4.6 Article

Pharmacologic therapy for engraftment arrhythmia induced by transplantation of human cardiomyocytes

期刊

STEM CELL REPORTS
卷 16, 期 10, 页码 2473-2487

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2021.08.005

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Production Assistance for Cell Therapies (PACT) (Bethesda, MD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heart failure remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality following myocardial infarction. Cardiac remuscularization with transplantation of human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes is a promising preclinical therapy to restore function. Recent large animal data, however, have revealed a significant risk of engraftment arrhythmia (EA). Pharmacologic treatment of EA may be a viable strategy to improve safety and allow further clinical development of cardiac remuscularization therapy.
Heart failure remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality following myocardial infarction. Cardiac remuscularization with transplantation of human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes is a promising preclinical therapy to restore function. Recent large animal data, however, have revealed a significant risk of engraftment arrhythmia (EA). Although transient, the risk posed by EA pre-sents a barrier to clinical translation. We hypothesized that clinically approved antiarrhythmic drugs can prevent EA-related mortality as well as suppress tachycardia and arrhythmia burden. This study uses a porcine model to provide proof-of-concept evidence that a com-bination of amiodarone and ivabradine can effectively suppress EA. None of the nine treated subjects experienced the primary endpoint of cardiac death, unstable EA, or heart failure compared with five out of eight (62.5%) in the control cohort (hazard ratio = 0.00; 95% confidence interval: 0-0.297; p = 0.002). Pharmacologic treatment of EA may be a viable strategy to improve safety and allow further clinical development of cardiac remuscularization therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据