4.7 Article

VEGF Gene Therapy Fails to Improve Perfusion of Ischemic Myocardium in Patients With Advanced Coronary Disease: Results of the NORTHERN Trial

Journal

MOLECULAR THERAPY
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages 1109-1115

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1038/mt.2009.70

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [UCT-51532]
  2. Heart & Stroke Foundation of Ontario [NA-4788]
  3. St. Michael's Hospital Foundation
  4. Heart & Stroke/Richard Lewar Centre of Excellence in Cardiovascular research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite the promise of proangiogenic gene therapy most clinical trials have failed to show benefit for the primary end point analysis. The NOGA angiogenesis Revascularization Therapy: assessment by RadioNuclide imaging (NORTHERN) trial was a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of intramyocardial vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF165) gene therapy versus placebo, involving seven sites across Canada, designed to overcome major limitations of previous proangiogenic gene therapy trials. A total of 93 patients with refractory Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class 3 or 4 anginal symptoms were randomized to receive 2,000 mu g of VEGF plasmid DNA or placebo (buffered saline) delivered via the endocardial route using an electroanatomical NOGA guidance catheter. There was no difference between the VEGF-treated and the placebo groups in the primary end point of change in myocardial perfusion from baseline to 3 or 6 months, assessed by single photon emission tomography (SPECT) imaging, although a significant reduction in the ischemic area was seen in both groups. Also, similar improvements in exercise treadmill time and anginal symptoms were seen in the VEGF and the placebo groups at 3 and 6 months, although again there were no differences between these groups. Despite the intramyocardial administration of a high dose of plasmid DNA using a percutaneous guidance catheter system, there was no benefit of VEGF gene therapy at 3 or 6 months for any of the end points studied.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available