Evidence Hub

The safety and efficacy of stem cells for the treatment of severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: A randomized clinical trial

P. Laterre, M. S. Sánchez García, T. van der Poll, X. Wittebole, F. Martínez-Sagasti, Gonzalo Hernández, Ricard Ferrer, Jesús Caballero et al.

Journal of critical care, 2023

42 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE

Evaluate the safety profile of expanded allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell (eASC) for the treatment of severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2a trial. Patients with severe CABP were enrolled to receive intravenous infusions of Cx611 or placebo. The primary objective was safety including hypersensitivity reactions, thromboembolic events, and immunological responses to Cx611. The secondary endpoints included the clinical cure rate, ventilation-free days, and overall survival (Day 90).

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were randomized and received infusions (Cx611: n = 42]; placebo: n = 41]. The mean age was similar (Cx611: 61.1 [11.2] years; placebo: 63.4 [10.4] years). The number of AEs and treatment-emergent AEs were similar (243; 184 and 2; 1) in Cx611 and placebo respectively. Hypersensitivity reactions or thromboembolic events were similar (Cx611: n = 9; placebo: n = 12). Each study arm had similar anti-HLA antibody/DSA levels at Day 90. The clinical cure rate (Cx611: 86.7%; placebo: 93.8%), mean number of ventilator-free days (Cx611: 12.2 [10.29] days; placebo: 15.4 [10.75] days), and overall survival (Cx611: 71.5%; placebo: 77.0%) did not differ between study arms.

CONCLUSION

Cx611 was well tolerated in severe CABP. These data provide insights for future stem cell clinical study designs, endpoints and sample size calculation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 42 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free