Autograft-derived spinal cord mass following olfactory mucosal cell transplantation in a spinal cord injury patient

Abstract

<jats:p>Over the last decade, human cell transplantation and neural stem cell trials have examined the feasibility and safety of these potential therapies for treatment of a variety of neurological disorders. However, significant safety concerns have surrounded these trials due to the possibility of ectopic, uncontrolled cellular growth and tumor formation.</jats:p> <jats:p>The authors present the case of an 18-year-old woman who sustained a complete spinal cord injury at T10–11. Three years after injury, she remained paraplegic and underwent olfactory mucosal cell implantation at the site of injury. She developed back pain 8 years later, and imaging revealed an intramedullary spinal cord mass at the site of cell implantation, which required resection. Intraoperative findings revealed an expanded spinal cord with a multicystic mass containing large amounts of thick mucus-like material. Histological examination and immunohistochemical staining revealed that the mass was composed mostly of cysts lined by respiratory epithelium, submucosal glands with goblet cells, and intervening nerve twigs.</jats:p> <jats:p>This is the first report of a human spinal cord mass complicating spinal cord cell transplantation and neural stem cell therapy. Given the prolonged time to presentation, safety monitoring of all patients with cell transplantation and neural stem cell implantation should be maintained for many years.</jats:p>

From mice to mind: Strategies and progress in translating neuroregeneration

“…Among several safety-related issue surrounding cell transplantation, the greatest concern surrounds tumor formation, which has been reported in humans receiving stem cell grafts outside of well-controlled clinical trials (Amariglio et al, 2009;Dlouhy et al, 2014). Tumors formation may occur for at least 3 reasons.…”

Ethics and Policy Issues for Stem Cell Research and Pulmonary Medicine

“…Th e treatments themselves may be based on a weak scientifi c rationale and lack poor quality assurance, leading to tragic medical complications (as illustrated by high-profi le cases involving brain and spinal tumors following stem cell treatments) as well as psychosocial consequences. [49][50][51] Th ere is also evidence of widespread hype in Internet advertising of stem cell treatments, 52 and media exposés have revealed unapproved therapies being proffered at clinics of questionable repute run by individuals whose methods were exposed as fraudulent. 48,53,54 Th us, there are huge health and fi nancial risks to patients and families, with scientifi c responsibility and medical professionalism at stake.…”

Current Stage and Future Perspective of Stem Cell Therapy in Ischemic Stroke

“…The major risk factor is associated with capacity of undifferentiated cells to form tumors [44]. Some isolated cases of tumor formation was observed in patients after stem cells transplantation [45,46]. If this potential can be generated by the type of stem cell or by delivery number of cells should be further established.…”