How to Overcome the Valley of Death from Basic Science to Clinical Trials

Author(s):  
Kelly Bridgham ◽  
Akash Chandawarkar ◽  
Halley Darrach ◽  
Justin M. Sacks
Cells ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1197
Author(s):  
Klaus Ley

This 11-chapter Special Issue of Cells spans the gamut from basic science in mechanistic animal models to translational science to outcomes of clinical trials, all focused on the role of inflammation in atherosclerosis [...]


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 444-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Bernhardt ◽  
Kathryn S Hayward ◽  
Gert Kwakkel ◽  
Nick S Ward ◽  
Steven L Wolf ◽  
...  

The first Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable established a game changing set of new standards for stroke recovery research. Common language and definitions were required to develop an agreed framework spanning the four working groups: translation of basic science, biomarkers of stroke recovery, measurement in clinical trials and intervention development and reporting. This paper outlines the working definitions established by our group and an agreed vision for accelerating progress in stroke recovery research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 1420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Wernly ◽  
Moritz Mirna ◽  
Richard Rezar ◽  
Christine Prodinger ◽  
Christian Jung ◽  
...  

Although reperfusion therapy has improved outcomes, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is still associated with both significant mortality and morbidity. Once irreversible myocardial cell death due to ischemia and reperfusion sets in, scarring leads to reduction in left ventricular function and subsequent heart failure. Regenerative cardiovascular medicine experienced a boost in the early 2000s when regenerative effects of bone marrow stem cells in a murine model of AMI were described. Translation from an animal model to stem cell application in a clinical setting was rapid and the first large trials in humans suffering from AMI were conducted. However, high initial hopes were early shattered by inconsistent results of randomized clinical trials in patients suffering from AMI treated with stem cells. Hence, we provide an overview of both basic science and clinical trials carried out in regenerative cardiovascular therapies. Possible pitfalls in specific cell processing techniques and trial design are discussed as these factors influence both basic science and clinical outcomes. We address possible solutions. Alternative mechanisms and explanations for effects seen in both basic science and some clinical trials are discussed here, with special emphasis on paracrine mechanisms via growth factors, exosomes, and microRNAs. Based on these findings, we propose an outlook in which stem cell therapy, or therapeutic effects associated with stem cell therapy, such as paracrine mechanisms, might play an important role in the future. Optimizing stem cell processing and a better understanding of paracrine signaling as well as its effect on cardioprotection and remodeling after AMI might improve not only AMI research, but also our patients’ outcomes.


2006 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilberto de Castro Junior ◽  
Fabio Puglisi ◽  
Evandro de Azambuja ◽  
Nagi S. El Saghir ◽  
Ahmad Awada

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Binith Cheeran ◽  
Leonardo Cohen ◽  
Bruce Dobkin ◽  
Gary Ford ◽  
...  

Background. Major advances during the past 50 years highlight the immense potential for restoration of function after neural injury, even in the damaged adult human brain. Yet, the translation of these advances into clinically useful treatments is painstakingly slow. Objective. Here, we consider why the traditional model of a “translational research pipeline” that transforms basic science into novel clinical practice has failed to improve rehabilitation practice for people after stroke. Results. We find that (1) most treatments trialed in vitro and in animal models have not yet resulted in obviously useful functional gains in patients; (2) most clinical trials of restorative treatments after stroke have been limited to small-scale studies; (3) patient recruitment for larger clinical trials is difficult; (4) the determinants of patient outcomes and what patients want remain complex and ill-defined, so that basic scientists have no clear view of the clinical importance of the problems that they are addressing; (5) research in academic neuroscience centers is poorly integrated with practice in front-line hospitals and the community, where the majority of patients are treated; and (6) partnership with both industry stakeholders and patient pressure groups is poorly developed, at least in the United Kingdom where research in the translational restorative neurosciences in stroke depends on public sector research funds and private charities. Conclusions. We argue that interaction between patients, front-line clinicians, and clinical and basic scientists is essential so that they can explore their different priorities, skills, and concerns. These interactions can be facilitated by funding research consortia that include basic and clinical scientists, clinicians and patient/carer representatives with funds targeted at those impairments that are major determinants of patient and carer outcomes. Consortia would be instrumental in developing a lexicon of common methods, standardized outcome measures, data sharing and long-term goals. Interactions of this sort would create a research-friendly, rather than only target-led, culture in front-line stroke rehabilitation services.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document