Table 2 Published clinical trials with various in vitro and in vivo stem cell purging techniques.
From: Role of stem cells in cancer therapy and cancer stem cells: a review
Authors | In Vivo/In Vitro | Type of cancer(cells) | Purging technique | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Barbui et al [120] | IV & IT | Multiple myeloma | Two step negative selection procedure with combination of monoclonal antibodies | Safe procedure of purging stem cells. Higher event free survival rate |
Stewart et al [121] | IT | Multiple myeloma | CEPRATE SC System – continuous flow immunoadsorption technique | No advantage of purging of stem cells |
Vescio et al. [122] | IT | Multiple myeloma | CEPRATE SC System – continuous flow immunoadsorption technique | Significantly reduce tumour cell contamination and provides safe and rapid haematological recovery |
Shpall et al [123] | IV | Breast cancer | WR-2721 (amifostine) to 4-hydroperoxycyclophosphamide (4-HC) | Reduced time to engraftment |
Huang et al [124] | IT | Breast cancer | Dielectrophoretic field-flow-fractionation (DEP-FFF) | Efficient separation was observed in 12 minutes with purity of > 99.2% |
Borbolla-Escoboza et al [125] | IT | B cell lymphoma | Rituximab | Rituximab can be used in stem cell purging |
Craiu et al [126]. | IT | Multiple myeloma | Pulsed electric fields | Promising technology for rapid stem cell purging |
Wierenga et al [127] | IT | Acute myeloid leukaemia | Hyperthermia | Promising method for stem cell purging |