007.
    1. Bauer TW, Muschler GF. Bone graft materials. An overview of the basic science. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;371:10–27. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200002000-00003.
    1. Schlundt C, Bucher CH, Tsitsilonis S, Schell H, Duda GN, Schmidt-Bleek K. Clinical and research approaches to treat non-union fracture. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2018;16(2):155–168. doi: 10.1007/s11914-018-0432-1.
    1. Zimmermann G, Wagner C, Schmeckenbecher K, Wentzensen A, Moghaddam A. Treatment of tibial shaft non-unions: bone morphogenetic proteins versus autologous bone graft. Injury. 2009;40:S50–SS3. doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(09)70012-9.
    1. Gómez-Barrena E, Rosset P, Gebhard F, Hernigou P, Baldini N, Rouard H, Sensebé L, Gonzalo-Daganzo RM, Giordano R, Padilla-Eguiluz N, García-Rey E, Cordero-Ampuero J, Rubio-Suárez JC, Stanovici J, Ehrnthaller C, Huber-Lang M, Flouzat-Lachaniette CH, Chevallier N, Donati DM, Ciapetti G, Fleury S, Fernandez MN, Cabrera JR, Avendaño-Solá C, Montemurro T, Panaitescu C, Veronesi E, Rojewski MT, Lotfi R, Dominici M, Schrezenmeier H, Layrolle P. Feasibility and safety of treating non-unions in tibia, femur and humerus with autologous, expanded, bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells associated with biphasic calcium phosphate biomaterials in a multicentric, non-comparative trial. Biomaterials. 2019;196:100–108. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.03.033.
    1. Hernigou P, Desroches A, Queinnec S, Flouzat Lachaniette CH, Poignard A, Allain J, Chevallier N, Rouard H. Morbidity of graft harvesting versus bone marrow aspiration in cell regenerative therapy. Int Orthop. 2014;38(9):1855–1860. doi: 10.1007/s00264-014-2318-x.
    1. DiSilvio F, Jr, Foyil S, Schiffman B, Bernstein M, Summers H, Lack WD. Long bone union accurately predicted by cortical bridging within 4 months. JB JS Open Access. 2018;3(4):e0012. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.18.00012.
    1. Rupp M, Biehl C, Budak M, Thormann U, Heiss C, Alt V. Diaphyseal long bone nonunions - types, aetiology, economics, and treatment recommendations. Int Orthop. 2018;42(2):247–258. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3734-5.
    1. Perez JR, Kouroupis D, Li DJ, Best TM, Kaplan L, Correa D. Tissue engineering and cell-based therapies for fractures and bone defects. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2018;6:105. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00105.
    1. Nicholson JA, Tsang STJ, MacGillivray TJ, Perks F, Simpson AHRW. What is the role of ultrasound in fracture management?: diagnosis and therapeutic potential for fractures, delayed unions, and fracture-related infection. Bone Joint Res. 2019;8(7):304–312. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.87.BJR-2018-0215.R2.
    1. Griffin XL, Costa ML, Parsons N, Smith N. Electromagnetic field stimulation for treating delayed union or non-union of long bone fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;4:CD008471.
    1. Giuliani N, Lisignoli G, Magnani M, Racano C, Bolzoni M, Dalla Palma B, et al. New insights into osteogenic and chondrogenic differentiation of human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells and their potential clinical applications for bone regeneration in pediatric orthopaedics. Stem Cells Int. 2013;2013:312501. doi: 10.1155/2013/312501.
    1. Wang X, Wang Y, Gou W, Lu Q, Peng J, Lu S. Role of mesenchymal stem cells in bone regeneration and fracture repair: a review. Int Orthop. 2013;37(12):2491–2498. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-2059-2.
    1. de Girolamo L, Lucarelli E, Alessandri G, Avanzini MA, Bernardo ME, Biagi E, Brini AT, D'Amico G, Fagioli F, Ferrero I, Locatelli F, Maccario R, Marazzi M, Parolini O, Pessina A, Torre ML, Italian Mesenchymal Stem Cell Group Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells: a new “cells as drugs” paradigm. Efficacy and critical aspects in cell therapy. Curr Pharm Des. 2013;19(13):2459–2473. doi: 10.2174/1381612811319130015.
    1. Hayashi O, Katsube Y, Hirose M, Ohgushi H, Ito H. Comparison of osteogenic ability of rat mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow, periosteum, and adipose tissue. Calcif Tissue Int. 2008;82(3):238–247. doi: 10.1007/s00223-008-9112-y.
    1. Li F, Whyte N, Niyibizi C. Differentiating multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells generate factors that exert paracrine activities on exogenous MSCs: implications for paracrine activities in bone regeneration. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2012;426(4):475–479. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.095.
    1. Oryan A, Kamali A, Moshiri A, Baghaban EM. Role of mesenchymal stem cells in bone regenerative medicine: what is the evidence? Cells Tissues Organs. 2017;204(2):59–83. doi: 10.1159/000469704.
    1. Otsuru S, Tamai K, Yamazaki T, Yoshikawa H, Kaneda Y. Bone marrow-derived osteoblast progenitor cells in circulating blood contribute to ectopic bone formation in mice. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2007;354(2):453–458. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.12.226.
    1. Connolly JF. Injectable bone marrow preparations to stimulate osteogenic repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;313:8–18.
    1. Hernigou P, Poignard A, Beaujean F, Rouard H. Percutaneous autologous bone-marrow grafting for nonunions. Influence of the number and concentration of progenitor cells. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(7):1430–1437. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02215.
    1. Suenaga H, Furukawa KS, Suzuki Y, Takato T, Ushida T. Bone regeneration in calvarial defects in a rat model by implantation of human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cell spheroids. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015;26(11):254. doi: 10.1007/s10856-015-5591-3.
    1. Perlepe V, Michoux N, Heynen G, Vande BB. Semi-quantitative CT assessment of fracture healing: how many and which CT reformats should be analyzed? Eur J Radiol. 2019;118:181–186. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.07.026.
    1. Perlepe V, Cerato A, Putineanu D, Bugli C, Heynen G, Omoumi P, Berg BV. Value of a radiographic score for the assessment of healing of nailed femoral and tibial shaft fractures: a retrospective preliminary study. Eur J Radiol. 2018;98:36–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.10.020.
    1. Litrenta J, Tornetta P, 3rd, Mehta S, Jones C, O'Toole RV, Bhandari M, et al. Determination of radiographic healing: an assessment of consistency using RUST and modified RUST in metadiaphyseal fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(11):516–520. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000390.
    1. Liwski RS, Gebel HM. Of cells and microparticles: assets and liabilities of HLA antibody detection. Transplantation. 2018;102(1S Suppl 1):S1–S6. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001818.
    1. Tait BD, Susal C, Gebel HM, Nickerson PW, Zachary AA, Claas FH, et al. Consensus guidelines on the testing and clinical management issues associated with HLA and non-HLA antibodies in transplantation. Transplantation. 2013;95(1):19–47. doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e31827a19cc.
    1. Schoenfeld D. Statistical considerations for pilot studies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1980;6(3):371–374. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(80)90153-4.
    1. Healthy Belgium. Determinants of health - tobacco use. 2020. Available from . Last accessed 09 July 2020.
    1. Morshed S, Corrales L, Genant H, Miclau T., 3rd Outcome assessment in clinical trials of fracture-healing. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(Suppl 1):62–67. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01556.
    1. Corrales LA, Morshed S, Bhandari M, Miclau T., 3rd Variability in the assessment of fracture-healing in orthopaedic trauma studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(9):1862–1868. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01580.
    1. Bhargava R, Sankhla S, Gupta A, Changani R, Gagal K. Percutaneous autologus bone marrow injection in the treatment of delayed or nonunion. Indian J Orthop. 2007;41(1):67–71. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.30529.
    1. Sahu RL. Percutaneous autogenous bone marrow injection for delayed union or non-union of long bone fractures after internal fixation. Rev Bras Ortop. 2018;53(6):668–673. doi: 10.1016/j.rbo.2017.09.012.
    1. Gross JB, Diligent J, Bensoussan D, Galois L, Stoltz JF, Mainard D. Percutaneous autologous bone marrow injection for treatment of delayed and non-union of long bone: a retrospective study of 45 cases. Biomed Mater Eng. 2015;25(1 Suppl):187–197. doi: 10.3233/BME-141235.
    1. Kim SJ, Shin YW, Yang KH, Kim SB, Yoo MJ, Han SK, Im SA, Won YD, Sung YB, Jeon TS, Chang CH, Jang JD, Lee SB, Kim HC, Lee SY. A multi-center, randomized, clinical study to compare the effect and safety of autologous cultured osteoblast (Ossron) injection to treat fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10(1):20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-10-20.
    1. Lohan P, Treacy O, Griffin MD, Ritter T, Ryan AE. Anti-donor immune responses elicited by allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells and their extracellular vesicles: are we still learning? Front Immunol. 2017;8:1626. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01626.
    1. Berglund AK, Fortier LA, Antczak DF, Schnabel LV. Immunoprivileged no more: measuring the immunogenicity of allogeneic adult mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2017;8(1):288. doi: 10.1186/s13287-017-0742-8.
    1. Panes J, Garcia-Olmo D, Van Assche G, Colombel JF, Reinisch W, Baumgart DC, et al. Expanded allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (Cx601) for complex perianal fistulas in Crohn’s disease: a phase 3 randomised, double-blind controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388(10051):1281–1290. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31203-X.
    1. Kakaiya RM, Triulzi DJ, Wright DJ, Steele WR, Kleinman SH, Busch MP, Norris PJ, Hillyer CD, Gottschall JL, Rios JA, Carey P, Glynn SA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study-II Prevalence of HLA antibodies in remotely transfused or alloexposed volunteer blood donors. Transfusion. 2010;50(6):1328–1334. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2009.02556.x.
    1. Triulzi DJ, Kleinman S, Kakaiya RM, Busch MP, Norris PJ, Steele WR, Glynn SA, Hillyer CD, Carey P, Gottschall JL, Murphy EL, Rios JA, Ness PM, Wright DJ, Carrick D, Schreiber GB. The effect of previous pregnancy and transfusion on HLA alloimmunization in blood donors: implications for a transfusion-related acute lung injury risk reduction strategy. Transfusion. 2009;49(9):1825–1835. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2009.02206.x.
    1. Consentius C, Reinke P, Volk HD. Immunogenicity of allogeneic mesenchymal stromal cells: what has been seen in vitro and in vivo? Regen Med. 2015;10(3):305–315. doi: 10.2217/rme.15.14.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj