Table 2

Published clinical trials with various in vitro and in vivo stem cell purging techniques.

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


Keys: IT – in vitro, IV – in vivo.

Sagar et al. Cancer Cell International 2007 7:9   doi:10.1186/1475-2867-7-9

Open Data