Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 487

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Safety and Efficacy of the Intravenous Infusion of Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Patients With Heart Failure: A Phase 1/2 Randomized Controlled Trial (RIMECARD Trial [Randomized Clinical Trial of Intravenous Infusion Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Cardiopathy])

Open access
Bartolucci, Jorge, Verdugo, Fernando J., González, Paz L., Larrea, Ricardo E., Abarzua, Ema, Goset, Carlos, Rojo, Pamela, Palma, Ivan, Lamich, Ruben, Pedreros, Pablo A., Valdivia, Gloria, Lopez, Valentina M., Nazzal, Carolina, Alcayaga-Miranda, Francisca, Cuenca, Jimena, Brobeck, Matthew J., Patel, Amit N., Figueroa, Fernando E., Khoury, Maroun·2017·Circulation Research

Abstract

Rationale: Umbilical cord–derived mesenchymal stem cells (UC-MSC) are easily accessible and expanded in vitro, possess distinct properties, and improve myocardial remodeling and function in experimental models of cardiovascular disease. Although bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells have been previously assessed for their therapeutic potential in individuals with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, no clinical trial has evaluated intravenous infusion of UC-MSCs in these patients. Objective: Evaluate the safety and efficacy of the intravenous infusion of UC-MSC in patients with chronic stable heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results: Patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction under optimal medical treatment were randomized to intravenous infusion of allogenic UC-MSCs (Cellistem, Cells for Cells S.A., Santiago, Chile; 1×10 6 cells/kg) or placebo (n=15 per group). UC-MSCs in vitro, compared with bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells, displayed a 55-fold increase in the expression of hepatocyte growth factor, known to be involved in myogenesis, cell migration, and immunoregulation. UC-MSC–treated patients presented no adverse events related to the cell infusion, and none of the patients tested at 0, 15, and 90 days presented alloantibodies to the UC-MSCs (n=7). Only the UC-MSC–treated group exhibited significant improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up assessed both through transthoracic echocardiography ( P =0.0167 versus baseline) and cardiac MRI ( P =0.025 versus baseline). Echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction change from baseline to month 12 differed significantly between groups (+7.07±6.22% versus +1.85±5.60%; P =0.028). In addition, at all follow-up time points, UC-MSC–treated patients displayed improvements of New York Heart Association functional class ( P =0.0167 versus baseline) and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire ( P <0.05 versus baseline). At study completion, groups did not differ in mortality, heart failure admissions, arrhythmias, or incident malignancy. Conclusions: Intravenous infusion of UC-MSC was safe in this group of patients with stable heart failure and reduced ejection fraction under optimal medical treatment. Improvements in left ventricular function, functional status, and quality of life were observed in patients treated with UC-MSCs. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01739777 . Unique identifier: NCT01739777

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circresaha.117.310712

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bartolucci, J., Verdugo, F. J., González, P. L., Larrea, R. E., Abarzua, E., Goset, C., Rojo, P., Palma, I., Lamich, R., Pedreros, P. A., Valdivia, G., Lopez, V. M., Nazzal, C., Alcayaga-Miranda, F., Cuenca, J., Brobeck, M. J., Patel, A. N., Figueroa, F. E., & Khoury, M.
Venue
Circulation Research
Published
2017-10-27
Volume
121
Issue
10
Pages
1192-1204
ISSN
  • 0009-7330 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4571
OpenAlex
W2758616494
Cited by
487
References
2
FWCI
17.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.