Over the past two decades, evidence has emerged for the existence of a distinct population of endogenous progenitor cells in adult articular cartilage, predominantly referred to as articular cartilage-derived progenitor cells (ACPCs). This progenitor population can be isolated from articular cartilage of a broad range of species, including human, equine, and bovine cartilage. In vitro, ACPCs possess mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC)-like characteristics, such as colony forming potential, extensive proliferation, and multilineage potential. Contrary to bone marrow-derived MSCs, ACPCs exhibit no signs of hypertrophic differentiation and therefore hold potential for cartilage repair. As no unique cell marker or marker set has been established to specifically identify ACPCs, isolation and characterization protocols vary greatly. This systematic review summarizes the state-of-the-art research on this promising cell type for use in cartilage repair therapies. It provides an overview of the available literature on endogenous progenitor cells in adult articular cartilage and specifically compares identification of these cell populations in healthy and osteoarthritic (OA) cartilage, isolation procedures, in vitro characterization, and advantages over other cell types used for cartilage repair. The methods for the systematic review were prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020184775).

Meniscus damage can be caused by trauma or degeneration and is therefore common among patients of all ages. Repair or regeneration of the menisci could be of great importance not only for pain relief or regaining function but also to prevent degenerative disease and osteoarthritis. Current treatment does not offer consistent long-term improvement. Although preclinical research focusing on augmentation of meniscal tear repair and regeneration after meniscectomy is encouraging, clinical translation remains difficult. To systematically evaluate the literature on in vivo meniscus regeneration and explore the optimal cell sources and conditions for clinical translation. We aimed at thorough evaluation of current evidence as well as clarifying the challenges for future preclinical and clinical studies. Systematic review. A search was conducted using the electronic databases of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Collaboration. Search terms included meniscus, regeneration, and cell-based. After screening 81 articles based on title and abstract, 51 articles on in vivo meniscus regeneration could be included; 2 additional articles were identified from the references. Repair and regeneration of the meniscus has been described by intra-articular injection of multipotent mesenchymal stromal (stem) cells from adipose tissue, bone marrow, synovium, or meniscus or the use of these cell types in combination with implantable or injectable scaffolds. The use of fibrochondrocytes, chondrocytes, and transfected myoblasts for meniscus repair and regeneration is limited to the combination with different scaffolds. The comparative in vitro and in vivo studies mentioned in this review indicate that the use of allogeneic cells is as successful as the use of autologous cells. In addition, the implantation or injection of cell-seeded scaffolds increased tissue regeneration and led to better structural organization compared with scaffold implantation or injection of a scaffold alone. None of the studies mentioned in this review compare the effectiveness of different (cell-seeded) scaffolds. There is heterogeneity in animal models, cell types, and scaffolds used, and limited comparative studies are available. The comparative in vivo research that is currently available is insufficient to draw strong conclusions as to which cell type is the most promising. However, there is a vast amount of in vivo research on the use of different types of multipotent mesenchymal stromal (stem) cells in different experimental settings, and good results are reported in terms of tissue formation. None of these studies compare the effectiveness of different cell-scaffold combinations, making it hard to conclude which scaffold has the greatest potential.

Objective: Allogeneic mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are used in the 1-stage treatment of articular cartilage defects. The aim of this study is to investigate whether transport of mitochondria exists between chondrocytes and MSCs and to investigate whether the transfer of mitochondria to chondrocytes contributes to the mechanism of action of MSCs. Design: Chondrocytes and MSCs were stained with MitoTracker, and CellTrace was used to distinguish between cell types. The uptake of fluorescent mitochondria was measured in cocultures using flow cytometry. Transport was visualized using fluorescence microscopy. Microvesicles were isolated and the presence of mitochondria was assessed. Mitochondria were isolated from MSCs and transferred to chondrocytes using MitoCeption. Pellets of chondrocytes, chondrocytes with transferred MSC mitochondria, and cocultures were cultured for 28 days. DNA content and proteoglycan content were measured. Mitochondrial DNA of cultured pellets and of repair cartilage tissue was quantified. Results: Mitochondrial transfer occurred bidirectionally within the first 4 hours until 16 hours of coculture. Transport took place via tunneling nanotubes, direct cell-cell contact, and extracellular vesicles. After 28 days of pellet culture, DNA content and proteoglycan deposition were higher in chondrocyte pellets to which MSC mitochondria were transferred than the control groups. No donor mitochondrial DNA was traceable in the biopsies, whereas an increase in MSC mitochondrial DNA was seen in the pellets. Conclusions: These results suggest that mitochondrial transport plays a role in the chondroinductive effect of MSCs on chondrocytes in vitro. However, in vivo no transferred mitochondria could be traced back after 1 year.

Objective: Articular cartilage-derived progenitor cells (ACPCs) are a potential new cell source for cartilage repair. This study aims to characterize endogenous ACPCs from healthy and osteoarthritic (OA) cartilage, evaluate their potential for cartilage regeneration, and compare this to cartilage formation by chondrocytes. Design: ACPCs were isolated from full-thickness healthy and OA human cartilage and separated from the total cell population by clonal growth after differential adhesion to fibronectin. ACPCs were characterized by growth kinetics, multilineage differentiation, and surface marker expression. Chondrogenic redifferentiation of ACPCs was compared with chondrocytes in pellet cultures. Pellets were assessed for cartilage-like matrix production by (immuno)histochemistry, quantitative analyses for glycosaminoglycans and DNA content, and expression of chondrogenic and hypertrophic genes. Results: Healthy and OA ACPCs were successfully differentiated toward the adipogenic and chondrogenic lineage, but failed to produce calcified matrix when exposed to osteogenic induction media. Both ACPC populations met the criteria for cell surface marker expression of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs). Healthy ACPCs cultured in pellets deposited extracellular matrix containing proteoglycans and type II collagen, devoid of type I collagen. Gene expression of hypertrophic marker type X collagen was lower in healthy ACPC pellets compared with OA pellets. Conclusions: This study provides further insight into the ACPC population in healthy and OA human articular cartilage. ACPCs show similarities to MSCs, yet do not produce calcified matrix under well-established osteogenic culture conditions. Due to extensive proliferative potential and chondrogenic capacity, ACPCs show potential for cartilage regeneration and possibly for clinical application, as a promising alternative to MSCs or chondrocytes.

Background: Articular cartilage defects in the knee have poor intrinsic healing capacity and may lead to functional disability and osteoarthritis (OA). “Instant MSC Product accompanying Autologous Chondron Transplantation” (IMPACT) combines rapidly isolated recycled autologous chondrons with allogeneic MSCs in a one-stage surgery. IMPACT was successfully executed in a first-in-man investigator-driven phase I/II clinical trial in 35 patients. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of IMPACT to nonsurgical treatment for the treatment of large (2–8 cm²) articular cartilage defects in the knee. Methods: Sixty patients will be randomized to receive nonsurgical care or IMPACT. After 9 months of nonsurgical care, patients in the control group are allowed to receive IMPACT surgery. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), pain (numeric rating scale, NRS), and EuroQol five dimensions five levels (EQ5D-5 L) will be used to compare outcomes at baseline and 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 months after inclusion. Cartilage formation will be assessed at baseline, and 6 and 18 months after inclusion using MRI. An independent rheumatologist will monitor the onset of a potential inflammatory response. (Severe) adverse events will be recorded. Lastly, the difference between IMPACT and nonsurgical care in terms of societal costs will be assessed by monitoring healthcare resource use and productivity losses during the study period. A health economic model will be developed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMPACT vs. nonsurgical treatment in terms of costs per quality adjusted life year over a 5-year time horizon. Discussion: This study is designed to evaluate the efficacy of IMPACT compared to nonsurgical care. Additionally, safety of IMPACT will be assessed in 30 to 60 patients. Lastly, this study will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of IMPACT compared to nonsurgical care. Trial registration: NL67161.000.18 [Registry ID: CCMO] 2018#003470#27 [EU-CTR; registered on 26 March 2019] NCT04236739 [ClinicalTrials.gov] [registered after start of inclusion; 22 January 2020]

Meniscus regeneration could be enhanced by targeting meniscus cells and mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) with the right growth factors. Combining these growth factors with the Collagen Meniscus Implant (CMI®) could accelerate cell ingrowth and tissue formation in the implant and thereby improve clinical outcomes. Using a transwell migration assay and a micro‐wound assay, the effect of insulin‐like growth factor‐1 (IGF‐1), platelet‐derived growth factor (PDGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF‐β1), fibroblast growth factor (FGF) and platelet lysate (PL) on migration and proliferation of meniscus cells and MSCs was assessed. The formation of extracellular matrix under influence of the abovementioned growth factors was assessed after 28 days of culture of both MSCs and meniscus cells. As a proof‐of‐concept, the CMI® was functionalized with a VEGF binding peptide and coated with platelet rich plasma (PRP) for clinical application. Our results demonstrate that PDGF, TGF‐β1 and PL stimulate migration, proliferation and/or extracellular matrix production of meniscus cells and MSCs. Additionally, the CMI® was successfully functionalized with a VEGF binding peptide and PRP which increased migration of meniscus cell and MSC into the implant. This study demonstrates proof‐of‐concept of functionalizing the CMI® with growth factor binding peptides. A CMI® functionalized with the right growth factors holds great potential for meniscus replacement after partial meniscectomy.