No abstract

Background:Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) and microfracture are established treatments for large, full-thickness cartilage defects, but there is still a need to expand the clinical and health economic knowledge of these procedures.Purpose:To confirm the noninferiority of ACI compared with microfracture.Study Design:Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.Methods:Patients were randomized to be treated with matrix-associated ACI using spheroid technology (n = 52) or microfracture (n = 50). Both procedures followed standard methods. Patients were assessed by the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), MOCART (magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue) scoring system, Bern score, modified Lysholm score, International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) rating (histological and immunochemical scoring after rebiopsy 24 months after implantation), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) examination form. The main assessments were conducted 24 months after study treatment.Results:In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, the overall KOOS score for both ACI and microfracture yielded a statistically significant improvement relative to baseline. According to the between-group analysis, ACI passed the test of noninferiority compared with microfracture; thus, the primary goal of the study was achieved. The KOOS subscores yielded the same qualitative results as the overall KOOS score (ie, for each of these, noninferiority was demonstrated), and in 1 case (Activities of Daily Living subscore), the threshold for superiority was passed. The subgroup analyses did not yield any clear evidence of an association between treatment effect and any of the categories investigated (age, diagnosis, defect localization, sex). A histological analysis of biopsies from 16 patients (ACI: n = 9; microfracture: n = 7) suggested a better quality of repair in the patients treated with ACI.Conclusion:The efficacy of both ACI and microfracture was demonstrated with respect to both functional outcomes and morphological repair. The primary analysis confirmed the statistical hypothesis of the noninferiority of ACI, even for relatively small cartilage defects (1-4 cm2) treated in this study, the indication for which microfracture is generally accepted as the standard of care. ACI showed significant superiority in the KOOS subscores of Activities of Daily Living at 24 months and Knee-related Quality of Life at 12 months.Registration:NCT01222559 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Interleukin-10 is a versatile adjuvant candidate to control the post-injurious environment in cartilage defects and promote chondrogenesis in ACI grafts.

Purpose 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. Methods 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. Results 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’. Conclusions 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 I.

NCT01225575 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier); 2009-016816-20 (EudraCT number).