![]() |
Spheramine Update
the following update was publised in April 2008 in Neurotherapeutics: The Journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics. It contains some promising information. Note that the improvement of the conditions of the six patients involved in the first study is continuing even 4 years after the surgery. The article contains several pages. As I have no link I will provide here the full text without the tables.
Spheramine for Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease Natividad P. Stover and Ray L. Watts Department of Neurology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294 INTRODUCTION Parkinson’s disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, characterized by a constellation of motor and nonmotor symptoms. The cause of PD is probably multifactorial and related to both genetic and environmental factors. The pathologic diagnosis includes dopaminergic cell loss in the pars compacta of the substantia nigra and the presence of lewy bodies.1,2 The cardinal motor symptoms of PD include tremor, bradykinesia, stiffness, and postural changes, 3 and improve significantly with oral administration of dopaminergic medications in the majority of patients.4 Progression of the disease makes the response to oral dopaminergic medications more unpredictable, and most patients develop motor complications. Ablative surgery or deep brain stimulation may also improve the motor symptoms, as well as improving some of the complications related to pharmacologic therapy.5–7 At least some aspects of the motor complications that appear in many patients after long-term pharmacologic treatment of PD are thought to be related to the pulsatile administration of the dopaminergic medications.8 Continuous systemic administration of dopaminergic agents may prevent or delay the occurrence of these disabling side effects.9,10 Numerous therapeutic clinical trials since the 1980s have attempted to address the problem of dopamine delivery and tried to develop more physiologic replacement of dopamine to treat PD.11–13 To date, more than 300 patients have been treated worldwide with stereotactic implantation of dopamine-producing, allogeneic human fetal mesencephalic tissue, with conflicting results. Nonetheless, treatment has provided promising learning experiences and valuable information.14–27 Similar types of limitations were also encountered with xenotransplantation of porcine fetal mesencephalic cells. Spheramine therapy does not require the use of immunosuppression, and has advantages regarding the ethical and logistical problems associated with the use of human fetal brain tissue. PROPERTIES OF SPHERAMINE: BIOLOGICAL, PHARMACOLOGICAL, AND TECHNOLOGICAL Human RPE cells are support cells derived from the inner layer of the neural retina,28–30 located between the photoreceptor and the choriocapillaris layers. These cells form tight junctions that contribute to maintaining the blood–brain barrier and provide a physical barrier to activated immune cells. The cells grow to confluence during the formation of a stable retinal structure and survive the lifetime of the individual, providing also a trophic function to the retina. Human RPE cells for transplantation are isolated from postmortem human eye tissue acquired from human eye banks; they can be expanded in tissue culture and can be stored for prolonged periods of time.31 In this way, a single donor eye can potentially treat many patients. Melanin, the pigment present in hRPE cells, has important physiologic functions.32 Melanin is able to absorb and block light coming through the sclera, protecting the retina from light damage and improving the quality of images. Levodopa is a precursor in melanin production in hRPE cells, and during the process of melanogenesis the hRPE cells express both levodopa and small quantities of dopamine.33 In the biosynthesis of melanin, tyrosine is hydroxylated to levodopa by tyrosinase and this is converted to intermediates that polymerize to form melanin. The immune privilege associated with the anterior chamber of the eye is thought to be related to the expression by hRPE cells of detectable levels of the Fas ligand protein,34,35 which prevents apoptosis when attached to a substance, a characteristic that may contribute to the survival of hRPE cells implanted into the brain.36,37 Human RPE cells also express retinaldehyde binding protein, cytokeratins, vesicular monoamine transporter, platelet derived growth factor, and epidermal and vascular endothelial growth factors, which contribute to support and trophic functions of hRPE cells in the retina.38,39 The technological basis of Spheramine is the combined use of hRPE cells in attachment to biologically compatible gelatin microcarriers that have a diameter of about 100 m (FIG. 1). Microcarriers have been frequently used in transplantation therapies and tissue engineering in recent years.40–52 The microcarriers present in Spheramine allow prolonged survival of the cells in the absence of immunosuppression, prevent apoptosis, and maintain the cells in a monolayer distribution, which is important in the case of hRPE cells for the process of melanization. Human RPE cells unattached to microcarriers do not survive well in the brain, and do not produce a lasting therapeutic effect in PD models.53 The tissue for the preparation of Spheramine is acquired from eye donors with negative test results for bacterial and viral infections. The isolated hRPE cells are expanded under current good manufacturing practices (cGMP) conditions and are prepared and tested for sterility. The cells are also examined for the presence of viral particles with the use of transmission electron microscopy. The microcarriers are prepared from certified porcine gelatin, processed with steam for sterilization, and prepared under cGMP conditions (FIG. 2). The sterility of Spheramine is confirmed by Gram stain in the laboratory at the clinical site, and it is placed in Hank’s Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS). The cells are tested for viability and counted before being loaded into syringes for implantation. Preclinical human studies Studies in vitro and in accepted animal models of PD were conducted to determine the biochemical, toxicological, and pharmacological properties of Spheramine and its components before the development of the human phase studies.54 The studies were also directed to determine the dose of Spheramine that was clinically effective in parkinsonian nonhuman primates, and these data were used to calculate the number of cells to be implanted in the human studies. The preliminary efficacy of hRPE cells was determined initially in the PD animal model of unilateral 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) striatal-lesioned rats.55 The animals received approximately 1000 cells attached to 150 microcarriers in the ipsilateral lesioned striatum. The animals exhibited significant reduction in apomorphine- induced circling after the implantation, a pharmacological effect indicating an increase of dopaminergic stimulation. This effect was maintained for the duration of the 18-week study, without using immunosuppression. Implantation of hRPE cells unattached to microcarriers produced only a brief, transient effect in the animals.56 A controlled, blinded study was performed to assess the effect of intrastriatal implantation of hRPE cells on gelatin microcarriers in MPTP-induced hemiparkinsonian Maccaca mulatta monkeys. The animals that were implanted with approximately 250,000 hRPE cells on gelatin microcarriers over five sites in the lesioned striatum had statistically significant motor improvement at 12 months after implantation, compared with control animals. The animals implanted with a low dose of cells (50,000 with microcarriers) or with microcarriers alone did not show significant improvement of symptoms.53 As part of the toxicology studies, the Ames test Salmonella typhimurium reverse mutation assay,57,58 an accepted test that studies mutagenic effects, showed no mutations when used with Spheramine. A toxicological study with intracranial implantation of gelatin microcarriers or Spheramine was done in M. fascicularis monkeys to estimate the maximally tolerated total dose of Spheramine or of the gelatin microcarriers alone. To test the related mortality or body weight effects, gelatin microcarrier beads were implanted intracranially in M. fascicularis; histopathological examination of the brain in these animals showed only mild astroglial cell proliferation and inflammation, with no evidence of granulomatous or immune-mediated reactions. Phase I study The first study in humans evaluated primarily the safety and tolerability of Spheramine in an open-label, single-center, pilot study in six patients with advanced PD. The exploratory evaluation of efficacy focused on motor disability. All the patients had bilateral but asymmetric PD, moderate to severe motor symptoms, motor fluctuations, and dyskinesias of varying degrees; all were levodopa responders. The patients were placed on optimal antiparkinsonian medications and the doses were maintained stable for at least 3 months before the surgery. The patients had baseline evaluations 1 month before surgery in the off state as practically defined—that is, in the morning after at least 12 hours overnight without taking medications. All the patients had normal findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) prior to surgery. The mean age of the patients was 52 years (40 –70), and they had a mean PD duration of 10 years. The Hoehn and Yahr stages were 3–4 in the off state and 2–3 during the on state. Surgery was done using MRI stereotactic guidance to target the postcommissural putamen. A burr hole was made anterior to the coronal suture with the patient under general anesthesia and in the supine position. A total of approximately 325,000 hRPE cells on gelatin microcarriers in 250 L were implanted unilaterally in five tracts in the postcommisural putamen, contralateral to the patient’s more affected side. The tracts were spaced 5 mm apart, and in each tract there were two deposits of 25 L separated by 5 to 10 mm in each target. The patients were taken to a recovery room and then transferred to a hospital bed and discharged within 3 days, after a brain MRI confirmed accurate placement of the implants.59 The safety and tolerability evaluations consisted of clinical and neurological examinations, recording of side effects, vital signs, and standard laboratory studies at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months after surgery, as well as periodic brain MRI and neuropsychological evaluations. 60 The patients tolerated the implantation well, and there were no serious adverse events related to the treatment. One patient had a small hemorrhage (4 7 mm) that was asymptomatic immediately after the surgery and subsequently resolved. One patient had an episode of depression with suicidal ideation at 14 months after surgery that required admission to the hospital; this was treated medically and improved in the subsequent weeks. The most frequent side effect was transient headache immediately after the surgery in the six patients, which resolved spontaneously in 1 to 2 weeks The adverse events that were considered as possibly or probably related to the treatment were transient increases in peakdose dyskinesias (in four of the six patients), which were mild, and the appearance of visual hallucinations without previous episodes (in three of the six patients). Both side effects resolved after reducing the antiparkinsonian medications. One patient reported increased freezing episodes at 7 months after implantation. There were no significant changes in laboratory assessments.61 The exploratory primary efficacy outcome measure was the change from baseline in the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) during the practically defined off state. The results showed a clinically and statistically significant improvement from baseline in the UPDRS motor off state score in all six patients. The mean improvement was a 48% reduction of the off state in the UPDRS motor disability score at 12 months, which was sustained through 24 months (with an average improvement of 41%). This improvement was maintained at 43% at 48 months in five of the six patients; the sixth patient refused to be off the PD medications overnight. The UPDRS motor off state score improved from mean ( SD) of 52 9 at baseline to 27 7 at 12 months, 31 7 at 24 months, and 28 5 at 48 months (FIG. 3). The clinical motor improvement was more evident contralateral to the implanted striatum. On state time, measured using patient diaries,62 increased from 44% of the awake day at baseline to 55% at 12 months, 65% at 24 months, and 53% at 48 months after surgery. The off state duration of the awake day decreased from 41% at baseline to 30% at 12 months, 28% at 24 months, and 35% at 48 months (n 5 patients) (FIG. 4). Total UPDRS scores decreased from 118 14 mean at baseline to 69 10 at 48 months. There was no increased on state time with dyskinesias, and no off state dyskinesias63 were observed. The section of the UPDRS regarding mentation, behavior, and mood was maintained stable during the 4 years of follow-up. Scores on the PD Quality of Life Questionnaire (PDQ-39)64–66 improved from a mean of 42 11 at baseline to 26 12 at 12 and at 24 months and to 29 20 at 48 months (Table 1). Phase II study Based on the results of the human phase I clinical trial, a phase II study was initiated and the surgeries have just been completed. This trial was a double-blind, randomized, multicenter, placebo (sham-surgery) controlled study of the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of Spheramine implanted bilaterally into the postcommissural putamen of patients with advanced PD. To maintain the blind, the surgical procedures were performed by a neurosurgeon located at a medical center geographically separated from where the patient was evaluated. The study was designed to include three cohorts. In the first group there were 12 patients, with 6 assigned to active treatment and 6 to sham surgery. The second cohort comprised 24 patients, and a new review of the accumu- lated safety data was done before proceeding to the third cohort. A total of 71 patients underwent surgery. The primary efficacy endpoint of the study was the change in the UPDRS motor subscore during the off state after 12 months, compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included the change in total UPDRS scores, UPDRS motor subscores during the on state, UPDRS activities of daily living scores, quality of life scores (PDQ-39), and evaluation of dyskinesias. The candidates were evaluated and their medications optimized 3 months before the surgery. The inclusion criteria required that the patients have disease duration of more than 5 years, be in the age range from 30 to 70 years, have bilateral disease, and have insufficient symptom control or intolerable side effects with best medical treatment. Patients were excluded from the study if they had PD with only tremor-based symptomatology, severe dyskinesias, significant psychiatric or cognitive symptoms, or severe or uncontrolled systemic disease. The patients were required to have at least 33% improvement in the UPDRS motor score between the practically defined off and on state at the screening visit, and the scores had to be between 38–70 points. Also, patients were required to have unequivocal clinical on and off periods. The patients were randomized to receive either bilateral stereotactic implantation of Spheramine into the postcommissural putamen (325,000 cells per side) or sham surgery. The patients were evaluated every 2 weeks during the first month after surgery, then monthly for 3 months, and then every 3 months thereafter, up to 2 years. The selection of the dose of 325,000 cells was based on the animal studies, as well as the dose used in the open-label human clinical study. The surgical team in charge was unblinded only for the patients on whom they operated. The treating neurologist, UPDRS rater, and all other staff remained blinded. The same independent rater evaluated each patient during all of the visits. The safety evaluations included physical and neurological examinations, vital signs, adverse events, electrocardiography, laboratory parameters and periodic brain MRI and neuropsychological assessments. The regimen of medications was maintained stable for at least the first year, unless medically necessary to treat side effects or in case of substantial deterioration of the patient’s condition. All patients had stereotactic frame placement, followed by brain MRI. In the operating room, the patients received anesthesia appropriate to make them unaware of the activities. The patients were randomized to Spheramine or placebo treatment. The patients randomized to Spheramine had bilateral scalp incisions, with burr holes placed in the calvaria and opening of the dura. A total of 325,000 hRPE cells in a volume of 250 L distributed along five needle tracts spaced about 5 mm apart were stereotactically implanted into each postcommissural putamen. Each tract had two deposits of 25 L of Spheramine suspension placed approximately 5–10 mm apart along the linear tract (65,000 hRPE cells per tract). The sham surgery control patients had bilateral scalp incisions, with burr holes placed in the outer table of the calvaria but without opening of the dura. The duration of the sham surgery was similar to that of the treatment surgery. A placebo-controlled, double blind study was chosen to provide an unbiased evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Spheramine in PD patients with moderate to advanced disease.67,68 The patients treated with placebo in this phase II trial will be eligible to receive Spheramine if this study demonstrates satisfactory efficacy and safety after the data are analyzed. Also, phase III studies will follow. CONCLUSION Spheramine is currently an experimental approach for the treatment of PD and the preclinical and open-label human studies show promise worthy of further investigation. Currently, it is postulated that the ability of hRPE cells to produce levodopa in the biosynthetic pathway for melanogenesis may serve as the rationale for a therapeutic effect, but a role of trophic factors cannot be excluded. A double-blind, controlled phase II study in advanced PD patients is currently underway, and data from this study will be available for analysis within 12 to 18 months. If this study demonstrates acceptable tolerability, safety, and efficacy then a pivotal phase III trial will be warranted. frank_ger |
Am I understanding...
Am I understanding this correctly that at 48 mos the scores started to go back up again??
|
Quote:
yes, that was also my understanding. frank_ger |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by
vB Optimise (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.