4.7 Article

CIBER-CLAP (CIBERCV Cardioprotection Large Animal Platform): A multicenter preclinical network for testing reproducibility in cardiovascular interventions

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-56613-6

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Insituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCiii) through the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (MICINN)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite many cardioprotective interventions have shown to protect the heart against ischemia/reperfusion injury in the experimental setting, only few of them have succeeded in translating their findings into positive proof-of-concept clinical trials. Controversial and inconsistent experimental and clinical evidence supports the urgency of a disruptive paradigm shift for testing cardioprotective therapies. There is a need to evaluate experimental reproducibility before stepping into the clinical arena. The CIBERCV (acronym for Spanish network-center for cardiovascular biomedical research) has set up the Cardioprotection Large Animal Platform (CIBER-CLAP) to perform experimental studies testing the efficacy and reproducibility of promising cardioprotective interventions based on a pre-specified design and protocols, randomization, blinding assessment and other robust methodological features. Our first randomized, control-group, open-label blinded endpoint experimental trial assessing local ischemic preconditioning (IPC) in a pig model of acute myocardial infarction (n = 87) will be carried out in three separate sets of experiments performed in parallel by three laboratories. Each set aims to assess: (A) CMR-based outcomes; (B) histopathological-based outcomes; and (C) protein-based outcomes. Three core labs will assess outcomes in a blinded fashion (CMR imaging, histopathology and proteomics) and 2 methodological core labs will conduct the randomization and statistical analysis.

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