Long-term safety and efficacy of treating symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tears with fresh, uncultured, unmodified, autologous, adipose-derived regenerative cells isolated at the point of care: 40 months follow-up of a prospective, randomized, controlled, first-in-human clinical trial ========================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================= * Mark Lundeen * Jason L. Hurd * Matthew Hayes * Meredith Hayes * Tiffany R. Facile * John P. Furia * Nicola Maffulli * Christopher Alt * Eckhard U. Alt * Christoph Schmitz * David A. Pearce ## Abstract **Objective** Symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (sPTRCT) are problematic. Management of sPTRCT with fresh, uncultured, unmodified, autologous, adipose-derived regenerative cells (UA-ADRCs) isolated from lipoaspirate at the point of care is safe and leads to improved shoulder function without adverse effects. This study tested the hypothesis that managemen t of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs is safe and more effective than injection of corticosteroid even in the long run. **Methods** Subjects who had completed a former randomized controlled trial were enrolled in the present study. At baseline these subjects had not responded to physical therapy treatments for at least six weeks, and were randomly assigned to receive respectively a single injection of an average 11.4 × 106 UA-ADRCs (n = 11) or a single injection of 80 mg of methylprednisolone (n = 5). Safety was assessed by rigorously documenting and evaluating treatment emergent adverse events. Efficacy was assessed using the ASES Total score, pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and RAND Short Form-36 Health Survey at 33.2 ± 1.0 (mean ± standard deviation) and 40.6 ± 1.9 months post-treatment. Proton density, fat-saturated, T2-weighted (PD FS T2), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the index shoulder was performed at both study visits. **Results** There were no greater risks connected with injection of UA-ADRCs than those connected with injection of corticosteroid. The subjects in the UA-ADRCs group showed statistically significantly higher mean ASES Total scores than the subjects in the corticosteroid group. Treatment outcome could not be assessed using measurements of tear volume on MRI scans. On the other hand, PD FS T2 MRI scans at six months post-treatment allowed to "watch the UA-ADRCs at work". There was no relationship between treatment outcome and baseline data, including those data characterizing UA-ADRCs that can be collected with a clinical test. **Conclusions** The present study further supports treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs. **Trial registration** [Clinicaltrials.gov](http://Clinicaltrials.gov) [NCT04077190](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04077190&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) (September 4, 2019). Keywords * UA-ADRCs * Safety * Shoulder disease * Stem cells * Stromal vascular fraction. ## INTRODUCTION Symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tear (sPTRCT) is a common cause of shoulder pain, loss of function and occupational disability [1–3]. Cadaveric and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies reported the incidence of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears between 13% and 25%, with an increasing incidence with age [4–6]. The majority of sPTRCT cases are associated with aging, repetitive overhead use of the arm, sudden and forceful trauma, or a combination of these factors [1–3]. Current non-surgical and surgical treatment options to address sPTRCT do not offer the potential to naturally replace damaged tendon tissue and often do not improve clinical results. Subacromial injection of corticosteroids, among the most widely used nonoperative treatment options for sPTRCT [7], can provide short-term pain relief but may not modify the course of the disease [7]. Even worse, subacromial injection of corticosteroid bears the risk that a partial-thickness rotator cuff tear develops into a full-thickness rotator cuff tear [8]. A recent meta-analysis and a recent double-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) concluded that injections of platelet rich plasma might also not be beneficial in non- operative treatment of rotator cuff disease [9, 10]. Surgical treatment of sPTRCT is generally successful among patients who, for a period of 3 to 6 months, unsuccessfully underwent conservative treatment modalities [2]. However, surgical intervention presents potential complications and a more lengthy recovery, and some authors have argued that results from these procedures may not exceed those obtained with conservative management [11]. A recent, first-in-human RCT [12] (hereafter: the former study) indicated that treatment of sPTRCT with fresh, uncultured, unmodified, autologous, adipose-derived regenerative cells (UA-ADRCs) isolated from lipoaspirate at the point of care is safe and leads to improved shoulder function without adverse effects. This study also showed that the risks associated with treating sPTRCT with UA-ADRCs were as low as those associated with injection of corticosteroid over 12 months post-treatment, with no serious adverse events observed for either treatment [12]. Unlike most other cell preparations currently under investigation for use in regenerative medicine (including cultured adipose derived stem cells (ADSCs), induced pluripotent stem cells, etc.) UA-ADRCs are not expanded in culture, and are therefore not exposed to potential, culture- related mechanic and oxidative stress that could affect their safety as a medicinal product [13]. Furthermore, UA-ADRCs do not share the risk of potentially developing tumors (reported for induced pluripotent stem cells) and immunological defensive reactions (reported for allogeneic adult stem cells) [14, 15]. Only 0.001–0.1% of the total population of bone marrow nucleated cells represent mesenchymal stromal cells, whereas these cells can represent up to 12% of the total population of UA-ADRCs [16, 17]. Additionally, harvesting adipose tissue is typically much less invasive than harvesting bone marrow [18]. A major limitation of the former study [12] was that subjects were not followed up beyond 12 months post- treatment. The present study tested the hypothesis that treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs is safe and more effective than injection of corticosteroid even in the long run, with a minimum follow-up of 36 months. ## METHODS ### Study design The present study was a long term follow-up study of a first- in-human, two center, prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial [12]. Both the present study and the former study [12] were conducted at Sanford Orthopedics and Sports Medicine – Fargo (Fargo, ND, USA) (PI: M.L.) and Sanford Orthopedics and Sports Medicine – Sioux Falls (Sioux Falls, SD, USA) (principal investigator (PI): J.H.). Fig. 1 shows the flow of subjects in the present study and the former study [12] according to the CONSORT statement [19]. ![FIGURE 1.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F1.medium.gif) [FIGURE 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F1) FIGURE 1. Flow of subjects in the present study and the former study [12] according to CONSORT [19]. Abbreviations: W3 / W6 / W9 / W12 / W24 / W32 / W40 / W52, study visits scheduled in the former study [12] at 3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 24 / 32 / 40 / 52 weeks post-treatment; FSV, first study visit of the present study at 33.2 ± 1.0 (mean ± standard deviation) months post-treatment; SSV, second study visit of the present study at 40.6 ± 1.9 months post-treatment. ### Ethics The former study [12] received Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on September 23, 2016 (no. 16956), was registered at [Clinicaltrials.gov](http://Clinicaltrials.gov) on September 28, 2016 (ID [NCT02918136](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT02918136&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom)), and received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval of Sanford Health (Sioux Falls, SD, USA) on November 4, 2016 (Sanford IRB #3 registration number 00007985) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The first subject was enrolled in the former study [12] on January 04, 2017, and the last subject on April 21, 2017. The study was closed on November 7, 2019. After having received additional IRB approval from Sanford Health on November 07, 2019 (Sanford IRB #3 registration number STUDY00001869) to re-examine MRI scans, the former study [12] was re-opened on September 14, 2020. The present study received IDE from the FDA on May 13, 2019, received IRB approval from WIRB Copernicus Group, Inc. (Olympia, WA, USA) on July 23, 2019 for study site Sanford USD Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD, USA and on September 29, 29 for study site Sanford Orthopedic Sports Medicine Clinic, Fargo, ND, USA (IRB Tracking Number: 20191931), and was registered at [Clinicaltrials.gov](http://Clinicaltrials.gov) on September 4, 2019 ([NCT04077190](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04077190&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom)). The first subject was enrolled in the present study on November 21, 2019, and the last subject on March 20, 2020. The present study was closed on May 09, 2022. ### Participants, randomization and interventions In brief, all the subjects enrolled in the former study [12] suffered from a sPTRCT of the supraspinatus tendon at baseline, had not responded to physical therapy treatments for at least six weeks, and were randomly assigned to receive respectively a single injection of an average 11.4 × 106 UA-ADRCs (in 5 mL liquid; mean cell viability: 88%) (n=11; modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population) (hereafter: UA-ADRCs group) or a single injection of 80 mg of methylprednisolone (40 mg/mL; 2 mL) plus 3 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine (n=5 in the former study [12]; n=4 in the present study; mITT population) (hereafter: corticosteroid group). The UA-ADRCs were isolated from lipoaspirate using the Transpose RT system (InGeneron) [15, 20]. One subject in the corticosteroid group experienced progression of sPTRCT into a symptomatic, full-thickness rotator cuff tear during the former study [12] and was therefore not enrolled in the present study. For this reason, the baseline data of the subjects in the corticosteroid group enrolled in the present study (summarized in Table 1) slightly differ from the baseline data of those in the corticosteroid group provided in the former study [12]. View this table: [Table 1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T1) Table 1 Characteristics of the subjects enrolled in the present study at baseline (modified intention-to-treat population). ### Outcome measurements and assessments According to the study protocol the primary endpoints of the present study were long-term safety as indicated through the rate of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and long-term efficacy of pain and function through American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [21] (ASES Total score) and RAND Short Form-36 [22] (SF-36) health questionnaires between the UA-ADRCs group and the corticosteroid group. The secondary endpoint of the present study was long-term efficacy evaluated through MRI pre- and post-injection for the therapeutic intent to treat sPTRCT between the UA-ADRCs group and the corticosteroid group. Adverse events in the present study and the former study [12] were defined as any untoward or unfavorable medical occurrence in a subject, including any abnormal sign, symptom or disease temporally associated with the subject’s participation in these studies, whether or not considered related to the subject’s participation in these studies. In the former study [12], safety was assessed immediately after treatment and three weeks (W3), W6, W9, W12, W24, W32, W40 and W52 post-treatment; ASES Total score and SF-36 Total score were assessed at baseline (BL) and at W3, W6, W9, W12, W24, W32, W40 and W52 post-treatment; MRI was performed at BL and at W24 and W52 post- treatment. In the present study, the primary and secondary endpoints were assessed at 33.2 ± 1.0 (mean ± standard deviation) months post-treatment (range, 30.7 – 34.7) (first study visit; FSV) and at 40.6 ± 1.9 months post-treatment (range, 36.5 –44.7) (second study visit; SSV). ### Analysis of MRI scans Next to the determination of the partial-thickness tear size (calculated as ellipsoid volume), the proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted (PD FS T2) coronal MRI scans of all subjects who were enrolled in the present study were transferred in digital and fully anonymized form (compliant with the HIPAA regulation) [23] to C.S. who was only aware of the Subject IDs. Then, C.S. mounted these MRI scans as shown in Figs S1-S15 (**Figs S1-S21 and Tables S1-S21 are in the Appendix**), evaluated them and indicated hyperintense structures at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that were present at W24 post-treatment but not at baseline (yellow arrows in Figs S1-S7 and S9-S11). Afterwards, the files with the MRI scan montages and the indicated hyperintense structures were transferred in fully anonymized form (even without the Subject IDs) to M.H. and M.H., who performed an independent, blinded re-analysis of the hyperintense structures at the position of the supraspinatus tendon indicated by C.S. ### Statistical analysis Statistical analysis of the safety data included group-specific comparisons of the following variables: (i) total number of TEAEs, (ii) number of TEAEs experienced per subject, (iii) number of TEAEs classified as {mild / moderate / severe}, (iv) relationship of TEAEs to treatment classified as {not related / unlikely / possible / probable / definite} and (v) number of TEAEs classified as {mild and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / mild and possibly related to the investigated treatment / moderate and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / moderate and possibly related to the investigated treatment}. According to the protocol of the present study these comparisons were performed for the following time periods: from BL to W24 post-treatment (considering only data of the former study [12]), from BL to FSV in the present study, and from BL to SSV in the present study (each considering data of the present study and the former study [12]). Comparisons were performed using respectively Chi-square test or Chi-square test for trend. Mean and standard error of the mean (SEM) of the ASES Total score, VAS pain score, SF-36 Total score and partial-thickness tear size were calculated. These calculation considered the data from all subjects enrolled in the former study [12] (i.e., n=11 in the UA-ADRCs group and n=5 in the corticosteroid group); missing data were imputed using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) approach [24]. Differences between the groups were tested using two-way repeated measures ANOVA, with subject-specific values obtained at BL, W24 and W52 post-treatment (data of the former study [12]) as well as at FSV and SSV (data of the present study) as matched data; values obtained during the former study [12] at W3, W6, W9, W12, W32 and W40 post- treatment were not considered in the statistical analysis (as in the former study [12]). *Post hoc* Bonferroni tests were used for pairwise comparisons. In all analyses, a p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Calculations were performed using GraphPad Prism (Version 9.4.1 for Windows; GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). ## RESULTS ### Long-term safety of treating sPTRCT with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid The subjects in the UA-ADRCs group reported a total number of 58 TEAEs (35 TEAEs during the former study [12] and 23 TEAEs during the present study) (details in Table S1). The subjects in the corticosteroid group reported a total number of 25 TEAEs (12 TEAEs during the former study [12] and 13 TEAEs during the present study) (details in Table S2). No TEAE that occurred during the present study and the former study [12] was classified as probably or definitely related to the investigated treatment. Furthermore, all severe TEAEs that occurred during the present study and the former study [12] were classified as not related to the investigated treatment. All subjects reported experiencing at least one TEAE. The number of subjects who experienced 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 10/ 12 TEAEs in the present study and the former study [12] was 1 / 0 / 2 / 3 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 1 / 0 in the UA-ADRCs group (5.3 ± 2.7; median, 4) and 0 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 in the corticosteroid group (5.0 ± 1.8 (mean ± SEM); median, 4). These data were not significantly different between the groups (Chi-square test for trend; p = 0.778) (details in Table S3). The number of TEAEs classified as {mild / moderate / severe} in the present study and the former study [12] was 38/ 16 / 4 in the UA-ADRCs group and 17 / 8 / 0 in the corticosteroid group. These data were not significantly different between the groups (Chi-square test for trend; p = 0.497) (details in Tables S4-S6). The relationship of TEAEs to treatment classified as {not related / unlikely / possible / probable / definite} in the present study and the former study [12] was 48 / 6 / 4 / 0 / 0 in the UA- ADRCs group and 20 / 3 / 2 / 0 / 0 in the corticosteroid group. These data were not significantly different between the groups (Chi-square test; p = 0.956) (details in Tables S7-S9). The number of TEAEs classified as {mild and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / mild and possibly related to the investigated treatment / moderate and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / moderate and possibly related to the investigated treatment} in the presen study and the former study [12] was 4 / 3 / 2 /1 in the UA- ADRCs group and 3 / 0 / 0 / 2 in the corticosteroid group. These data were not significantly different between the groups (Chi-square test for trend; p = 0.757) (details in Table S10). The four severe TEAEs that occurred in the UA-ADRCs group during the present study and the former study [12] were non ST elevation myocardial infarction, ST elevation myocardial infarction, ganglion cyst of the non-index shoulder, and pain in the index shoulder. None of these severe TEAEs were related to treatment (details in Tables S11-S13). ### Long-term efficacy of treating sPTRCT with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid Four of the 11 subjects (36.4%) in the UA-ADRCs group and three of the five subjects (60.0%) in the corticosteroid group developed additional pathologies of the index shoulder (next to sPTRCT) and/or received additional treatments on the index shoulder (next to injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid) during the present or the former study [12]. In none of the 11 subjects (0%) in the UA-ADRCs group and two of the five subjects (40%) in the corticosteroid group these additional pathologies were considered treatment failure (details in Tables S14 and S15). After these events, individual data related to the efficacy of the investigated treatment were either missing or, if they had been collected after the event during the present study or the former study [12], unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome. These missing data were imputed using the LOCF approach [24]. The individual ASES Total scores, VAS pain scores and SF-36 Total scores as a function of time post-treatment are shown in Figs S16-S18; imputation of missing data is indicated in these figures. Eight of the 11 subjects (72.7%) in the UA-ADRCs group but only one of the five subjects (20%) in the corticosteroid group reached an individual ASES Total score of 90 at any time of the present study and the former study [12]. An ASES Total score of 100 (representing no pain and maximum function) was reached by five of the 11 subjects (45.5%) in the UA-ADRCs group but none of the five subjects (0%) in the corticosteroid group at any time of the present study and the former study [12]. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA showed significant improvement of the mean ASES Total score and the mean VAS pain score (but not the mean SF-36 Total score) over time, as well as a significant difference between the groups with respect to the mean ASES Total score (Fig. 2 and Tables S16-S18). Bonferroni’s multiple comparisons test demonstrated that the subjects in the UA-ADRCs group had a significantly higher mean ASES Total score than the subjects in the corticosteroid group at 52 weeks post treatment (Table S16). ![FIGURE 2.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F2.medium.gif) [FIGURE 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F2) FIGURE 2. Tukey boxplots of (A) ASES Total score, (B) VAS pain score (collected together with the ASES score) and (C) SF-36 Total score of subjects treated with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs (gray bars) or corticosteroid (open bars) (imputation of missing data performed using the Last Observation Carried Forward approach). The corresponding 95% confidence intervals are shown in (D-F). Abbreviations: W24 / W52, study visits scheduled in the former study [12] at 24 and 52 weeks post-treatment; FSV, first study visit of the present study; SSV, second study visit of the present study; A, injection of UA-ADRCs; C, injection of corticosteroid. ### Partial thickness rotator cuff tear size as a function of time after treatment with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid The individual tear size as a function of time post-treatment is shown in Fig. S19; imputation of missing data is indicated i this figure. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant change in the mean tear size over time, as well as no significant difference between the groups (Fig. 3 and Table S19). ![FIGURE 3.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F3.medium.gif) [FIGURE 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F3) FIGURE 3. (A) Tukey boxplots of the tear volume measured on MRIs of subjects treated with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs (gray bars) or corticosteroid (open bars) (imputation of missing data performed using the Last Observation Carried Forward approach). The corresponding 95% confidence intervals are shown in (B). Abbreviations: W24 / W52, study visits scheduled in the former study [12] at 24 and 52 weeks post-treatment; FSV, first study visit of the present study; SSV, second study visit of the present study; A, injection of UA-ADRCs; C, injection of corticosteroid. ### Detection of hyperintense structures on PD FS T2 coronal MRI scans of the index shoulder at the position of the supraspinatus tendon after injection of UA-ADRCs, but not after injection of corticosteroid, at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline The PD FS T2 coronal MRI scans of the index shoulder of 10 of 11 subjects (90.9%) in the UA-ADRCs group and none of the subjects (0%) in the corticosteroid group showed hyperintense structures at the position of the supraspinatus tendon at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. A representative example is shown in Fig. 4; all PD FS T2 coronal MRI scans of Subjects A1-A11 (injection of UA- ADRCs) and Subjects C1-C4 (injection of corticosteroid) are provided in Figs S1-S15. No MRI scans of Subject C5 are shown because this subject was not enrolled in the present study, and the study protocol did not allow to re-assess the MRI scans of this subject generated during the former study [12]. ![FIGURE 4.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F4.medium.gif) [FIGURE 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F4) FIGURE 4. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal MRI scans of the index shoulder of Subject A4 (injection of UA-ADRCs), showing hyperintense structures at the position of the supraspinatus tendon at 24 weeks post-treatment (yellow arrows) but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, study visits scheduled in the former study [12] at 24 and 52 weeks post-treatment. ### No relationship between treatment outcome and baseline data Supplementary Figures 22 and 23 show individual ASES Total scores as a function of time post-treatment together wit individual data at baseline (ASES Total score, tear volume, age and body mass index, as well as (in case of subjects who were treated with injection of UA-ADRCs) cell yield and cell viability. No relationship between treatment outcome and baseline data was found, including those data characterizing UA-ADRCs that can be collected with a clinical test. ## DISCUSSION To assess the relevance of the results of the present study in accordance with the current state of knowledge, Table 2 summarizes the essential details of all previously published clinical studies on the management of partial-thickness and full-thickness rotator cuff tears with stem cells [12,25–33]. In most of these studies, stem cells were applied to improve the outcome of surgical treatment. Furthermore, next to the former study [12], treatment of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears was only investigated in three other studies [30–32], and only three other studies were randomized controlled trials [28,32,33]. The mean number of subjects treated with stem cells in the studies listed in Table 2 (excluding the former study [12]) was 19.1 ± 5.0 (mean ± SEM) (median, 13.5; range, 7-45). View this table: [TABLE 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T2) TABLE 2. Essential details of all published clinical studies on the management of rotator cuff tears with stem cells. With respect to the long-term safety we evidenced that treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs did not result in serious adverse events by 40.6 ± 1.9 months post- treatment. There were no greater risks connected with injection of UA-ADRCs than those connected with injection of corticosteroid in treatment of sPTRCT. In summary, the results of the present study suggest that the use of UA-ADRCs in subjects with sPTRCT is safe. The only other study listed in Table 2 (excluding the former study [12]) in which UA- ADRCs were applied [29] did not address the safety of the procedure. Regarding the long-term efficacy we evidenced that the subjects in the UA-ADRCs group had significantly higher mean ASES total scores than the subjects in the corticosteroid group, with p < 0.05 in *post hoc* Bonferroni test at 52 weeks post-treatment (Table S16). This finding was in line with the finding of the former study [12] that treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs leads to improved shoulder function. We hypothesize that the negative outcome (i.e., p > 0.05) of the *post hoc* Bonferroni test at the times of the first and second study visits of the present study was consequent to the small sample size. Using an adequate sample size of n=246 subjects an ongoing pivotal clinical trial is currently testing the hypothesis that treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA- ADRCs is more effective than treatment of sPTRCT with injection of corticosteroid [34]. We would like to point to the following, additional results of the present study and the former study [12]: (i) The results obtained in the former study [12] after treatment of sPTRCT with injection of corticosteroid were in line with other studies which investigated the efficacy of treating sPTRCT with injection of corticosteroid [35–39] (details in Tables S20 and S21). (ii) Six subjects in the UA-ADRCs group but no subject in the corticosteroid group reached an ASES Total score of 100 over time after treatment (Fig. S16). Among these six subjects in the UA-ADRCs group, five reported an ASES Total score of 100 both at the end of the former study [12] and throughout the present study (Fig. S16). (iii) One subject in the corticosteroid group (Subject C5 in Figs S16-S18) developed a full thickness tear during the former study [12], and another subject in the corticosteroid group (Subject C4 in Figs S16-S18) developed pain in the index shoulder at 1.4 months post-treatment and was treated with another injection of corticosteroid at 7.4 months post-treatment during the former study [12]. In contrast, except for one subject in the UA-ADRCs group (Subject A9 in Figs S16-S18) who reported an accident with involvement of the index shoulder at 1.0 months post-treatment, no subject in the UA-ADRCs group required additional treatment of the index shoulder during the former study [12]. (iv) No subject in the UA-ADRCs group required additional treatment during the present study because of failure of the initial index treatment. In summary, these results reinforce the general need to individually examine the clinical course after an initial treatment, and to identify all possible interfering influences that could have negatively impacted the success of the therapy under study. Furthermore, these results support our hypothesis that treatment of UA- ADRCs with injection of sPTRCT is effective, and is more effective than treatment of sPTRCT with injection of corticosteroid. The only other published study to date that investigated treatment of sPTRCT with injection of stem cells without surgery found no benefit of injection of cultured adipose- derived stem cells (ADSCs) for 24 months post-treatment, and the results obtained after injection of ADSCs did not differ from the results obtained after injection of saline [32]. This negative result could have been caused by at least three circumstances: (i) the use of allogeneic cells, with the possible inability of new cells derived from the stem cells to integrate into the host tissue because of immunological incompatibility [14]; (ii) the need for culturing the cells, with the possible reduction of the life span of the cells by shortening the telomeres following repetitive cell divisions, and possible negative effects on the safety of the cells as a medicinal product [13]; and (iii) the selection of a single cell type, with the consequence of limited functionality of the cells [14, 40]. All this is prevented by the use of fresh UA-ADRCs in the present study and the former study [12], and may explain the discrepancy between the negative result in [32] and the positive results in the present study and the former study [12]. It is beyond the scope of the present study to provide a comprehensive explanation why selection of stem cells (i.e., the use of cultured ADSCs or cultured MSCs in general) is inferior to the use of fresh UA-ADRCs in treatment of musculoskeletal pathologies. Here we report just three of the most important reasons: (i) unlike cultured ADSCs, fresh UA- ADRCs express those growth factors that are needed to stimulate cultured ADSCs towards tenogenic differentiation in culture [41]; (ii) these growth factors are expressed by M2 macrophages [42–45], and M2 macrophages are contained in the UA-ADRCs used in the present study and the former study [12, 20], but are missing in any cultured stem cells; and (iii) M2 macrophages are mainly involved in anti- inflammatory responses [46, 47], and the presence of M2 macrophages in UA-ADRCs may explain the very early treatment success observed after treating sPTRCT with UA- ADRCs in the former study [12], which cannot be explained by the formation of new tendon tissue (Fig. S16). In summary, there are a number of possible explanations of the discrepancy between the negative result in [32] and the positive results in the present study and the former study [12] with respect to treatment of sPTRCT with injection of stem cells. Regarding the analysis of MRIs pre- and post-injection, we found no significant improvement of the mean tear volume over time, nor any significant difference between the results obtained after injection of UA-ADRCs and those obtained after injection of corticosteroid (Table S18). Of note, these findings are not in line with the results related to the long term efficacy (improvement in ASES Total score) outlined above. The main reason for this discrepancy may be the mechanisms of action of UA-ADRCs in tendon repair. Initially one could assume that UA-ADRCs would mainly fill the gap in the tendon tissue caused by a partial-thickness tear. However, the location of the hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans at the position of the supraspinatus tendon present at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline in 10 of the 11 subjects in the UA-ADRCs group (Figs S1-S11) and none of the subjects in the corticosteroid group (Figs S12-S15) indicate that this may not be the case. Rather, these hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans may indicate formation of new tendon tissue following injection of UA-ADRCs in a different location than the original tear, possibly primarily following individual biomechanical requirements. This may explain why subjects who are suffering from sPTRCT experience fast (the former study [12]) and lasting (present study) recovery from pain and impaired function without disappearance of the rotator cuff tears on MRI scans even at 40 months post- treatment. The presence of hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans at the position of a tendon with partial-thickness tear a few months after injection of UA-ADRCs has only been reported in a recent single case report [48]. Without additional investigations, it is unclear whether these hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans indeed represent formation of new tendon tissue. These investigations must be performed on biopsies of tendons with partial-thickness tear that were treated with injection of UA-ADRCs. On the other hand, there are two indications supporting the hypothesis that these hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans indeed represent formation of new tendon tissue: (i) the analysis of the biopsy reported the recent case report [48] indicated newly formed tendon tissue which did not resemble scar tissue (the biopsy was taken at the position of the hyperintense structure found in the corresponding MRI scans ten weeks post- treatment); and (ii) this biopsy showed a dense network of newly formed microvessels next to the position of newly formed tendon tissue [48]. Blood flow in these newly formed microvessels may indeed explain the occurrence of hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans after treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs. Furthermore, the full or partial disappearance of these hyperintense structures in PD FS T2 MRI scans at 52 weeks post-treatment (Figs S1-S10) may indicate that tendon regeneration was complete, or almost complete, at this time. In summary, the results of the present study indicate that treatment success after treating sPTRCT with UA-ADRCs cannot be assessed using measurements of tear volume on MRI scans. On the other hand, PD FS T2 MRI scans taken a few months after treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA- ADRCs may allow to "watch the UA-ADRCs at work". The latter finding may inform researchers about optimal times for taking biopsies in future research into the mechanisms of action of UA-ADRCs in tendon repair. Based on the outcome of the analysis shown in Fig. S20 we hypothesize that individual treatment success after treating sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs cannot be predicted based on the following, individual values at baseline: ASES Total score, tear volume, age and BMI, as well as on the cell yield and cell viability of the final cell suspension. This finding is important because it may render individual bedside testing of the final cell suspension in clinical use of UA-ADRCs irrelevant. It is currently unknown whether individual treatment success after treating sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs can be predicted using the colony forming unit (CFU) assay [15] and/or determination of cell surface markers using fluorescence-activated cell scanning [20]. In any case, these analyses take between several days (determination of surface markers) and more than two weeks (CFU assay). Thus, they are not suitable for clinical testing of the final cell suspension in clinical use of UA-ADRCs. ### Limitations The limitations of the present study are the same as the limitations of the former study [12]: only a small sample of subjects suffering from sPTRCT was investigated, only a limited number of clinical examination methods was applied, no power analysis was carried out, and neither the subjects nor the physicians who performed treatment and the assessors who performed baseline and follow-up examinations were blinded (only the physicians who analyzed the MRI scans were blinded). We believe that the ongoing clinical trial [21] will demonstrate with sufficient statistical power that treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs is more effective than treatment of sPTRCT with injection of corticosteroid. ## Conclusions The present investigation further supports treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs. Once this therapy is approved in the US, clinicians should consider injection of UA-ADRCs instead of injection of corticosteroids. In the long run treatment of sPTRCT with injection of UA-ADRCs may delay or even prevent surgical treatment of sPTRCT. ## Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors. ## Funding This study did not receive external funding. ## Availability of data and materials The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, taking into account any confidentiality. ## Authors’ contributions Mark Lundeen Methodology, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing Jason l. Hurd Methodology, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing, Matthew Hayes Methodology, Validation, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing, Meredith Hayes Methodology, Validation, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing, Tiffany R. Facile Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Data curation, Writing – Review & Editing, Project administration John P. Furia Writing – Review & Editing Nicola Maffulli Writing – Review & Editing Christopher Alt Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – Review & Editing, Eckhard U. Alt Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition Christoph Schmitz Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Resources, Data curation, Writing – Original Draft, Visualization, David A. Pearce Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Data curation, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition ## Consent for publication We have obtained consent for publication ## Competing interests C.A. is Director of Medical and Scientific Affairs of InGeneron, Inc. (Houston, TX, USA). E.U.A. is Executive Chair of InGeneron. C.S. is Advisory Medical Director of InGeneron. However, InGeneron had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, interpretation of the data, and no role in the decision to publish and write this manuscript. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported. ## Appendix Note: throughout this document the term "former study" refers to the following study: Hurd JL, Facile TR, Weiss J, et al. Safety and efficacy of treating symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tears with fresh, uncultured, unmodified, autologous, adipose-derived regenerative cells (UA-ADRCs) isolated at the point of care: a prospective, randomized, controlled first-in- human pilot study. *J Orthop Surg Res* 2020;**15**:122. ### Part 1 – Original MRI scans ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F5/graphic-7.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F5/graphic-7) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F5/graphic-8.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F5/graphic-8) FIGURE S1. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A1 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels FW24, GW24, HW24, IW24 and JW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M34 / M41, 34 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F6/graphic-9.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F6/graphic-9) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F6/graphic-10.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F6/graphic-10) FIGURE S2. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A2 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels GW24, HW24 and IW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 33 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F7/graphic-11.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F7/graphic-11) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F7/graphic-12.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F7/graphic-12) FIGURE S3. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A3 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels CW24, DW24, EW24, FW24, GW24 and HW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M32 / M39, 32 / 39 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F8/graphic-13.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F8/graphic-13) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F8/graphic-14.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F8/graphic-14) FIGURE S4. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A4 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels FW24, GW24, HW24 and IW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M34, 34 months post-treatment (no MRI was performed during the second visit of Subject A7). ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F9/graphic-15.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F9/graphic-15) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F9/graphic-16.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F9/graphic-16) FIGURE S5. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A5 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels BW24, CW24, DW24, EW24, FW24, GW24 HW24, IW24 and JW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post- treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 33 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F10/graphic-17.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F10/graphic-17) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F10/graphic-18.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F10/graphic-18) FIGURE S6. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A6 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels DW24, EW24 and FW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 33 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F11/graphic-19.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F11/graphic-19) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F11/graphic-20.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F11/graphic-20) FIGURE S7. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A7 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels HW24 and IW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 33 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F12/graphic-21.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F12/graphic-21) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F12/graphic-22.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F12/graphic-22) FIGURE S8. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject AB treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 31 / 39 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F13/graphic-23.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F13/graphic-23) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F13/graphic-24.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F13/graphic-24) FIGURE S9. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A9 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels BW24, CW24 and DW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33, 33 months post-treatment (no MRI was performed during the second visit of Subject A9). ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F14/graphic-25.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F14/graphic-25) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F14/graphic-26.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F14/graphic-26) FIGURE S10. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A10 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels CW24 and DW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M35 / M41, 35 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F15/graphic-27.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F15/graphic-27) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F15/graphic-28.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F15/graphic-28) FIGURE S11. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject A11 treated with injection of ADRCs, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. The yellow arrows in Panels CW24, DW24, HW24, IW24, JW24, KW24 and LW24 indicate a hyperintense structure at the position of the supraspinatus tendon that was found at 24 weeks post-treatment but not at baseline. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33, 33 months post-treatment (note that no MRI was performed during the second visit of Subject A3). ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F16/graphic-29.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F16/graphic-29) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F16/graphic-30.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F16/graphic-30) FIGURE S12. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject C1 treated with injection of corticosteroid, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 33 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F17/graphic-31.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F17/graphic-31) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F17/graphic-32.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F17/graphic-32) FIGURE S13. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject C2 treated with injection of corticosteroid, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M34 / M42, 34 / 42 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F18/graphic-33.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F18/graphic-33) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F18/graphic-34.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F18/graphic-34) FIGURE S14. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject C3 treated with injection of corticosteroid, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M33 / M41, 33 / 41 months post-treatment. ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F19/graphic-35.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F19/graphic-35) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F19/graphic-36.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F19/graphic-36) FIGURE S15. Proton density weighted, fat saturated, T2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the index shoulder of Subject C4 treated with injection of corticosteroid, generated during the former study and the present study. Panels A-L show the same (or nearly the same) image planes at different times, with Panels A showing the most ventral image plane and Panels L the most dorsal image plane. Abbreviations: BL, baseline; W24 / W52, 24 / 52 weeks post-treatment; M35 / M40, 35 / 40 months post-treatment. ### Part 2 – Treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred during the present study and the former study #### 2.1. Details of all treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred during the present study and the former study Tables S1 and S2 provide details of all treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported in the present study and the former study, stratified by the relation to the investigated treatment, severity and month post-treatment during which the TEAEs occurred. View this table: [TABLE S1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T3) TABLE S1 Treatment-emergent adverse events reported by those subjects who were treated with injection of UA-ADRCs. Adverse events related to the index shoulder are given boldface View this table: [TABLE S2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T4) TABLE S2 Treatment-emergent adverse events reported by those subjects who were treated with injection of corticosteroid. Adverse events related to the index shoulder are given boldface. #### 2.2. Statistical analysis of all treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred during the present study and the former study The total number of TEAEs was 83, of which 58 (69.9%) occurred in the UA-ADRCs group and 25 (30.1%) in the corticosteroid group (Tables S1 and S2). Accordingly, the average number of TEAEs per subject was 5.3 ± 2.7 (mean ± standard error of the mean) in the UA-ADRCs group and 5.0 ± 1.8 in the corticosteroid group. The distribution of these 83 TEAEs with regard to severity and relation to the investigated treatment was as follows: there were… • four severe TEAEs (4.8%), none of which were related to the investigated treatment (all in the UA-ADRCs group), • three moderate TEAEs probably related to the investigated treatment (3.6%) (one in the UA- ADRCs group and two in the corticosteroid group), • three mild TEAEs probably related to the investigated treatment (3.6%) (all in the UA-ADRCs group), • two moderate TEAEs unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment (2.4%) (all in the UA- ADRCs group), • seven mild TEAEs unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment (8.4%) (four in the UA- ADRCs group and three in the corticosteroid group), • 19 moderate TEAEs not related to the investigated treatment (22.9%), and • 45 mild TEAEs not related to the investigated treatment (54.2%). Table S3 shows group-specific numbers of subjects who experienced a certain number of TEAEs (between 0 and 12) in the present study and the former study. View this table: [TABLE S3](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T5) TABLE S3 Group-specific numbers of subjects who experienced a certain number of treatment-emergent adverse events (between 0 and 12) in the present study and the former study. For all investigated time periods there was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to the numbers of subjects who experienced a certain number of TEAEs (between 0 and 12) in the present study and the former study (Chi-square test for trend): • from baseline to W24 in the former study: p = 0.809, • from baseline to the first study visit of the present study: p = 0.488, and • from baseline to the second study visit of the present study: p = 0.778. Table S4 shows group-specific numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {mild / moderate / severe} in the present study and the former study. Table S5 summarizes absolute numbers of all TEAEs reported in the present study and the former study, stratified by the relation to the investigated treatment, severity and time period during which the TEAEs occurred. Table S6 summarizes the corresponding mean numbers of TEAEs per subject in each group. View this table: [TABLE S4](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T6) TABLE S4 Group-specific numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {mild / moderate / severe} in the present study and the former study. For all investigated time periods there was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to the numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {mild / moderate / severe} in the present study and the former study (Chi-square test for trend): • from baseline to W24 in the former study: p = 0.951, • from baseline to the first study visit of the present study: p = 0.468, and • from baseline to the second study visit of the present study: p = 0.497. View this table: [TABLE S5](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T7) TABLE S5 Absolute numbers of TEAEs reported in the present study and the former study, stratified by the relation to the investigated treatment, severity and time period during which the TEAEs occurred. View this table: [TABLE S6](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T8) TABLE S6 Group-specific mean numbers of treatment-emergent adverse events per subject reported in the present study and the former study, stratified by the relation to the investigated treatment, severity and time period during which the TEAEs occurred. Table S7 shows group-specific numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {not related / unlikely to be related / possibly related / probably related / definitely related} to the investigated treatment in the present study and the former study. Tables S8 and S9 summarize the individual courses of all TEAEs classified as {unlikely to be / possibly} related to the investigated treatment that occurred during the present study and the former study, experienced by those subjects who were treated with injection of UA-ADRCs (Table 8) and those subjects who were treated with injection of corticosteroid (Table S9). View this table: [TABLE S7](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T9) TABLE S7 Group-specific numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {not related / unlikely to be related / possibly related / probably related / definitely related} to the investigated treatment in the present study and the former study. For all investigated time periods there was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to the numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {not related / unlikely to be related / possibly related / probably related / definitely related} to the investigated treatment in the present study and the former study (Chi-square test): • from baseline to W24 in the former study: p = 0.672, • from baseline to the first study visit of the present study: p = 0.802, and • from baseline to the second study visit of the present study: p = 0.956. View this table: [TABLE S8](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T10) TABLE S8 Individual courses of the treatment-related adverse events classified as {unlikely to be / possibly related} to the investigated treatment that occurred during the present study and the former study,experienced by those subjects who were treated with injection of UA-ADRCs. View this table: [TABLE S9](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T11) TABLE S9 Individual courses of the treatment-related adverse events classified as {unlikely to be / possibly} related to the investigated treatment that occurred during the present study and the former study, experienced by those subjects who were treated with injection of corticosteroid. Table S10 shows group-specific numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {mild and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / mild and possibly related to the investigated treatment / moderate and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / moderate and possibly related to the investigated treatment} in the present study and the former study. View this table: [TABLE S10](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T12) TABLE S10 Group-specific numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {mild and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / mild and possibly related to the investigated treatment / moderate and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / moderate and possibly related to the investigated treatment} in the present study and the former study. For all investigated time periods there was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to the numbers of TEAEs that were classified as {mild and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / mild and possibly related to the investigated treatment / moderate and unlikely to be related to the investigated treatment / moderate and possibly related to the investigated treatment} in the present study and the former study (Chi-square test for trend): • from baseline to W24 in the former study: p = 0.941, • from baseline to the first study visit of the present study: p = 0.757, and • from baseline to the second study visit of the present study: p = 0.757. #### 2.3. Severe treatment emergent adverse events Tables S11-S13 summarize the individual courses of the four severe TEAEs that occurred during the present study and the former study, all of which were classified as not related to the investigated treatment. View this table: [TABLE S11](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T13) TABLE S11 Severe TEAE experienced by Subject A7 who was treated with UA-ADRCs. Data regarding the SAE of Subject A7 (this SAE occurred during the present study) was sent to the Institutional Review Board of the study site, the Data and Safety Monitoring Board of the present study and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and all noted that this SAE was not related to study treatment. The SAE was treated per standard of care. View this table: [TABLE S12](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T14) TABLE S12 Severe TEAE experienced by Subject A9 who was treated with UA-ADRCs. View this table: [TABLE S13](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T15) TABLE S13 Severe TEAEs experienced by Subject A4 who was treated with UA-ADRCs. #### Part 3 – Scheduled study visits and availability of ASES Total score, VAS pain score and SF-36 Total score data Table S14 lists the scheduled visits of the present study and the former study, during which the primary endpoint long term efficacy of pain and function through ASES Shoulder Score and SF-36 health questionnaires between the two groups was investigated, and indicates whether (+) or not (-) the corresponding subject developed additional pathologies of the index shoulder (next to symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tear) and/or received additional treatments on the index shoulder (next to injection of UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid) during either of these studies. The corresponding reasons are summarized in Table S15. View this table: [TABLE S14](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T16) TABLE S14 Scheduled visits of the present study and the former study, during which the primary endpoint long term efficacy of pain and function through ASES Shoulder Score and SF-36 health questionnaires between the two groups was investigated, and indication whether (+) or not (-) the corresponding subject developed additional pathologies of the index shoulder (next to symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tear) and/or received additional treatments on the index shoulder (next to injection of UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid) during either of these studies. The remarks are outlined in Table S15. View this table: [TABLE S15](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T17) TABLE S15 Reasons why individual subjects enrolled in the present study and the former study developed additional pathologies of the index shoulder (next to symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tear)and/or received additional treatments on the index shoulder (next to injection of UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid) during either of these studies. The remarks refer to Table S14. #### Part 4 – Efficacy data as a function of time post-treatment ![FIGURE S16](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F20.medium.gif) [FIGURE S16](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F20) FIGURE S16 (on the next page). Individual ASES Total score data as a function of time post-treatment of subjects treated with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs (Subjects A1-A11) or corticosteroid (Subjects C1-C5). The data are arranged in descending order of individual treatment success (i.e., the data of the subjects with the hightest ASES Total score are shown in the top row of the left column (Subject A2 treated with injection of UA-ADRCs) and the right column (Subject C3 treated with injection of corticosteroid). In the graphs… • green dots and green lines (Subjects A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A10, C1 and C3) indicate that all data of the present study and the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, • black dots and black lines (Subjects A1, A3, A11 and C2) indicate that all data of the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, but in the time period between the former study and the present study there was an incidence that rendered the data of the present study unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), • red dots and red lines (Subjects A9, C4 and C5) indicate that there was an incidence during the former study that rendered a part of the data of the former study (and, thus, all data of the present study in case they were collected) unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), and • open dots and dashed lines (Subjects A1, A3, A9, A11, C2, C4 and C5) indicate imputation of missing data using the Last Observation Carried Forward approach. Abbreviations: A, accident affecting the index shoulder; C, injection of corticosteroid into the index shoulder; P, pain in the index shoulder; S, surgery of the index shoulder. ![FIGURE S17](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F21.medium.gif) [FIGURE S17](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F21) FIGURE S17 (on the next page). Individual VAS pain score (collected together with the ASES score) as a function of time post-treatment of subjects treated with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs (Subjects A1-A11) or corticosteroid (Subjects C1-C5). The data are arranged in descending order of individual treatment success (i.e., the data of the subjects with the hightest ASES Total scores are shown in the top row of the left column (Subject A2 treated with injection of UA-ADRCs) and the right column (Subject C3 treated with injection of corticosteroid) (c.f. Figure 16). In the graphs… • green dots and green lines (Subjects A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A10, C1 and C3) indicate that all data of the present study and the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, • black dots and black lines (Subjects A1, A3, A11 and C2) indicate that all data of the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, but in the time period between the former study and the present study there was an incidence that rendered the data of the present study unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), • red dots and red lines (Subjects A9, C4 and C5) indicate that there was an incidence during the former study that rendered a part of the data of the former study (and, thus, all data of the present study in case they were collected) unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), and • open dots and dashed lines (Subjects A1, A3, A9, A11, C2, C4 and C5) indicate imputation of missing data using the Last Observation Carried Forward approach. Abbreviations: A, accident affecting the index shoulder; C, injection of corticosteroid into the index shoulder; P, pain in the index shoulder; S, surgery of the index shoulder. ![FIGURE S18](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F22.medium.gif) [FIGURE S18](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F22) FIGURE S18 (on the next page). Individual SF-36 Total score as a function of time post-treatment of subjects treated with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs (Subjects A1-A11) or corticosteroid (Subjects C1-C5). The data are arranged in descending order of individual treatment success (i.e., the data of the subjects with the hightest ASES Total scores are shown in the top row of the left column (Subject A2 treated with injection of UA-ADRCs) and the right column (Subject C3 treated with injection of corticosteroid) (c.f. Figure 16). In the graphs… • green dots and green lines (Subjects A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A10, C1 and C3) indicate that all data of the present study and the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, • black dots and black lines (Subjects A1, A3, A11 and C2) indicate that all data of the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, but in the time period between the former study and the present study there was an incidence that rendered the data of the present study unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), • red dots and red lines (Subjects A9, C4 and C5) indicate that there was an incidence during the former study that rendered a part of the data of the former study (and, thus, all data of the present study in case they were collected) unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), and • open dots and dashed lines (Subjects A1, A3, A9, A11, C2, C4 and C5) indicate imputation of missing data using the Last Observation Carried Forward approach. Abbreviations: A, accident affecting the index shoulder; C, injection of corticosteroid into the index shoulder; P, pain in the index shoulder; S, surgery of the index shoulder. View this table: [TABLE S16](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T18) TABLE S16 Mean, standard error of the mean and median of the ASES Total score collected during the present study and the former study after treating subjects suffering from sPTRCT with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid, and results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA of these data. pTime < 0.001; pTreatment = 0.006; pTime × Treatment = 0.097; pSubject < 0.001. View this table: [TABLE S17](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T19) TABLE S17 Mean, standard error of the mean and median of the VAS pain score (collected together with the ASES Total score) collected during the present study and the former study22 after treating subjects suffering from sPTRCT with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid, and results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA of these data. pTime = 0.001; pTreatment = 0.077; pTime × Treatment = 0.380; pSubject < 0.001. View this table: [TABLE S18](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T20) TABLE S18 Mean, standard error of the mean and median of the SF-36 Total score collected during the present study and the former study22 after treating subjects suffering from sPTRCT with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid, and results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA of these data. pTime = 0.093; pTreatment = 0.180; pTime × Treatment = 0.859; pSubject < 0.001. #### Part 5 – Analysis of MRI scans ![FIGURE S19](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F23.medium.gif) [FIGURE S19](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F23) FIGURE S19 (on the next page). Individual tear size (calculated as ellipsoid volume) as a function of time post-treatment of subjects treated with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs (Subjects A1-A11) or corticosteroid (Subjects C1-C5). The data are arranged in descending order of individual treatment success (i.e., the data of the subjects with the hightest ASES Total scores are shown in the top row of the left column (Subject A2 treated with injection of corticosteroid) and the right column (Subject C3 treated with injection of UA- ADRCs) (c.f. Figure S16). In the graphs… View this table: [TABLE S19](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T21) TABLE S19 Mean, standard error of the mean and median of the tear size (calculated as ellipsoid volume) collected during the present study and the former study22 after treating subjects suffering from sPTRCT with injection of respectively UA-ADRCs or corticosteroid, and results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA of these data. pTime = 0.290; pTreatment = 0.300; pTime × Treatment = 0.349; pSubject < 0.001. • green dots and green lines (Subjects A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A10, C1 and C3) indicate that all data of the present study and the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, • black dots and black lines (Subjects A1, A3, A11 and C2) indicate that all data of the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, but in the time period between the former study and the present study there was an incidence that rendered the data of the present study unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), • red dots and red lines (Subjects A9, C4 and C5) indicate that there was an incidence during the former study that rendered a part of the data of the former study (and, thus, all data of the present study in case they were collected) unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), and • open dots and dashed lines (Subjects A1, A3, A9, A11, C2, C4 and C5) indicate imputation of missing data using the Last Observation Carried Forward approach. Abbreviations: A, accident affecting the index shoulder; C, injection of corticosteroid into the index shoulder; P, pain in the index shoulder; S, surgery of the index shoulder. #### Part 6 – Relationship between treatment outcome and baseline data ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F24/graphic-64.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F24/graphic-64) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F24/graphic-65.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F24/graphic-65) ![](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F24/graphic-66.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F24/graphic-66) FIGURE S20 (on the next pages). Individual ASES Total score as a function of time post-treatment, and individual data at baseline (ASES Total score, tear volume, age, body mass index, cell yield and cell viability) of the subjects who were treated with injection of UA-ADRCs (Subjects A1-A11). The data are arranged in descending order of individual treatment success (i.e., the data of the subject with the best treatment outcome (Subject A2) are shown in the top row). In the graphs showing individual ASES Total scores as a function of time post-treatment… • green dots and green lines (Subjects A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8 and A10) indicate that all data of the present study and the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, • black dots and black lines (Subjects A1, A3 and A11) indicate that all data of the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, but in the time period between the former study and the present study there was an incidence that rendered the data of the present study unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), and • red dots and red lines (Subject A9) indicate that there was an incidence during the former study that rendered a part of the data of the former study (and, thus, all data of the present study in case they were collected) unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panel and outlined in detail in Table S15). In the graphs showing individual data at baseline (ASES Total score, tear volume, age, body mass index, cell yield and cell viability)… • the individual data of the subject whose ASES Total score as a function of time post-treatment is shown in the same row are given on the left ("Subject"), and • the data of all subjects in the corticosteroid group are given on the right ("All"). The horizontal lines represent mean values. In addition, for each variable the subject treated with ADRCs with… • presumably the best prognosis (at baseline highest ASES Total score, smallest tear volume, youngest age and lowest body mass index, as well as highest cell yield and highest cell viability) is indicated with a green dot and green frame surrounding the corresponding data, and • presumably the worst prognonis (at baseline lowest ASES Total score, largest tear volume, oldest age and highest body mass index, as well as lowest cell yield and lowest cell viability) is indicated with a red dot and red frame surrounding the corresponding data. Abbreviations: A, accident affecting the index shoulder; C, injection of corticosteroid into the index shoulder; P, pain in the index shoulder; S, surgery of the index shoulder. ![FIGURE S21](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F25.medium.gif) [FIGURE S21](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/F25) FIGURE S21 (on the next page). Individual ASES Total score as a function of time post-treatment, and individual data at baseline (ASES Total score, tear volume, age and body mass index) of the subjects who were treated with corticosteroid. The data are arranged in descending order of individual treatment success (i.e., the data of the subject with the best treatment outcome (C3) are shown in the top row). In the graphs showing individual ASES Total scores as a function of time post-treatment… • green dots and green lines (Subjects A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8 and A10) indicate that all data of the present study and the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, • black dots and black lines (Subjects A1, A3 and A11) indicate that all data of the former study were available and could be used for assessing treatment outcome, but in the time period between the former study and the present study there was an incidence that rendered the data of the present study unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panels and outlined in detail in Table S15), and • red dots and red lines (Subject A9) indicate that there was an incidence during the former study that rendered a part of the data of the former study (and, thus, all data of the present study in case they were collected) unsuitable for assessing treatment outcome (reasons are indicated in the corresponding panel and outlined in detail in Table S15). In the graphs showing individual data at baseline (ASES Total score, tear volume, age and body mass index)… • the individual data of the subject whose ASES Total score as a function of time post-treatment is shown in the same row are given on the left ("Subject"), and • the data of all subjects in the corticosteroid group are given on the right ("All"). The horizontal lines represent mean values. In addition, for each variable the subject treated with corticosteroid with… • presumably the best prognosis (at baseline highest ASES Total score, smallest tear volume, youngest age and lowest body mass index) is indicated with a green dot and green frame surrounding the corresponding data, and • presumably the worst prognonis (at baseline lowest ASES Total score, largest tear volume, oldest age and highest body mass index) is indicated with a red dot and red frame surrounding the corresponding data (note that this was not possible in case of the BMI at baseline because for Subject C5 no height was collected in the former study and, thus, no BMI could be calculated). Abbreviations: P, pain in the index shoulder; C, injection of corticosteroid into the index shoulder; S, surgery of the index shoulder. #### Part 7 – Comparison of the results obtained in the present study and the former study after treatment of sPTRCT with injection of corticosteroid with corresponding results of other studies in the literature View this table: [TABLE S20](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T22) TABLE S20 Details of published studies that investigated the efficacy of treating partial-thickness rotator cuff tears with injections of corticosteroids. References are in the main text. View this table: [TABLE S21](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/14/2022.12.14.22283447/T23) TABLE S21 Results of the studies summarized in Table S20. References are in the main text. * Received December 14, 2022. * Revision received December 14, 2022. * Accepted December 14, 2022. * © 2022, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ## References 1. 1.Matava MJ, Purcell DB, Rudzki JR. Partial-thickness rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:1405–17. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0363546505280213&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16127127&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000231517100017&link_type=ISI) 2. 2.Matthewson G, Beach CJ, Nelson AA, Woodmass JM, Ono Y, Boorman RS, et al. Partial thickness rotator cuff tears: current concepts. Adv Orthop. 2015;2015:458786. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1155/2015/458786&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26171251&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 3. 3.Via AG, De Cupis M, Spoliti M, Oliva F. Clinical and biological aspects of rotator cuff tears. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2013;3:70–9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.11138/mltj/2013.3.2.070&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23888289&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 4. 4.Cotton RE, Rideout DF. Tears of the humeral rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg. 1964;46:314–28. 5. 5.Fukuda H. Partial-thickness rotator cuff tears: a modern view on Codman’s classic. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2000;9:163–8. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1058-2746(00)90049-1&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10810700&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000086871900017&link_type=ISI) 6. 6.Sher JS, Uribe JW, Posada A, Murphy BJ, Zlatkin MB. Abnormal findings on magnetic resonance images of asymptomatic shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:10–5. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiamJqc2FtIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjc6Ijc3LzEvMTAiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMi8xMi8xNC8yMDIyLjEyLjE0LjIyMjgzNDQ3LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 7. 7.Coombes BK, Bisset L, Vicenzino B. Efficacy and safety of corticosteroid injections and other injections for management of tendinopathy: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Lancet. 2010;367:1751–67. 8. 8.Ramírez J, Pomés I, Cabrera S, Pomés J, Sanmartí R, Cañete JD. Incidence of full-thickness rotator cuff tear after subacromial corticosteroid injection: a 12-week prospective study. Mod Rheumatol. 2014;24:667–70. 9. 9.Hurley ET, Hannon CP, Pauzenberger L, Fat DL, Moran CJ, Mullett H. Nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease with platelet-rich plasma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Arthroscopy. 2019;35:1584–91. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.arthro.2018.10.115&link_type=DOI) 10. 10.Schwitzguebel AJ, Kolo FC, Tirefort J, Kourhani A, Nowak A, Gremeaux V, et al. Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of interstitial supraspinatus tears: a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47:1885–92. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0363546519851097&link_type=DOI) 11. 11.Kukkonen J, Joukainen A, Lehtinen J, Mattila KT, Tuominen EK, Kauko T, et al. Treatment of non-traumatic rotator cuff tears: A randomised controlled trial with one-year clinical results. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B:75-81. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2106/JBJS.M.01216&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24395315&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 12. 12.Hurd JL, Facile TR, Weiss J, Hayes M, Hayes M, Furia JP, et al. Safety and efficacy of treating symptomatic, partial-thickness rotator cuff tears with fresh, uncultured, unmodified, autologous adipose- derived regenerative cells (UA-ADRCs) isolated at the point of care: a prospective, randomized, controlled first-in-human pilot study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020;15:122. 13. 13.Cossu G, Birchall M, Brown T, De Coppi P, Culme-Seymour E, Gibbon S, et al. Lancet Commission: stem cells and regenerative medicine. Lancet. 2018;391:883–910. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31366-1&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28987452&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 14. 14.Furia JP, Lundeen MA, Hurd JL, Pearce DA, Alt C, Alt EU, et al. Why and how to use the body’s own stem cells for regeneration in musculoskeletal disorders: a primer. J Orthop Surg Res. 2022;17:36. 15. 15.Winnier GE, Valenzuela N, Peters-Hall J, Kellner J, Alt C, Alt EU. Isolation of adipose tissue derived regenerative cells from human subcutaneous tissue with or without the use of an enzymatic reagent. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0221457. 16. 16.Aust L, Devlin B, Foster SJ, Halvorsen YD, Hicok K, du Laney T, et al. Yield of human adipose-derived adult stem cells from liposuction aspirates. Cytotherapy. 2004;6:7–14. 17. 17.Yu H, Lu K, Zhu J, Wang J. Stem cell therapy for ischemic heart diseases. Br Med Bull. 2017;121:135–54. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/bmb/ldw059&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28164211&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 18. 18.Zhu Y, Liu T, Song K, Fan X, Ma X, Cui Z. Adipose-derived stem cell: a better stem cell than BMSC. Cell Biochem Funct. 2008;26:664–75. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/cbf.1488&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18636461&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 19. 19.Boutron I, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF, Ravaud P; CONSORT NPT Group. CONSORT statement for randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatments: a 2017 update and a CONSORT extension for nonpharmacologic trial abstracts. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:40–7. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/M17-0046&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28630973&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 20. 20.Schmitz C, Alt C, Azares AR, Pearce DA, Facile TR, Furia JP, et al. The composition of adipose-derived regenerative cells isolated from lipoaspirate using a point of care system does not depend on the subject’s individual age, gender, body mass index and ethnicity; [https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202209.0321/v2](https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202209.0321/v2). 21. 21.Angst F, Schwyzer HK, Aeschlimann A, Simmen BR, Goldhahn J. Measures of adult shoulder function: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) and its short version (QuickDASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Society standardized shoulder assessment form, Constant (Murley) Score (CS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63 Suppl 11:S174–88. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/acr.20630&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 22. 22.Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. The RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Health Econ. 1993;2:217–27. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/hec.4730020305&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8275167&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 23. 23.Moore W, Frye S. Review of HIPAA, Part 2: limitations, rights, violations, and role for the imaging technologist. J Nucl Med Technol. 2020;48:17–23. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiam5tdCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo3OiI0OC8xLzE3IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjIvMTIvMTQvMjAyMi4xMi4xNC4yMjI4MzQ0Ny5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 24. 24.1. Salkind NJ (ed). Encyclopedia of Research Design. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2010. 25. 25. Ellera Gomes JL, da Silva RC, Silla LM, Abreu MR, Pellanda R. Conventional rotator cuff repair complemented by the aid of mononuclear autologous stem cells. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20:373–7. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s00167-011-1607-9&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21773831&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 26. 26.Hernigou P, Flouzat Lachaniette CH, Delambre J, Zilber S, Duffiet P, Chevallier N, et al. Biologic augmentation of rotator cuff repair with mesenchymal stem cells during arthroscopy improves healing and prevents further tears: a case-controlled study. Int Orthop. 2014;38:1811–8. 27. 27.Havlas V, Kotaška J, Koníček P, Trč T, Konrádová Š, Kočí Z, et al. Kultivovaných lidských autologních kmenových buněk kostní dřeně při rekonstrukci ruptury rotátorové manžety - studie bezpečnost metody, předběžné výsledky [Use of cultured human autologousbone marrow stem cells in repair of a rotator cuff tear: preliminary results of a safety study]. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2015;82:229–34. Czech. 28. 28.Lamas JR, García-Fernández C, Tornero-Esteban P, Lópiz Y, Rodriguez-Rodriguez L, Ortega L, et al. Adverse effects of xenogenic scaffolding in the context of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study for repairing full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Trials. 2019;20:387. 29. 29.Kim YS, Sung CH, Chung SH, Kwak SJ, Koh YG. Does an injection of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells loaded in fibrin glue influence rotator cuff repair outcomes? A clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45:2010–8. 30. 30.Jo CH, Chai JW, Jeong EC, Oh S, Kim PS, Yoon JY, et al. Intratendinous injection of autologous adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of rotator cuff disease: A first-in-human trial. Stem Cells. 2018;36:1441–50. 31. 31.Jo CH, Chai JW, Jeong EC, Oh S, Yoon KS. Intratendinous injection of mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of rotator cuff disease: A 2-year follow-up study. Arthroscopy. 2020;36:971–80. 32. 32.Chun SW, Kim W, Lee SY, Lim CY, Kim K, Kim JG, et al. A randomized controlled trial of stem cell injection for tendon tear. Sci Rep. 2022;12:818. 33. 33.Randelli PS, Cucchi D, Fossati C, Boerci L, Nocerino E, Ambrogi F, et al. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair augmentation with autologous microfragmented lipoaspirate tissue is safe and effectively improves short-term clinical and functional results: A prospective randomized controlled trial with 24-month follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2022;50:1344–57. 34. 34.Hurd J. Autologous adult adipose-derived regenerative cell injection into chronic partial-thickness rotator cuff tears. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: [NCT03752827](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT03752827&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom); [https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03752827](https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03752827). 35. 35.Alvarez CM, Litchfield R, Jackowski D, Griffin S, Kirkley A. A prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing subacromial injection of betamethasone and xylocaine to xylocaine alone in chronic rotator cuff tendinosis. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:255–262. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0363546504267345&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15701612&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000226501600011&link_type=ISI) 36. 36.von Wehren L, Blanke F, Todorov A, Heisterbach P, Sailer J, Majewski M. The effect of subacromial injections of autologous conditioned plasma versus cortisone for the treatment of symptomatic partial rotator cuff tears. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24:3787–92. 37. 37.Cole B, Lam P, Hackett L, Murrell GAC. Ultrasound-guided injections for supraspinatus tendinopathy: corticosteroid versus glucose prolotherapy - a randomized controlled clinical trial. Shoulder Elbow. 2018;10:170–78. 38. 38.Damjanov N, Barac B, Colic J, Stevanovic V, Zekovic A, Tulic G. The efficacy and safety of autologous conditioned serum (ACS) injections compared with betamethasone and placebo injections in the treatment of chronic shoulder joint pain due to supraspinatus tendinopathy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Med Ultrason. 2018;20:335–41. 39. 39.Sari A, Eroglu A. Comparison of ultrasound-guided platelet-rich plasma, prolotherapy, and corticosteroid injections in rotator cuff lesions. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2020;33:387–96. 40. 40.Andia I, Maffulli N, Burgos-Alonso N. Stromal vascular fraction technologies and clinical applications. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2019;19:1289–1305. 41. 41.Polly SS, Nichols AEC, Donnini E, Inman DJ, Scott TJ, Apple SM, et al. Adipose-derived stromal vascular fraction and cultured stromal cells as trophic mediators for tendon healing. J Orthop Res. 2019;37:1429–39. 42. 42.Dai M, Sui B, Xue Y, Liu X,Sun J. Cartilage repair in degenerative osteoarthritis mediated by squid type II collagen via immunomodulating activation of M2 macrophages, inhibiting apoptosis and hypertrophy of chondrocytes. Biomaterials. 2018;180:91–103. 43. 43.Liu Z, Kuang W, Zhou Q, Zhang Y. TGF-β1 secreted by M2 phenotype macrophages enhances the stemness and migration of glioma cells via the SMAD2/3 signalling pathway. Int J Mol Med. 2018;42:3395–403. 44. 44.Lv J, Liu C, Chen FK, Feng ZP, Jia L, Liu PJ, et al. M2-like tumour-associated macrophage-secreted IGF promotes thyroid cancer stemness and metastasis by activating the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. Mol Med Rep. 2021;24:604. 45. 45.Spiller KL, Anfang RR, Spiller KJ, Ng J, Nakazawa KR, Daulton JW, et al. The role of macrophage phenotype in vascularization of tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2014;35:4477–88. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.02.012&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24589361&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F12%2F14%2F2022.12.14.22283447.atom) 46. 46.Yunna C, Mengru H, Lei W, Weidong C. Macrophage M1/M2 polarization. Eur J Pharmacol. 2020;877:173090. 47. 47.Scala P, Rehak L, Giudice V, Ciaglia E, Puca AA, Selleri C, et al. Stem cell and macrophage roles in skeletal muscle regenerative medicine. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:10867. 48. 48.Alt E, Rothoerl R, Hoppert M, Frank HG, Wuerfel T, Alt C, et al. First immunohistochemical evidence of human tendon repair following stem cell injection: a case report and review of literature. World J Stem Cells. 2021;13:944–70.