Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute (Vaxinfectio), University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium.
Health Department, Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Mol, Belgium.
J Extracell Vesicles. 2024 Jul;13(7):e12458. doi: 10.1002/jev2.12458.
Nowadays, it has become clear that extracellular vesicles (EVs) are not a cellular waste disposal vesicle but are an essential part of an intercellular communication system. Besides the use of EVs in biomarker studies and diagnostics, the potential of EV-therapeutics has been seen by many. They provide unique properties for disease therapy, including strong immune-modulatory actions, the possibility of engineering, low immunogenicity, and the capability of crossing biological barriers. Proof-of-concept of EV-therapeutics for various pathologies has been achieved in preclinical studies. However, clinical trials with EVs have only been emerging slowly. Here, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state-of-the-art concerning clinical studies using EVs in human therapy. By approaching the current knowledge in a systematic manner, we were able to include 21 reports for meta-analysis of safety and evaluation of efficacy outcomes. Overall, we have shown that EV-based therapy is safe with a low incidence of serious adverse events (SAE; 0.7% (95%-CI: 0.1-5.2%), and adverse events (AE; 4.4% (95%-CI: 0.7-22.2%). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in SAE when comparing autologous versus allogeneic administration, as well as engineered versus non-engineered EV products. A significantly higher number of AE was seen in autologous versus allogeneic administration. However, the clinical relevance remains questionable. Evaluation of the clinical outcomes of immunostimulatory, immunosuppressive or regenerative EV-therapies indicated improvement in the majority of treated patients. Despite these promising results, data need to be approached with caution due to a high heterogeneity in the EVs manufacturing methods, study design, and reporting of (S)AE. Overall, we conclude that EV-based therapy is safe and presents a promising opportunity in therapy. More efforts are needed in the standardization and harmonization of reporting of EV isolation and characterization data as well as in the reporting of (S)AE to allow inter-study comparison.
如今,越来越清楚的是,细胞外囊泡 (EVs) 不是细胞的废物处理囊泡,而是细胞间通讯系统的重要组成部分。除了在生物标志物研究和诊断中使用 EVs 外,许多人还看到了 EV 治疗的潜力。它们为疾病治疗提供了独特的特性,包括强大的免疫调节作用、工程化的可能性、低免疫原性和穿过生物屏障的能力。EV 治疗在各种病理中的概念验证已在临床前研究中得到证实。然而,EV 的临床试验进展缓慢。在这里,我们旨在提供一个关于人类治疗中使用 EV 的临床研究的最新全面概述。通过系统地接近当前的知识,我们能够纳入 21 项关于安全性的报告和疗效评估的结果进行荟萃分析。总的来说,我们已经表明,基于 EV 的治疗是安全的,严重不良事件 (SAE) 的发生率很低 (0.7%(95%CI:0.1-5.2%),不良事件 (AE) 的发生率为 4.4%(95%CI:0.7-22.2%)。亚组分析表明,自体与同种异体给药以及工程与非工程 EV 产品之间的 SAE 无显著差异。自体与同种异体给药相比,AE 的数量明显更多。然而,临床相关性仍值得怀疑。对免疫刺激、免疫抑制或再生 EV 治疗的临床结果进行评估表明,大多数接受治疗的患者的病情得到改善。尽管取得了这些有希望的结果,但由于 EV 制造方法、研究设计和 (S)AE 报告方面存在高度异质性,因此需要谨慎对待这些数据。总的来说,我们得出结论,基于 EV 的治疗是安全的,并为治疗提供了有前途的机会。需要在 EV 分离和表征数据的报告以及 (S)AE 的报告方面进行更多的标准化和协调工作,以允许进行研究间比较。