Safety and efficacy of matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation with spheroid technology is independent of spheroid dose after 4 years
- 42 Downloads
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of product dose in autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) for the treatment of full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee and to assess its influence on clinical and morphological mid-term outcome.
Seventy-five patients were included in this single-blind, randomised, prospective, controlled clinical trial. Patients were assigned randomly to three different dose groups [low (3–7 spheroids/cm2), medium (10–30 spheroids/cm2), or high (40–70 spheroids/cm2)] and assessed using standardised clinical and morphological scoring systems (KOOS, IKDC, MOCART) for 4 years following the intervention.
The analysis population comprised 75 patients (22 women, 53 men) aged 34 ± 9 years. Defect sizes ranged from 2 to 10 cm2 following intraoperative debridement. The assessment of the primary variable ‘overall KOOS’ showed a statistically significant improvement, compared with baseline, for each dose group, i.e., at baseline the mean ‘overall KOOS’ scores were 60.4 ± 13.6, 59.6 ± 15.4, and 51.1 ± 15.4 for the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups, respectively, and 57.0 ± 15.2 for ‘all patients’. After 48 months those values improved to 80.0 ± 14.7, 84.0 ± 14.9, and 66.9 ± 21.5 in the respective dose groups and 77.1 ± 18.6 for ‘all patients’. Pairwise comparisons of these dose groups did not reveal any statistically significant differences. Likewise, assessment of the subjective IKDC score revealed no statistically significant differences between the three dose groups up to the 48-month visit. However, between 12 and 48 months there was a low, but steady, improvement in the low-dose group and a substantial amelioration in the medium-dose group. The mean MOCART total scores 3 months after treatment were 59.8 ± 10.9, 64.5 ± 10.3, and 64.7 ± 9.4 for the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups, and 62.9 ± 10.3 for ‘all patients’; 48 months after treatment these were 73.9 ± 13.1, 78.0 ± 12.4, and 74.3 ± 14.0 for the respective dose groups and 75.5 ± 13.1 for ‘all patients’.
Results of this study confirm the efficacy and safety of the applied “advanced therapy medicinal product”; no dose dependence was found either for the incidence or for the severity of any adverse reactions. All doses applied in the present study led to significant clinical improvement over time and can therefore be regarded as effective doses. The influence of product doses in the range investigated seems to be low and can be neglected. Thus, the authorised dose range of 10–70 spheroids/cm2 confirmed by this clinical trial offers a broad therapeutic window for the surgeon applying the product, thereby reducing the risk of over- or underdosing.
Level of evidence
KeywordsAutologous chondrocyte implantation Cartilage lesion Knee surgery Patella Randomised clinical trial
The present study was funded by the company CO.DON AG, Teltow, Germany.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The present study has been financed by the company Co.don (Teltow, Germany) has been part of the approval process for european market authorization by the European Medicinal Agency (EMA). All authors received grants for limited educational purposes and financial support for conducting the present study.
All procedures performed in this studies were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from Heidelberg University (2009-016466-82).
- 8.Collins NJ, Misra D, Felson DT, Crossley KM, Roos EM (2011) Measures of knee function: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS), Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADL), Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Activity Rating Scale (ARS), and Tegner Activity Score (TAS). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 63(Suppl 11):S208–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Crawford DC, DeBerardino TM, Williams RJ 3rd (2012) NeoCart, an autologous cartilage tissue implant, compared with microfracture for treatment of distal femoral cartilage lesions: an FDA phase-II prospective, randomized clinical trial after two years. J Bone Jt Surg Am 94:979–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Dwivedi G, Chevrier A, Alameh MG, Hoemann CD, Buschmann MD (2018) Quality of cartilage repair from marrow stimulation correlates with cell number, clonogenic, chondrogenic, and matrix production potential of underlying bone marrow stromal cells in a rabbit model. Cartilage. https://doi.org/10.1177/1947603518812555
- 13.Ebert JR, Fallon M, Zheng MH, Wood DJ, Ackland TR (2012) A randomized trial comparing accelerated and traditional approaches to postoperative weightbearing rehabilitation after matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation: findings at 5 years. Am J Sports Med 40:1527–1537PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 15.Filardo G, Kon E, Andriolo L, Di Martino A, Zaffagnini S, Marcacci M (2014) Treatment of "patellofemoral" cartilage lesions with matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte transplantation: a comparison of patellar and trochlear lesions. Am J Sports Med 42:626–634PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Guillen-Garcia P, Rodriguez-Inigo E, Guillen-Vicente I, Caballero-Santos R, Guillen-Vicente M, Abelow S et al (2014) Increasing the dose of autologous chondrocytes improves articular cartilage repair: histological and molecular study in the sheep animal model. Cartilage 5:114–122PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Kon E, Filardo G, Berruto M, Benazzo F, Zanon G, Della Villa S et al (2011) Articular cartilage treatment in high-level male soccer players: a prospective comparative study of arthroscopic second-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation versus microfracture. Am J Sports Med 39:2549–2557PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 27.Marlovits S, Singer P, Zeller P, Mandl I, Haller J, Trattnig S (2006) Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol 57:16–23PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 30.Niemeyer P, Laute V, John T, Becher C, Diehl P, Kolombe T et al (2016) The effect of cell dose on the early magnetic resonance morphological outcomes of autologous cell implantation for articular cartilage defects in the knee: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Sports Med 44:2005–2014PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 31.Niemeyer P, Laute V, Zinser W, Becher C, Kolombe T, Fay J et al (2019) A prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III noninferiority trial to compare the clinical efficacy of matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation with spheroid technology versus arthroscopic microfracture for cartilage defects of the knee. Orthop J Sports Med 7:2325967119854442PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 38.Saris DB, Vanlauwe J, Victor J, Almqvist KF, Verdonk R, Bellemans J et al (2009) Treatment of symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee: characterized chondrocyte implantation results in better clinical outcome at 36 months in a randomized trial compared to microfracture. Am J Sports Med 37(Suppl 1):10S–19SPubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 39.Saris DB, Vanlauwe J, Victor J, Haspl M, Bohnsack M, Fortems Y et al (2008) Characterized chondrocyte implantation results in better structural repair when treating symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee in a randomized controlled trial versus microfracture. Am J Sports Med 36:235–246PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 41.Vanlauwe J, Saris DB, Victor J, Almqvist KF, Bellemans J, Luyten FP et al (2011) Five-year outcome of characterized chondrocyte implantation versus microfracture for symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee: early treatment matters. Am J Sports Med 39:2566–2574PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 42.Wondrasch B, Risberg MA, Zak L, Marlovits S, Aldrian S (2015) Effect of accelerated weightbearing after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation on the femoral condyle: a prospective, randomized controlled study presenting MRI-based and clinical outcomes after 5 years. Am J Sports Med 43:146–153PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 43.Wood JJ, Malek MA, Frassica FJ, Polder JA, Mohan AK, Bloom ET et al (2006) Autologous cultured chondrocytes: adverse events reported to the United States Food and Drug Administration. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88:503–507Google Scholar