Adam Mendizabal

Bio: Adam Mendizabal is an academic researcher from Duke University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Transplantation & Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The author has an hindex of 37, co-authored 80 publications receiving 7501 citations. Previous affiliations of Adam Mendizabal include Cedars-Sinai Medical Center & University of Miami.

Comparison of allogeneic vs autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells delivered by transendocardial injection in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy: The POSEIDON randomized trial

Abstract: Context Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are under evaluation as a therapy for ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). Both autologous and allogeneic MSC therapies are possible; however, their safety and efficacy have not been compared. Objective To test whether allogeneic MSCs are as safe and effective as autologous MSCs in patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction due to ICM. Design, Setting, and Patients A phase 1/2 randomized comparison (POSEIDON study) in a US tertiary-care referral hospital of allogeneic and autologous MSCs in 30 patients with LV dysfunction due to ICM between April 2, 2010, and September 14, 2011, with 13-month follow-up. Intervention Twenty million, 100 million, or 200 million cells (5 patients in each cell type per dose level) were delivered by transendocardial stem cell injection into 10 LV sites. Main Outcome Measures Thirty-day postcatheterization incidence of predefined treatment-emergent serious adverse events (SAEs). Efficacy assessments included 6-minute walk test, exercise peak VO 2 , Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), New York Heart Association class, LV volumes, ejection fraction (EF), early enhancement defect (EED; infarct size), and sphericity index. Results Within 30 days, 1 patient in each group (treatment-emergent SAE rate, 6.7%) was hospitalized for heart failure, less than the prespecified stopping event rate of 25%. The 1-year incidence of SAEs was 33.3% (n = 5) in the allogeneic group and 53.3% (n = 8) in the autologous group (P = .46). At 1 year, there were no ventricular arrhythmia SAEs observed among allogeneic recipients compared with 4 patients (26.7%) in the autologous group (P = .10). Relative to baseline, autologous but not allogeneic MSC therapy was associated with an improvement in the 6-minute walk test and the MLHFQ score, but neither improved exercise VO 2 max. Allogeneic and autologous MSCs reduced mean EED by −33.21% (95% CI, −43.61% to −22.81%; P Conclusions In this early-stage study of patients with ICM, transendocardial injection of allogeneic and autologous MSCs without a placebo control were both associated with low rates of treatment-emergent SAEs, including immunologic reactions. In aggregate, MSC injection favorably affected patient functional capacity, quality of life, and ventricular remodeling. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01087996

Transendocardial Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Mononuclear Bone Marrow Cells for Ischemic Cardiomyopathy The TAC-HFT Randomized Trial

Abstract: Importance Whether culture-expanded mesenchymal stem cells or whole bone marrow mononuclear cells are safe and effective in chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy is controversial. Objective To demonstrate the safety of transendocardial stem cell injection with autologous mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMCs) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Design, setting, and patients A phase 1 and 2 randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled study involving 65 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction less than 50% (September 1, 2009-July 12, 2013). The study compared injection of MSCs (n=19) with placebo (n = 11) and BMCs (n = 19) with placebo (n = 10), with 1 year of follow-up. Interventions Injections in 10 LV sites with an infusion catheter. Main outcomes and measures Treatment-emergent 30-day serious adverse event rate defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, perforation, tamponade, or sustained ventricular arrhythmias. Results No patient had a treatment-emergent serious adverse events at day 30. The 1-year incidence of serious adverse events was 31.6% (95% CI, 12.6% to 56.6%) for MSCs, 31.6% (95% CI, 12.6%-56.6%) for BMCs, and 38.1% (95% CI, 18.1%-61.6%) for placebo. Over 1 year, the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure score improved with MSCs (-6.3; 95% CI, -15.0 to 2.4; repeated measures of variance, P=.02) and with BMCs (-8.2; 95% CI, -17.4 to 0.97; P=.005) but not with placebo (0.4; 95% CI, -9.45 to 10.25; P=.38). The 6-minute walk distance increased with MSCs only (repeated measures model, P = .03). Infarct size as a percentage of LV mass was reduced by MSCs (-18.9%; 95% CI, -30.4 to -7.4; within-group, P = .004) but not by BMCs (-7.0%; 95% CI, -15.7% to 1.7%; within-group, P = .11) or placebo (-5.2%; 95% CI, -16.8% to 6.5%; within-group, P = .36). Regional myocardial function as peak Eulerian circumferential strain at the site of injection improved with MSCs (-4.9; 95% CI, -13.3 to 3.5; within-group repeated measures, P = .03) but not BMCs (-2.1; 95% CI, -5.5 to 1.3; P = .21) or placebo (-0.03; 95% CI, -1.9 to 1.9; P = .14). Left ventricular chamber volume and ejection fraction did not change. Conclusions and relevance Transendocardial stem cell injection with MSCs or BMCs appeared to be safe for patients with chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy and LV dysfunction. Although the sample size and multiple comparisons preclude a definitive statement about safety and clinical effect, these results provide the basis for larger studies to provide definitive evidence about safety and to assess efficacy of this new therapeutic approach. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00768066.

Myeloablative Versus Reduced-Intensity Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Abstract: Purpose The optimal regimen intensity before allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is unknown. We hypothesized that lower treatment-related mortality (TRM) with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) would result in improved overall survival (OS) compared with myeloablative conditioning (MAC). To test this hypothesis, we performed a phase III randomized trial comparing MAC with RIC in patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes. Patients and Methods Patients age 18 to 65 years with HCT comorbidity index ≤ 4 and < 5% marrow myeloblasts pre-HCT were randomly assigned to receive MAC (n = 135) or RIC (n = 137) followed by HCT from HLA-matched related or unrelated donors. The primary end point was OS 18 months post-random assignment based on an intent-to-treat analysis. Secondary end points included relapse-free survival (RFS) and TRM. Results Planned enrollment was 356 patients; accrual ceased at 272 because of high relapse incidence with RIC versus MAC (48.3%; 95% CI, 39.6% to 56.4% and 13.5%; 95% CI, 8.3% to 19.8%, respectively; P < .001). At 18 months, OS for patients in the RIC arm was 67.7% (95% CI, 59.1% to 74.9%) versus 77.5% (95% CI, 69.4% to 83.7%) for those in the MAC arm (difference, 9.8%; 95% CI, -0.8% to 20.3%; P = .07). TRM with RIC was 4.4% (95% CI, 1.8% to 8.9%) versus 15.8% (95% CI, 10.2% to 22.5%) with MAC ( P = .002). RFS with RIC was 47.3% (95% CI, 38.7% to 55.4%) versus 67.8% (95% CI, 59.1% to 75%) with MAC ( P < .01). Conclusion OS was higher with MAC, but this was not statistically significant. RIC resulted in lower TRM but higher relapse rates compared with MAC, with a statistically significant advantage in RFS with MAC. These data support the use of MAC as the standard of care for fit patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Abstract: Guidelines for the management of patients with invasive candidiasis and mucosal candidiasis were prepared by an Expert Panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. These updated guidelines replace the previous guidelines published in the 15 January 2004 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases and are intended for use by health care providers who care for patients who either have or are at risk of these infections. Since 2004, several new antifungal agents have become available, and several new studies have been published relating to the treatment of candidemia, other forms of invasive candidiasis, and mucosal disease, including oropharyngeal and esophageal candidiasis. There are also recent prospective data on the prevention of invasive candidiasis in high-risk neonates and adults and on the empiric treatment of suspected invasive candidiasis in adults. This new information is incorporated into this revised document.