July 2019
Volume 60, Issue 9
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2019
Assessing the level of evidence for the benefit of commercially-available “cell therapy” treatments in the U.S. for ocular diseases
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Andrew Chen
    Flaum Eye Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, United States
  • Daniel Simhaee
    Flaum Eye Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, United States
  • Rajinder Singh Nirwan
    Flaum Eye Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, United States
  • Thomas A Albini
    Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Florida, United States
  • Jayanth Sridhar
    Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Florida, United States
  • Harry Flynn
    Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Florida, United States
  • Ajay E. Kuriyan
    Flaum Eye Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Andrew Chen, None; Daniel Simhaee, None; Rajinder Nirwan, None; Thomas Albini, None; Jayanth Sridhar, None; Harry Flynn, None; Ajay Kuriyan, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH P30EY001319-35; Research to Prevent Blindness
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2019, Vol.60, 6400. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Andrew Chen, Daniel Simhaee, Rajinder Singh Nirwan, Thomas A Albini, Jayanth Sridhar, Harry Flynn, Ajay E. Kuriyan; Assessing the level of evidence for the benefit of commercially-available “cell therapy” treatments in the U.S. for ocular diseases. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2019;60(9):6400. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : “Cell therapy” treatments, while non-FDA approved, are increasingly available to patients via online direct-to-consumer advertising for a variety of ophthalmic diseases. Few evidence-based studies have been performed to evaluate commercially available “cell therapy” efficacy or safety. We conducted a review of scientific literature review to assess the level of evidence (LOE) of treatment benefit for commercially-available “cell therapy” treatments in the U.S. for ocular diseases.

Methods : A review of scientific literature was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar to grade the LOE for treatment benefit using commercially-available ocular “cell therapy” treatments in the U.S. (Oxford Centre LOE scheme).

Results : Two case series (level 4 evidence) and 3 case reports (level 5 evidence) reported positive outcomes without adverse events. All studies with positive outcomes were registered under the same clinical trial and treated a variety of diseases. The listed outcome measures were visual acuity and fields. One case series (level 4 evidence) and 4 case reports (level 5 evidence) reported severe complications of commercially available “cell therapy” treatments. Stem cell sources included adipose-derived and bone-marrow derived stem cells.

Conclusions : Published series from “cell therapy” clinics emphasize benefits and reported no complications with commercially-available “cell therapies.” However, severe blinding complications after treatments at “cell therapy” clinics have been reported by the physicians who managed the complications. The medical and scientific community need to continue educating the public about the potential risks associated such with commercially available “cell therapy” treatments.

This abstract was presented at the 2019 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Vancouver, Canada, April 28 - May 2, 2019.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×