Info: Zenodo’s user support line is staffed on regular business days between Dec 23 and Jan 5. Response times may be slightly longer than normal.

Published March 7, 2022 | Version 2022_03_07
Journal article Open

Guidelines to analyse preclinical studies using perinatal derivatives

Creators

  • 1. Biophysics Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra; Coimbra, Portugal
  • 2. Department of Experimental Medicine (DIMES), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
  • 3. Division of Cell Biology, Histology, Embryology, Gottfried Schatz Research Center, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
  • 4. Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute (Vaxinfectio), University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
  • 5. Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Cardiology, Istituto Cardiocentro Ticino, Lugano, Switzerland; Center for Molecular Cardiology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
  • 6. Università degli Studi di Milano, Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science (DIVAS), Lodi, Italy
  • 7. Univ. Bordeaux, INSERM, BIOTIS, U1026, F-33000 Bordeaux, France; CHU Bordeaux, Service de chirurgie orale, F-33076 Bordeaux, France
  • 8. Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
  • 9. Laboratory of Tissue Engineering and Organ Regeneration, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  • 10. Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Laboratory of Biology, Faculty of Medicine, School of Health Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
  • 11. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
  • 12. Université de Reims Champagne Ardenne, EA 4691 Biomatériaux et Inflammation en site osseux, UFR d'odontologie, Reims, France
  • 13. Department of Obstetrics and Feto-maternal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Department for BioMedical Research (DBMR), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Description

The last 18 years have brought an increasing interest in the therapeutic use of perinatal derivatives (PnD). Preclinical studies used to assess the potential of PnD therapy include a broad range of study designs. The COST SPRINT Action (CA17116) aims to provide systematic and comprehensive reviews of preclinical studies for the understanding of the therapeutic potential and mechanisms of PnD in diseases and injuries that benefit from PnD therapy.

Here we describe the publication search and data mining, extraction, and synthesis strategies employed to collect and prepare the published data selected for meta-analyses and reviews of the efficacy of PnD therapies for different diseases and injuries. A coordinated effort was made to prepare the data suitable to make statements for the treatment efficacy of the different types of PnD, routes, time points and frequencies of administration, and the dosage based on clinically relevant effects resulting in clear increase, recovery or amelioration of the specific tissue or organ function. According to recently proposed guidelines, the harmonization of the nomenclature of PnD types will allow for the assessment of the most efficient treatments in various disease models. Experts within the COST SPRINT Action (CA17116), together with external collaborators, will do the meta-analyses and reviews using the data prepared with the strategies presented here in the relevant disease or research fields. Our final aim is to provide standards to assess the safety and clinical benefit of PnD and to minimize redundancy in the use of animal models following the 3R principles for animal experimentation.

Files

Files (342.2 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:94966102b5c4016b964704bde115ce73
342.2 kB Download

Additional details

Related works

Cites
Journal article: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.610544 (DOI)

References

  • Aziz J, Liao G, Adams Z, Rizk M, Shorr R, Allan DS (2019). Systematic review of controlled clinical studies using umbilical cord blood for regenerative therapy: Identifying barriers to assessing efficacy. Cytotherapy. 21:1112-1121. doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2019.08.004
  • Dimensions. Digital Science & Research Solutions Inc., London, United Kingdom (2020). https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication [Accessed December 11, 2020]
  • InCites Journal Citation Report. Clarivate, Boston, MA, United States of America (2020). https://jcr.clarivate.com/ [Accessed December 11, 2020]
  • Hooijmans CR, Rovers MM, de Vries RB, Leenaars M, Ritskes-Hoitinga M, Langendam MW (2014). SYRCLE's risk of bias tool for animal studies. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 14:43. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-43
  • Hook DW, Porter SJ, Herzog C. (2018). Dimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:23. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00023
  • Hutchins BI, Baker KL, Davis MT, Diwersy MA, Haque E, Harriman RM, Hoppe TA, Leicht SA, Meyer P, Santangelo GM (2019a). The NIH Open Citation Collection: A public access, broad coverage resource. PLoS Biol. 17:e3000385. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000385
  • Hutchins BI, Davis MT, Meseroll RA, Santangelo GM (2019b). Predicting translational progress in biomedical research. PLoS Biol. 17:e3000416. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000416
  • Hutchins BI, Hoppe TA, Meseroll RA, Anderson JM, Santangelo GM (2017). Additional support for RCR: A validated article-level measure of scientific influence. PLoS Biol. 15:e2003552. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003552
  • Hutchins BI, Yuan X, Anderson JM, and Santangelo GM. (2016). Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level. PLoS Biol. 14:e1002541. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002541
  • Kassem DH, Kamal MM (2020). Therapeutic efficacy of umbilical cord-derived stem cells for diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis study. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 11:484. doi: 10.1186/s13287-020-01996-x
  • Maltais-Bilodeau C, Henckel E, Cobey KD, Ahmadzai N, Skidmore B, Ferretti E, Thébaud B (2021). Efficacy of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells in Preclinical Models of Necrotizing Enterocolitis: a Systematic Review Protocol. Research Square [Preprint]. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-239448/v1
  • McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Ryan RE, Thomson HJ, Johnston RV, Thomas J (2021). "Chapter 3: Defining the criteria for including studies and how they will be grouped for the synthesis". In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022), Cochrane (2022). https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-03 [Accessed February 22, 2021]
  • Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D (2021a). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
  • Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, McKenzie JE. (2021b). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n160. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n160
  • Percie du Sert N, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, Clark A, Cuthill IC, Dirnagl U, Emerson M, Garner P, Holgate ST, Howells DW, Karp NA, Lazic SE, Lidster K, MacCallum CJ, Macleod M, Pearl EJ, Petersen OH, Rawle F, Reynolds P, Rooney K, Sena ES, Silberberg SD, Steckler T, Würbel H. (2020). The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. 18:e3000410. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410
  • PubMed. US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda MD, United States of America (2020b). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed [Accessed February 22, 2022].
  • Rohatgi, A. (2020). WebPlotDigitizer, version 4.4. (Pacifica, CA, United States of America). https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer [Accessed December 11, 2020]
  • Russell WMS, Burch RL (1959). The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. London, UK: Methuen & Co. Limited
  • Silini AR, Di Pietro R, Lang-Olip I, Alviano F, Banerjee A, Basile M, Borutinskaite V, Eissner G, Gellhaus A, Giebel B, Huang Y-C, Janev A, Erdani Kreft M, Kupper N, Abadía-Molina AC, Olivares EG, Pandolfi A, Papait A, Pozzobon M, Ruiz-Ruiz C, Soritau O, Susman S, Szukiewicz D, Weidinger A, Wolbank S, Huppertz B, Parolini O (2020). Perinatal Derivatives: Where Do We Stand? A Roadmap of the Human Placenta and Consensus for Tissue and Cell Nomenclature. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8:1438. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.610544
  • Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, Henry D, Altman DG, Ansari MT, Boutron I, Carpenter JR, Chan A-W, Churchill R, Deeks JJ, Hróbjartsson A, Kirkham J, Jüni P, Loke YK, Pigott TD, Ramsay CR, Regidor D, Rothstein HR, Sandhu L, Santaguida PL, Schünemann HJ, Shea B, Shrier I, Tugwell P, Turner L, Valentine JC, Waddington H, Waters E, Wells GA, Whiting PF, Julian Pt Higgins JP (2016). ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4919
  • Sterne JA, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, Cates CJ, Cheng H-Y, Corbett MS, Eldridge SM, Emberson JR, Hernán MA, Hopewell S, Hróbjartsson A, Junqueira DR, Jüni P, Kirkham JJ, Lasserson T, Li T, McAleenan A, Reeves BC, Shepperd S, Shrier I, Stewart LA, Tilling K, White IR, Whiting PF, Higgins JPT (2019). RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898