ABSTRACT
Introduction Despite being more than two decades of research, Mesenchymal Stromal Cell (MSC) treatments are still struggling to cross the translational gap. Two key issues that likely contribute to these failures are i) the lack of clear definition for MSC and ii) poor quality of reporting in MSC clinical studies. To address these issues, we propose a modified Delphi study to establish a consensus definition for MSC and clinical reporting guidelines for MSC.
Methods and analysis We will conduct a three-round international modified Delphi Survey. Findings from a recent scoping review examining how MSC are defined and reported in preclinical and clinical studies were used to draft the initial survey for round one of our Delphi. Participants will include a ‘core group’ of individuals as well as researchers whose work was captured in our scoping review. The core group will include stakeholders from different research fields including developmental biology, translational science, research methods, regulatory practices, scholarly journal editing, and industry. The first two survey rounds will be online, and the final round will take place in person. Each participant will be asked to rate their agreement on potential MSC definition characteristics and reporting items using a Likert scale. After each round, we will analyse data to determine which items have reached consensus for inclusion/exclusion, and then develop a revised questionnaire for any new items, or items that did not reach consensus.
Ethics and dissemination This study received ethical approval from the Ottawa Health Research Network Research Ethics Board. To support the dissemination of our findings, we will use an evidence-based ‘integrated knowledge translation’ approach to engage knowledge users from the inception of the research. This will allow us to develop a tailored end-of-project knowledge translation plan to support and ensure dissemination and implementation of the Delphi results.
Strengths and limitations of this study
We proposed to address the current limitations in MSC experimental and clinical research with a rigorous and methodological consensus building method (Delphi method) that will allow for structured communication on controversial issues.
To support dissemination and implementation of our results, we will engage stakeholders and end-users from the inception of the project – such as patient partners – and will develop a tailored end of project knowledge translation plan (integrated knowledge translation approach) in order to overcome historical issues related to community uptake.
To address the main limitations of a Delphi method (e.g., lack of participation, no in-person interaction or information exchange), we use a modified Delphi survey with a Core group of stakeholders and a face-to-face meeting.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work is supported by the Canadian Stem Cell Network, "Translation and Society Team Awards" 2020 grant. MML is supported by The Ottawa Hospital Anesthesia Alternate Funds Association and holds a University of Ottawa Junior Research Chair in Innovative Translational Research.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval was obtained from the Ottawa Health Research Network Research Ethics Board (REB Protocol ID# 20210187-01K).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This study protocol was registered using the Open Science Framework (OSF) (https://osf.io/3dsqx/). Data and study materials will be made publicly available at the time of publication using OSF.