Intracoronary infusion of the mobilized peripheral blood stem cell by G-CSF is better than mobilization alone by G-CSF for improvement of cardiac function and remodeling: 2-year follow-up results of the Myocardial Regeneration and Angiogenesis in Myocardial Infarction with G-CSF and Intra-Coronary Stem Cell Infusion (MAGIC Cell) 1 trial
- PMID: 17239682
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2006.11.004
Intracoronary infusion of the mobilized peripheral blood stem cell by G-CSF is better than mobilization alone by G-CSF for improvement of cardiac function and remodeling: 2-year follow-up results of the Myocardial Regeneration and Angiogenesis in Myocardial Infarction with G-CSF and Intra-Coronary Stem Cell Infusion (MAGIC Cell) 1 trial
Abstract
Background: The results of stem cell therapy trials in myocardial infarction using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) are inconsistent among trials, and the long-term outcome of G-CSF-based stem cell therapy remains unknown. We reported 2 years of follow-up results of 2 different strategies of G-CSF-based stem cell therapy.
Methods and results: We compared outcomes of intracoronary infusion of the mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) with G-CSF, mobilization alone with G-CSF, and the control PCI alone in patients with myocardial infarction. At 2 years of follow-up evaluation, cell infusion improved left ventricular systolic function and remodeling compared to baseline, but G-CSF alone did not. Cell infusion group showed better improvements of left ventricular ejection fraction (+6.2% +/- 3.6% vs -4.3% +/- 10.1%, P = .004) and end-systolic volume (-15.7 +/- 13.0 vs +0.3 +/- 16.7 mL, P = .075) compared to G-CSF alone at 6 months of follow-up, and these trends were maintained till 2 years of follow-up (P = .094 and .046, respectively). Improvements in cell infusion group are not significantly better than that of control group because of small sample size. Patients who received G-CSF administration showed a tendency of modest increase of binary restenosis (50% vs 30%, P > .05) and a greater late loss of minimal luminal diameter (P > .05) at 6 months of follow-up, compared to the control group.
Conclusions: Till 2 years follow-up, intracoronary cell infusion with mobilized PBSCs by G-CSF is better than G-CSF alone but not significantly better than control. Efficacy and safety of intracoronary infusion of mobilized PBSCs by G-CSF should be evaluated in a large randomized controlled trial.
Comment in
-
Is short-term effect of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor clearly known?Am Heart J. 2007 Aug;154(2):e17; author reply e19. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.04.063. Am Heart J. 2007. PMID: 17643562 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Differential effect of intracoronary infusion of mobilized peripheral blood stem cells by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on left ventricular function and remodeling in patients with acute myocardial infarction versus old myocardial infarction: the MAGIC Cell-3-DES randomized, controlled trial.Circulation. 2006 Jul 4;114(1 Suppl):I145-51. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.001107. Circulation. 2006. PMID: 16820564 Clinical Trial.
-
The clinical study of autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation by intracoronary infusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).Int J Cardiol. 2007 Jan 31;115(1):52-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.04.005. Epub 2006 Jul 5. Int J Cardiol. 2007. PMID: 16822566 Clinical Trial.
-
Autologous bone marrow stem cell mobilization induced by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after subacute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing late revascularization: final results from the G-CSF-STEMI (Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Oct 17;48(8):1712-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.044. Epub 2006 Sep 11. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006. PMID: 17045910 Clinical Trial.
-
Effectiveness and tolerability of administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on left ventricular function in patients with myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Clin Ther. 2007 Nov;29(11):2406-18. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.11.008. Clin Ther. 2007. PMID: 18158081 Review.
-
G-CSF- and erythropoietin-based cell therapy: a promising strategy for angiomyogenesis in myocardial infarction.Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2008 Jun;6(5):703-13. doi: 10.1586/14779072.6.5.703. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2008. PMID: 18510486 Review.
Cited by
-
High intensity training improves cardiac function in healthy rats.Sci Rep. 2019 Apr 4;9(1):5612. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-42023-1. Sci Rep. 2019. PMID: 30948751 Free PMC article.
-
Pursuing meaningful end-points for stem cell therapy assessment in ischemic cardiac disease.World J Stem Cells. 2017 Dec 26;9(12):203-218. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v9.i12.203. World J Stem Cells. 2017. PMID: 29321822 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Role of stem cells in cancer therapy and cancer stem cells: a review.Cancer Cell Int. 2007 Jun 4;7:9. doi: 10.1186/1475-2867-7-9. Cancer Cell Int. 2007. PMID: 17547749 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of abciximab on evolution of left ventricular function in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes undergoing PCI after clopidogrel pretreatment: lessons from the ISAR-REACT 2 trial.Clin Res Cardiol. 2011 Aug;100(8):691-9. doi: 10.1007/s00392-011-0299-y. Epub 2011 Mar 8. Clin Res Cardiol. 2011. PMID: 21384174 Clinical Trial.
-
The therapeutic potential of G-CSF in pressure overload induced ventricular reconstruction and heart failure in mice.Mol Biol Rep. 2012 Jan;39(1):5-12. doi: 10.1007/s11033-011-0703-8. Epub 2011 Mar 23. Mol Biol Rep. 2012. PMID: 21431359
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous