Toward a New Generation of Bio-Scaffolds for Neural Tissue Engineering: Challenges and Perspectives

Neural tissue engineering presents a compelling technological breakthrough in restoring brain function, holding immense promise. However, the quest to develop implantable scaffolds for neural culture that fulfill all necessary criteria poses a remarkable challenge for material science. These materials must possess a host of desirable characteristics, including support for cellular survival, proliferation, and neuronal migration and the minimization of inflammatory responses. Moreover, they should facilitate electrochemical cell communication, display mechanical properties akin to the brain, emulate the intricate architecture of the extracellular matrix, and ideally allow the controlled release of substances. This comprehensive review delves into the primary requisites, limitations, and prospective avenues for scaffold design in brain tissue engineering. By offering a panoramic overview, our work aims to serve as an essential resource, guiding the creation of materials endowed with bio-mimetic properties, ultimately revolutionizing the treatment of neurological disorders by developing brain-implantable scaffolds

Encapsulation of Asparaginase as a Promising Strategy to Improve In Vivo Drug Performance

Asparaginase (ASNase) is a widely applied chemotherapeutic drug that is used to treat Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL); however, immune responses and silent inactivation of the drug often limit its bioavailability. Many strategies have been proposed to overcome these drawbacks, including the development of improved formulations (biobetters), but only two of them are currently on the market. Nano- and micro-encapsulation are some of the most promising and novel approaches to enhance in vivo performance of ASNase, preventing the direct contact of the enzyme with the environment, protecting it from protease degradation, increasing the enzymes catalytic half-life, and in some cases, reducing immunogenicity. This review summarizes the strategies, particularly for ASNase nano- and micro-encapsulation, and their main findings, constraints, and current gaps in the state-of-the-art knowledge. The pros and cons of the use of different nanocarriers are discussed with the idea to ultimately provide safer and more effective treatments for patients with ALL

Encapsulation of Asparaginase as a Promising Strategy to Improve In Vivo Drug Performance

Asparaginase (ASNase) is a widely applied chemotherapeutic drug that is used to treat Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL); however, immune responses and silent inactivation of the drug often limit its bioavailability. Many strategies have been proposed to overcome these drawbacks, including the development of improved formulations (biobetters), but only two of them are currently on the market. Nano- and micro-encapsulation are some of the most promising and novel approaches to enhance in vivo performance of ASNase, preventing the direct contact of the enzyme with the environment, protecting it from protease degradation, increasing the enzymes catalytic half-life, and in some cases, reducing immunogenicity. This review summarizes the strategies, particularly for ASNase nano- and micro-encapsulation, and their main findings, constraints, and current gaps in the state-of-the-art knowledge. The pros and cons of the use of different nanocarriers are discussed with the idea to ultimately provide safer and more effective treatments for patients with ALL

A Novel Formulation of Asparaginase Encapsulated into Virus-like Particles of Brome Mosaic Virus: In Vitro and In Vivo Evidence

The interest in plant-derived virus-like particles (pVLPs) for the design of a new generation of nanocarriers is based on their lack of infection for humans, their immunostimulatory properties to fight cancer cells, and their capability to contain and release cargo molecules. Asparaginase (ASNase) is an FDA-approved drug to treat acute lymphoblastic leukemia (LLA); however, it exhibits high immunogenicity which often leads to discontinuation of treatment. In previous work, we encapsulated ASNase into bacteriophage P22-based VLPs through genetic-directed design to form the ASNase-P22 nanobioreactors. In this work, a commercial ASNase was encapsulated into brome mosaic virus-like particles (BMV-VLPs) to form stable ASNase-BMV nanobioreactors. According to our results, we observed that ASNase-BMV nanobioreactors had similar cytotoxicity against MOLT-4 and Reh cells as the commercial drug. In vivo assays showed a higher specific anti-ASNase IgG response in BALB/c mice immunized with ASNase encapsulated into BMV-VLPs compared with those immunized with free ASNase. Nevertheless, we also detected a high and specific IgG response against BMV capsids on both ASNase-filled capsids (ASNase-BMV) and empty BMV capsids. Despite the fact that our in vivo studies showed that the BMV-VLPs stimulate the immune response either empty or with cargo proteins, the specific cytotoxicity against leukemic cells allows us to propose ASNase-BMV as a potential novel formulation for LLA treatment where in vitro and in vivo evidence of functionality is provided

Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney disease

BACKGROUND Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHODS We randomly assigned 777 patients with advanced kidney disease and moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing to be treated with an initial invasive strategy consisting of coronary angiography and revascularization (if appropriate) added to medical therapy or an initial conservative strategy consisting of medical therapy alone and angiography reserved for those in whom medical therapy had failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. A key secondary outcome was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, a primary outcome event had occurred in 123 patients in the invasive-strategy group and in 129 patients in the conservative-strategy group (estimated 3-year event rate, 36.4% vs. 36.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.29; P=0.95). Results for the key secondary outcome were similar (38.5% vs. 39.7%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.29). The invasive strategy was associated with a higher incidence of stroke than the conservative strategy (hazard ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.52 to 9.32; P=0.004) and with a higher incidence of death or initiation of dialysis (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.11; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease, advanced chronic kidney disease, and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction

Health status after invasive or conservative care in coronary and advanced kidney disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, the primary analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of death or myocardial infarction with initial angiography and revascularization plus guideline-based medical therapy (invasive strategy) as compared with guideline-based medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) in participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease (an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 or receipt of dialysis). A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status. METHODS We assessed health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) before randomization and at 1.5, 3, and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. The primary outcome of this analysis was the SAQ Summary score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less frequent angina and better function and quality of life). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate the treatment effect with the invasive strategy. RESULTS Health status was assessed in 705 of 777 participants. Nearly half the participants (49%) had had no angina during the month before randomization. At 3 months, the estimated mean difference between the invasive-strategy group and the conservative-strategy group in the SAQ Summary score was 2.1 points (95% credible interval, 120.4 to 4.6), a result that favored the invasive strategy. The mean difference in score at 3 months was largest among participants with daily or weekly angina at baseline (10.1 points; 95% credible interval, 0.0 to 19.9), smaller among those with monthly angina at baseline (2.2 points; 95% credible interval, 122.0 to 6.2), and nearly absent among those without angina at baseline (0.6 points; 95% credible interval, 121.9 to 3.3). By 6 months, the between-group difference in the overall trial population was attenuated (0.5 points; 95% credible interval, 122.2 to 3.4). CONCLUSIONS Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used

Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)