IntroductionSystemic sclerosis (SSc) is an autoimmune disease characterised by inflammation, fibrosis and vasculopathy. Digital ulcers (DUs) are a frequent manifestation of vasculopathy in patients with SSc. Despite recent advances in pharmacological treatments, DU still have major health and economic implications. As there is currently no proven therapeutic strategy to promote DU healing, new treatments are urgently needed. Mesenchymal stem or stromal cells (MSCs) may provide a novel therapy for DU in SSc, because of their immunomodulatory and vasculoregenerative properties. Allogeneic MSC therapy involves functionally competent MSCs from healthy donors and may be used as ‘off-the-shelf’ available treatment. This study will evaluate whether allogeneic MSC therapy is a safe and potentially efficacious treatment for DU of SSc.Methods and analysisThe MANUS (Mesenchymal stromal cells for Angiogenesis and Neovascularization in digital Ulcers of Systemic Sclerosis) Trial is a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial. 20 patients with SSc with refractory DU will be randomised to receive eight intramuscular injections with either placebo or 50*106 MSCs. The primary outcome is the toxicity of the treatment at 12 weeks after administration. Secondary outcomes include (serious) adverse events, number and time to healing of DU, pain, reported hand function, quality of life and SSc disease activity. We will also evaluate changes in nailfold capillaroscopy pattern, as well as biochemical parameters and biomarkers in peripheral blood and skin biopsies. Follow-up visits will be scheduled at 48 hours and 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 weeks post-treatment. If the results confirm safety, feasibility and potential efficacy, a large multicentre randomised controlled trial with longer follow-up will be initiated focusing on efficacy.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Dutch Central Committee on Research Concerning Human Subjects (protocol no: NL51705.000.15). The results will be disseminated through patient associations and conventional scientific channels.Trial registration numberNCT03211793; Pre-results.

Administration of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) is a promising strategy to treat cardiovascular disease (CVD). As progenitor cells may be negatively affected by both age and comorbidity, characterization of MSC function is important to guide decisions regarding use of allogeneic or autologous cells. Definitive answers on which factors affect MSC function can also aid in selecting which MSC donors would yield the most therapeutically efficacious MSCs. Here we provide a narrative review of MSC function in CVD based on a systematic search. A total of 41 studies examining CVD-related MSC (dys)function were identified. These data show that MSC characteristics and regenerative potential are often affected by CVD. However, studies presented conflicting results, and directed assessment of MSC parameters relevant to regenerative medicine applications was lacking in many studies. The predictive ability of in vitro assays for in vivo efficacy was rarely assessed. There was no correlation between quality of study reporting and study findings. Age mismatch was also not associated with study findings or effect size. Future research should focus on assays that assess regenerative potential in MSCs and parameters that relate to clinical success.

If our results indicate that intramuscular allogeneic BM-MSC therapy for CLI is safe and potentially effective, this will have important consequences for treatment of patients with CLI. A large multicenter clinical trial with longer follow-up focusing on hard end points should then be initiated to confirm these findings.

Background. Cell-based therapies are being developed to meet the need for curative therapy in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Bone marrow- (BM-) derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) enhance tissue repair and induce neoangiogenesis through paracrine action of secreted proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). Administration of allogeneic BM MSCs is less desirable in a patient population likely to require a kidney transplant, but potency of autologous MSCs should be confirmed, given previous indications that CKD-induced dysfunction is present. While the immunomodulatory capacity of CKD BM MSCs has been established, it is unknown whether CKD affects wound healing and angiogenic potential of MSC-derived CM and EVs. Methods. MSCs were cultured from BM obtained from kidney transplant recipients (N=15) or kidney donors (N=17). Passage 3 BM MSCs and BM MSC-conditioned medium (CM) were used for experiments. EVs were isolated from CM by differential ultracentrifugation. BM MSC differentiation capacity, proliferation, and senescence-associated β-galactosidase activity was assessed. In vitro promigratory and proangiogenic capacity of BM MSC-derived CM and EVs was assessed using an in vitro scratch wound assay and Matrigel angiogenesis assay. Results. Healthy and CKD BM MSCs exhibited similar differentiation capacity, proliferation, and senescence-associated β-galactosidase activity. Scratch wound migration was not significantly different between healthy and CKD MSCs (P=0.18). Healthy and CKD BM MSC-derived CM induced similar tubule formation (P=0.21). There was also no difference in paracrine regenerative function of EVs (scratch wound: P=0.6; tubulogenesis: P=0.46). Conclusions. Our results indicate that MSCs have an intrinsic capacity to produce proangiogenic paracrine factors, including EVs, which is not affected by donor health status regarding CKD. This suggests that autologous MSC-based therapy is a viable option in CKD.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare autoimmune connective tissue disease with a high mortality and morbidity. While progress has been made in terms of identifying high-risk patients and implementing new treatment strategies, therapeutic options remain limited. In the past few decades, various cellular therapies have emerged, which have been studied in SSc and other conditions. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of currently available cellular therapies and critically assess their merit as disease-modifying treatment for SSc. Currently, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the only cellular therapy that has demonstrated clinical effects on the immune system, neoangiogenesis, and fibrosis. Robust mechanistic studies as well as clinical trials are essential to move the field forward.

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) for autoimmune diseases has been applied for two decades as a treatment for refractory patients with progressive disease. The rationale behind aHSCT is that high-dose immunosuppression eliminates autoreactive T and B cells, thereby resetting the immune system. Post-aHSCT the cytotoxic CD8+ T cells normalize via clonal expansion due to homeostatic proliferation within a few months. CD4+ T cells recover primarily via thymopoiesis resulting in complete renewal of the T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire which requires years or never normalize completely. The increase in naïve T cells inducing immune tolerance, renewal of especially the regulatory TCR repertoire, and a less pro-inflammatory functional profile of the CD4+ T cells seem essential for successful immune reconstitution inducing long-term remission. There is currently a knowledge gap regarding the immune response in tissue sites post-aHSCT, as well as disease-specific factors that may determine remission or relapse. Future studies on lymphocyte dynamics and function may pave the way for optimized conditioning regimens with a more individualized approach.

Objectives To examine the treatment decision-making process of patients with dcSSc in the context of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Methods A qualitative semi-structured interview study was done in patients before or after HSCT, or patients who chose another treatment than HSCT. Thematic analysis was used. Shared decision-making (SDM) was assessed with the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Results Twenty-five patients [16 male/nine female, median age 47 (range 27–68) years] were interviewed: five pre-HSCT, 16 post-HSCT and four following other treatment. Whereas the SDM-Q-9 showed the decision-making process was perceived as shared [median score 81/100 (range 49–100)], we learned from the interviews that the decision was predominantly made by the rheumatologist, and patients were often steered towards a treatment option. Strong guidance of the rheumatologist was appreciated because of a lack of accessible, reliable and SSc-specific information, due to the approach of the decision-making process of the rheumatologist, the large consequence of the decision and the trust in their doctor. Expectations of outcomes and risks also differed between patients. Furthermore, more than half of patients felt they had no choice but to go for HSCT, due to rapid deterioration of health and the perception of HSCT as ‘the holy grail’. Conclusion This is the first study that provides insight into the decision-making process in dcSSc. This process is negatively impacted by a lack of disease-specific education about treatment options. Additionally, we recommend exploring patients’ preferences and understanding of the illness to optimally guide decision-making and to provide tailor-made information.

There is increasing evidence that patients with rapidly progressive SSc may benefit from HSCT. However, optimal patient selection, pretransplantation workup and posttransplant management, still have to be established.