Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsRandomized Controlled TrialPubMed

Safety, tolerability and efficacy of intra-articular Progenza in knee osteoarthritis: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled single ascending dose study.

Kuah D., Sivell S., Longworth T., James K., Guermazi A., Cicuttini F.

Randomized Controlled Trial with a reported sample of 8 on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in J Transl Med (2018) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal
J Transl Med (2018)
Country
England
Reported sample size
8
Source database
PubMed
PMID
29510712
DOI
10.1186/s12967-018-1420-z

Abstract (original English)

Cell therapies are being investigated as potential disease modifying treatment options for osteoarthritis (OA). Progenza (PRG) comprises in vitro expanded mesenchymal stem cells derived from human donor adipose tissue combined with cell culture supernatant. The primary objective of this first-in-human study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of PRG. We conducted a single centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose study. Twenty patients aged 40-65 years with symptomatic Kellgren-Lawrence grade 1-3 knee OA were treated in two cohorts and randomized 4:1 to PRG or placebo. Cohort 1: 3.9 million cells (PRG 3.9M, n = 8) or placebo (n = 2) and cohort 2: 6.7 million cells (PRG 6.7M, n = 8) or placebo (n = 2). Each patient received a single intra-articular injection and was followed-up for 12 months. The study population comprised 20 patients (placebo, n = 4; PRG 3.9M, n = 8; PRG 6.7M, n = 8). All patients reported at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). The majority of events [143/169 (84.6%)] were mild with 34 (20.1%) being considered by the investigator to be treatment related. There were no serious AEs or withdrawals due to AEs during the study. There was a statistically significant within group improvement in VAS pain scores from baseline at all timepoints for the PRG combined group, with highly significant improvements seen a

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence
AdultAgedCartilageDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansInjections, Intra-ArticularKneeMagnetic Resonance Imaging

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research