Search

Aims: Bone marrow-derived mononuclear cell (BM-MNC) therapy may improve myocardial recovery in patients following acute myocardial infarction (AMI), though existing trial results are inconsistent., Methods and Results: Originally an open-label, multicentre Phase III trial, BAMI was designed to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of intracoronary infusion of BM-MNCs in reducing the time to all-cause mortality in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, ≤45%) after primary angioplasty (PPCI) for ST-elevation AMI. Unexpectedly low recruitment means the trial no longer qualifies as a hypothesis-testing trial, but is instead an observational study with no definitive conclusions possible from statistical analysis. In total, 375 patients were recruited: 185 patients were randomized to the treatment arm (intracoronary infusion of BM-MNCs 2-8 days after PPCI) and 190 patients to the control arm (optimal medical therapy). All-cause mortality at 2 years was 3.26% [6 deaths; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.48-7.12%] in the BM-MNC group and 3.82% (7 deaths; 95% CI: 1.84-7.84%) in the control group. Five patients (2.7%, 95% CI: 1.0-5.9%) in the BM-MNC group and 15 patients (8.1%, CI : 4.7-12.5%) in the control group were hospitalized for heart failure during 2 years of follow-up. Neither adverse events nor serious adverse events differed between the two groups. There were no patients hospitalized for stroke in the control group and 4 (2.2%) patients hospitalized for stroke in the BM-MNC group., Conclusions: Although BAMI is the largest trial of autologous cell-based therapy in the treatment of AMI, unexpectedly low recruitment and event rates preclude any meaningful group comparisons and interpretation of the observed results., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Harmonized regulation of research with human stem cells in Europe has shaped innovation in regenerative medicine. Findings from a Phase III academic clinical trial of an autologous cell procedure illustrate the obstacles that a multinational trial faces. A typology of the obstacles encountered, may help other teams embarking upon trials. The findings throw light on the situation of clinician-scientists in clinical innovation, as the expertise to run scientific trials is very complex. The innovation route of clinical translation takes insufficient account of the interdependencies between multiple social and cultural factors from outside the laboratory and the clinic. For ethical reasons, however, academic and business routes to stem cell treatments ought to be enabled by the regulators. Suggestions arise, how academics can prepare for trials, that academic research needs better institutional support and that new models of medical innovation may need to be developed for regenerative medicine.

This article aims to show how the traditions of ethical reasoning and policy-making shape stem cell research in Britain. To do so I give a detailed account of the earlier developments of regulations on embryo research and the specific scientific advances made in Britain. The subsequent regulation of stem cell research was largely predetermined by those structures and the different and partly opposing orientations of a utilitarian approach to policies on biomedicine. The setting up of the first stem cell bank and the directing of public funding into not only bioethical but also sociological guidance of the development of the new science field are aspects of the particular British way of supporting stem cell research. However, there is also an ongoing philosophical and juridical debate on the possible erosion of fundamental values caused by incremental regulatory weakening. Although I am highly sympathetic to the critical position that there is a need for a metaphysical anchor to secure individual human rights, one has to admit that the British mode of handling the inevitable ethical problems we face with biomedical progress is rather successful in terms of securing some of the basic needs and values of a modern democratic society.