Evaluation of human mononuclear umbilical cord blood cells systemic administration efficiency in the acute period of experimental severe spinal cord injury

Aim. To evaluate the efficiency of systemic (intravenous) application of cryopreserved human umbilical cord blood mononuclear cells (HUCBCs) in animal models of acute contusion spinal cord injury for the restoration of hind limb motor function and formation of posttraumatic cysts using clinically significant examination methods.

Materials and methods. Adult female Sprague–Dowley rats were used for the study. Severe acute contusion spinal cord injury model was performed using standard “weight‑drop” method. All samples of cryopreserved HUCBCs concentrate were prestored prior to infusion for 3 to 4 years at –196 °C. Hind limbs motor function was evaluated using open‑field technique and standard BBB testing system. Magnetic resonance scanning was performed using high‑field magnetic resonance CleanScan 7.0 T tomography (Bruker BioSpin, Germany).

Results. Intravenous infusions of HUCBCs were performed on Day 1 following acute severe spinal cord injury. Motor function assessment demonstrated significant (p <0.05) improvement of hind limbs motor function (up to 40–50 %) comparing to self‑healing outcomes. Moreover, by the Days 4 and 5 after severe spinal cord injury, the volume of posttraumatic cystic cavity decreases significantly (up to 40 %) (p <0.05).

Conclusion. The obtained results demonstrated that cryopreserved HUCBCs can be used as an effective source for cell therapy of acute contusion spinal cord injury.

1. Novoselova I.N Etiology and clinical epidemiology of spinal cord injury. Literature review. Rossiyskiy neyrokhirurgicheskiy zhurnal im. prof. A.L. Polenova = Russian Journal of Neurosurgery 2019;11(4):85–92.(In Russ.).

2. Chan B.C.F., Craven B.C., Furlan J.C. A scoping review on health economics in neurosurgery for acute spine trauma. Neurosurg Focus 2018;44(5):E15. DOI: 10.3171/2018.2.FOCUS17778

3. Grin A.A. Surgical treatment of patients with spinal cord injury with combined trauma. Abstract of dis. … doctor of medical sciences. Moscow, 2007. 320 p. (In Russ.).

4. Krylov V.V., Grin A.A., Lutsyk A.A. et al. An advisory protocol for treatment of acute complicated and uncomplicated spinal cord injury in adults (Association of neurosurgeons of the Russian Federation). Part 3. Zhurnal Voprosy neirokhirurgii im. N.N. Burdenko = Burdenko’s Journal of Neurosurgery 2015;79(2):97–110. (In Russ., In Engl.). DOI: 10.17116/neiro201579297-110

5. Ahuja C.S., Nori S., Tetreault L. et al. Traumatic spinal cord injury – repair and regeneration. Neurosurgery 2017;80(3S):9–22. DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyw080

6. Badhiwala J.H., Ahuja C.S., Fehling M.G. Time is spine: a review of translational advances in spinal cord injury. J Neurosurg Spine 2019;30(1):1–18. DOI: 10.3171/2018.9.SPINE18682

7. Aziz J., Liao G., Adams Z. et al. Systematic review of controlled clinical studies using umbilical cord blood for regenerative therapy: Identifying barriers to assessing efficacy. Cytotherapy 2019;21(11):1112–21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2019.08.004

8. Kwon B.K., Oxland T.R., Tetzlaff W. Animal models used in spinal cord regeneration research. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27(14):1504–10. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200207150-00005

9. Basso D.M. Behavioral testing after spinal cord injury: congruities, complexities, and controversies. J Neurotrauma 2004;21(4): 395–404. DOI: 10.1089/089771504323004548

10. Rosenzweig E.S., McDonald W. Rodent models for treatment of spinal cord injury: research trends and progress toward useful repair. Curr Opin Neurol 2004;17(2):121–31. DOI: 10.1097/00019052-200404000-00007

11. Metz G.A., Curt A., Meent H. et al. Validation of the weight-drop contusion model in rats: a comparative study of human spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma 2000;17(1):1–17. DOI: 10.1089/neu.2000.17.1

12. Basso D.M., Beattie M.S., Bresnahan J.C. Graded histological and locomotor outcomes after spinal cord contusion using the NYU weight-drop device versus transection. Exp Neurol 1996;139(2):244–56. DOI: 10.1006/exnr.1996.009

13. Ryabov S.I., Zvyagintseva M.A., Pavlovich E.R. et al. Efficiency of transplantation of human placental/umbilical blood cells to rats with severe spinal cord injury. Bull Exp Biol Med 2014.157(1):85–8. DOI: 10.1007/s10517-014-2498-9

14. Rubinstein P., Dobrila L., Rosenfield R.E. et al. Processing and cryopreservation of placental/umbilical cord blood for unrelated bone marrow reconstitution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995;92(22):10119–22. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.92.22.10119

15. Basso D.M., Beattie M.S., Bresnahan J.C. A Sensitive and reliable locomotor rating scale for open field testing in rats. J Neurotrauma 1995;1:1–21. DOI: 10.1089/neu.1995.12.1

16. Lebedev S.V., Timofeyev S.V., Zharkov A.V. et al. Exercise tests and BBB method for evaluation of motor disorders in rats after contusion spinal injury. Bull Exp Biol Med 2008;146(4):489–94. DOI: 10.1007/s10517-009-0328-2

17. Freund P., Seif M., Weiskopf N. et al. MRI in traumatic spinal cord injury: from clinical assessment to neuroimaging biomarkers. Lancet Neurol 2019;18(12):1123–35. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30138-3

18. Park D.H., Lee J.H., Borlongan C.V. et al. Transplantation of umbilical cord blood stem cells for treating spinal cord injury. Stem Cell Rev Rep 2011;7(1):181–94. DOI: 10.1007/s12015-010-9163-0

19. Rizk M., Aziz J., Shorr R., Allan D.S. Cell-based therapy using umbilical cord blood for novel indications in regenerative therapy and immune modulation: an updated systematic scoping review of the literature. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2017;23(10): 1607–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.05.032

20. Newman M.B., Davis C.D., Kuzmin-Nichols N., Sanberg P.R. Human umbilical cord blood (HUCB) cells for central nervous system repair. Neurotox Res 2003;5(5):355–68. DOI: 10.1007/BF03033155

21. Yang W.Z., Zhang Y., Wu F. et al. Safety evaluation of allogeneic umbilical cord blood mononuclear cell therapy for degenerative conditions. J Transl Med 2010;3;8:75. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5876-8-75