↓ Skip to main content

Safety, tolerability, clinical, and joint structural outcomes of a single intra-articular injection of allogeneic mesenchymal precursor cells in patients following anterior cruciate ligament…

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
247 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety, tolerability, clinical, and joint structural outcomes of a single intra-articular injection of allogeneic mesenchymal precursor cells in patients following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a controlled double-blind randomised trial
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13075-017-1391-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuanyuan Wang, Andrew Shimmin, Peter Ghosh, Paul Marks, James Linklater, David Connell, Stephen Hall, Donna Skerrett, Silviu Itescu, Flavia M. Cicuttini

Abstract

Few clinical trials have investigated the safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells for the management of post-traumatic osteoarthritis. The objectives of this pilot study were to determine the safety and tolerability and to explore the efficacy of a single intra-articular injection of allogeneic human mesenchymal precursor cells (MPCs) to improve clinical symptoms and retard joint structural deterioration over 24 months in patients following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. In this phase Ib/IIa, double-blind, active comparator clinical study, 17 patients aged 18-40 years with unilateral ACL reconstruction were randomized (2:1) to receive either a single intra-articular injection of 75 million allogeneic MPCs suspended in hyaluronan (HA) (MPC + HA group) (n = 11) or HA alone (n = 6). Patients were monitored for adverse events. Immunogenicity was evaluated by anti-HLA panel reactive antibodies (PRA) against class I and II HLAs determined by flow cytometry. Pain, function, and quality of life were assessed using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and SF-36v2 scores. Joint space width was measured from radiographs, and tibial cartilage volume and bone area assessed from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Moderate arthralgia and swelling within 24 h following injection that subsided were observed in 4 out of 11 in the MPC + HA group and 0 out of 6 HA controls. No cell-related serious adverse effects were observed. Increases in class I PRA >10% were observed at week 4 in the MPC + HA group that decreased to baseline levels by week 104. Compared with the HA group, MPC + HA-treated patients showed greater improvements in KOOS pain, symptom, activities of daily living, and SF-36 bodily pain scores (p < 0.05). The MPC + HA group had reduced medial and lateral tibiofemoral joint space narrowing (p < 0.05), less tibial bone expansion (0.5% vs 4.0% over 26 weeks, p = 0.02), and a trend towards reduced tibial cartilage volume loss (0.7% vs -4.0% over 26 weeks, p = 0.10) than the HA controls. Intra-articular administration of a single allogeneic MPC injection following ACL reconstruction was safe, well tolerated, and may improve symptoms and structural outcomes. These findings suggest that MPCs warrant further investigations as they may modulate some of the pathological processes responsible for the development of post-traumatic osteoarthritis following ACL reconstruction. ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01088191 ) registration date: March 11, 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 247 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 14%
Student > Master 31 13%
Student > Bachelor 29 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 37 15%
Unknown 89 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 72 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 6%
Psychology 6 2%
Sports and Recreations 6 2%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 105 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2018.
All research outputs
#2,722,536
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#549
of 3,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,226
of 327,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#8
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.