One-Time, Lasting Treatment for Sickle Cell Disease May be on Horizon, According to New CIRM-Funded Study

For the nearly 1,000 babies born each year in the United States with sickle cell disease, a painful and arduous road awaits them. The only cure is to find a bone marrow donor—an exceedingly rare proposition. Instead, the standard treatment for this inherited blood disorder is regular blood transfusions, with repeated hospitalizations to deal with complications of the disease. And even then, life expectancy is less than 40 years old.

In Sickle Cell Disease, the misshapen red blood cells cause painful blood clots and a host of other complications.

In Sickle Cell Disease, the misshapen red blood cells cause painful blood clots and a host of other complications.

But now, scientists at UCLA are offering up a potentially superior alternative: a new method of gene therapy that can correct the genetic mutation that causes sickle cell disease—and thus help the body on its way to generate normal, healthy blood cells for the rest of the patient’s life. The study, funded in part by CIRM and reported in the journal Blood, offers a great alternative to developing a functional cure for sickle cell disease. The UCLA team is about to begin a clinical trial with another gene therapy method, so they—and their patients—will now have two shots on goal in their effort to cure the disease.

Though sickle cell disease causes dangerous changes to a patient’s entire blood supply, it is caused by one single genetic mutation in the beta-globin gene—altering the shape of the red blood cells from round and soft to pointed and hard, thus resembling a ‘sickle’ shape for which the disease is named. But the UCLA team, led by Donald Kohn, has now developed two methods that can correct the harmful mutation. As he explained in a UCLA news release about the newest technique:

“[These results] suggest the future direction for treating genetic diseases will be by correcting the specific mutation in a patient’s genetic code. Since sickle cell disease was the first human genetic disease where we understood the fundamental gene defect, and since everyone with sickle cell has the exact same mutation in the beta-globin gene, it is a great target for this gene correction method.”

The latest gene correction technique used by the team uses special enzymes, called zinc-finger nucleases, to literally cut out and remove the harmful mutation, replacing it with a corrected version. Here, Kohn and his team collected bone marrow stem cells from individuals with sickle cell disease. These bone marrow stem cells would normally give rise to sickle-shaped red blood cells. But in this study, the team zapped them with the zinc-finger nucleases in order to correct the mutation.

Then, the researchers implanted these corrected cells into laboratory mice. Much to their amazement, the implanted cells began to replicate—into normal, healthy red blood cells.

Kohn and his team worked with Sangamo BioSciences, Inc. to design the zinc-finger nucleases that specifically targeted and cut the sickle-cell mutation. The next steps will involve improving the efficiency and safest of this method in pre-clinical animal models, before moving into clinical trials.

“This is a promising first step in showing that gene correction has the potential to help patients with sickle cell disease,” said UCLA graduate student Megan Hoban, the study’s first author. “The study data provide the foundational evidence that the method is viable.”

This isn’t the first disease for which Kohn’s team has made significant strides in gene therapy to cure blood disorders. Just last year, the team announced a promising clinical trial to cure Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Syndrome, also known as SCID or “Bubble Baby Disease,” by correcting the genetic mutation that causes it.

While this current study still requires more research before moving into clinical trials, Kohn and his team announced last month that their other gene therapy method, also funded by CIRM, has been approved to start clinical trials. Kohn argues that it’s vital to explore all promising treatment options for this devastating condition:

“Finding varied ways to conduct stem cell gene therapies is important because not every treatment will work for every patient. Both methods could end up being viable approaches to providing one-time, lasting treatments for sickle cell disease and could also be applied to the treatment of a large number of other genetic diseases.”

Find Out More:
Read first-hand about Sickle Cell Disease in our Stories of Hope series.
Watch Donald Kohn speak to CIRM’s governing Board about his research.

Stem cell stories that caught our eye; progress toward artificial brain, teeth may help the blind and obesity

Here are some stem cell stories that caught our eye this past week. Some are groundbreaking science, others are of personal interest to us, and still others are just fun.

More progress toward artificial brain. A team at the RIKEN Institute in Japan has used stem cells in a 3-D culture to create brain tissue more complex than prior efforts and from an area of the brain not produced before, the cerebellum—that lobe at the lower back of the brain that controls motor function and attention. As far back as 2008, a RIKEN team had created simple tissue that mimicked the cortex, the large surface area that controls memory and language.

shutterstock_93075775

The Inquisitr web portal wrote a feature on a wide variety of efforts to create an artificial brain teeing off of this week’s publication of the cerebellum work in Cell Reports. The piece is fairly comprehensive covering computerized efforts to give robots intelligence and Europe’s Human Brain Project that is trying to map all the activity of the brain as a starting point for recapitulating it in the lab.

The experts interviewed included Robert Caplan of Tufts University in Massachusetts who is using 3-D scaffolding to build functional brain tissues that can process electrical signals. He is not planning any Frankenstein moments; he hopes to create models to improve understanding of brain diseases.

“Ideally we would like to have a laboratory brain system that recapitulates the most devastating diseases. We want to be able to take our existing toolkit of drugs and understand how they work instead of using trial and error.”

Teeth eyed as source of help for the blind. Today the European Union announced the first approval of a stem cell therapy for blindness. And already yesterday a team at the University of Pittsburg announced they had developed a new method to use stem cells to restore vision that could expand the number of patients who could benefit from stem cell therapy.

Many people have lost part or all their vision due to damage to the cornea on the surface of their eye. Even when they can gain vision back through a corneal transplant, their immune system often rejects the new tissue. So the ideal would be making new corneal tissue from the patient’s own cells. The Italian company that garnered the EU approval does this in patients by harvesting some of their own cornea-specific stem cells, called limbal stem cells. But this is only an option if only one eye is impacted by the damage.

The Pittsburgh team thinks it may have found an unlikely alternative source of limbal cells: the dental pulp taken from teeth that have be extracted. It is not as far fetched at it sounds on the surface. Teeth and the cornea both develop in the same section of the embryo, the cranial neural crest. So, they have a common lineage.

The researchers first treated the pulp cells with a solution that makes them turn into the type of cells found in the cornea. Then they created a fiber scaffold shaped like a cornea and seeded the cells on it. Many steps remain before people give up a tooth to regain their sight, but this first milestone points the way and was described in a press release from the journal Stem Cells Translational Medicine, which was picked up by the web site ClinicaSpace.

CIRM funds a project that also proposes to use the patient’s own limbal stem cells but using methods more likely to gain approval of the Food and Drug Administration than those used by the Italian company.

Stem cells and the fight against obesity. Of the two types of stem cells found in your bone marrow, one can form bone and cartilage and, all too often, fat. Preventing these stem cells from maturing into fat may be a tool in the fight against obesity according to a team at Queen Mary University of London.

The conversion of stem cells to fat seems to involve the cilia, or hair-like projections found on cells. When the cilia lengthen the stem cells progress toward becoming fat. But if the researchers genetically prevented that lengthening, they stopped the conversion to fat cells. The findings opens several different ways to think about understanding and curbing obesity says Melis Dalbay one of the authors of the study in a university press release picked up by ScienceNewsline.

“This is the first time that it has been shown that subtle changes in primary cilia structure can influence the differentiation of stem cells into fat. Since primary cilia length can be influenced by various factors including pharmaceuticals, inflammation and even mechanical forces, this study provides new insight into the regulation of fat cell formation and obesity.”

Clearing up chemobrain: cancer therapy-induced memory problems reversed by stem cells

You’d think receiving a cancer diagnosis and then suffering through chemo and/or radiation therapy would be traumatic enough. But as many as 75% of cancer survivors are afflicted by memory and attention problems long after their cancer therapy.

This condition, often called “chemobrain”, shouldn’t be misunderstood as being confined to cancers of the brain. A 2012 analysis of nearly 200 women who had been treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer showed they had ongoing memory and information processing deficits that persisted more than twenty years after their last round of treatment. And young cancer survivors are particularly vulnerable to reduced IQs, nonsocial behavior and an extremely lowered quality of life.

uci_news_image_limoli

CIRM grantee and UC Irvine professor Charles Limoli, PhD is senior author of this study

Chemotherapy drugs work by killing off cells that are dividing rapidly, a hallmark of cancer cells. But this brute force method also kills other rapidly dividing cells that are critical for normal bodily functions. In the case of chemobrain, it’s thought that damage to newly formed brain cells in the hippocampus, the memory center of the brain, is the culprit. A UC Irvine study published this week in Cancer Research supports that idea in experiments that test the effect of transplanting human nerve stem cells in rats. The research team leader Charles Limoli, a CIRM grantee and UC Irvine professor of radiation oncology, summarized the groundbreaking results in a press release (note: this study is not funded by CIRM):

“Our findings provide the first solid evidence that transplantation of human neural stem cells can be used to reverse chemotherapeutic-induced damage of healthy tissue in the brain.”

The novel place recognition test is evaluate memory function. Animal is initially presented with identical objects (red circles). Then a new object is introduced (blue square). A healthy mouse will investigate the blue square.

The novel place recognition test, one of several tests used in this study to evaluate memory function.  During training setup (left), the rodent is familiarized with identical objects (red circles). Later, rodent returns now in presence of a new object (blue square). A healthy mouse will investigate the new object during testing setup (right). Image credit: KnowingNeurons.com

So how the heck do you observe chemotherapy-induced cognitive problems in a rodent let alone show that stem cells can rescue the damage? In the study, the rats undergo a variety of recognition memory tasks after a typical chemotherapy drug treatment. For instance, in the novel place recognition test, an animal is familiarized with two identical objects inside a test “arena”. Later, the animal is returned to the arena but a new object is swapped in for one of the previous objects. Rats given chemotherapy treatment but no stem cell surgery (they’re implanted with a saline solution instead) do not show a preference for the novel object. But rats given chemotherapy and the human nerve stem cell surgery prefer the novel object. This novel seeking behavior is also seen in control rats given no chemotherapy. So these results demonstrate that the transplanted stem cells rescued normal memory recognition in the chemotherapy-treated rats.

The research team also saw differences within the brains of these groups of rats that match up with these behavioral results. First, they confirmed that the transplanted human stem cells had indeed survived and grafted into the rat brains and had matured into the correct type of brain cells. Next they looked at chemotherapy-induced inflammation of brain tissue. The brains of chemotherapy-treated rats with no stem cell transplantation showed increased number of active immune cells compared to the control and stem cell transplanted animals. In another experiment, a detailed analysis of the structure of individual nerve cells showed extensive damage in the chemotherapy treated rats compared to controls. Again, this damage was reversed in chemotherapy treated rats that also received the stem cell transplant.

Rat nerve cells (black structures) in memory center of the brain are damaged by chemotherapy (left); transplanting human nerve stem cells reverses the damage (right)

Rat nerve cells (black structures) in memory center of the brain are damaged by chemotherapy (left); transplanting human nerve stem cells reverses the damage (right). Image credit: Acharya et al. Cancer Research 75(4) p. 676

As many researchers can tell you, these exciting results in animals don’t guarantee a human therapy is around the corner. But still, says Limoli:

“This research suggests that stem cell therapies may one day be implemented in the clinic to provide relief to patients suffering from cognitive impairments incurred as a result of their cancer treatments. While much work remains, a clinical trial analyzing the safety of such approaches may be possible within a few years.”

For a more details about the role of stem cells in chemobrain, watch this recent presentation to the CIRM Governing Board by CIRM grantee and Stanford professor Michelle Monje.

Money matters: how investing in research advances stem cell science

Our goal at the stem cell agency is simple; to accelerate the development of successful therapies to patients with unmet medical needs. But on the way to doing that something interesting is happening; we’re helping advance the scientific understanding of stem cells and building a robust stem cell research community in California in the process.

You don’t have to take our word for it. A new paper in the journal Cell Stem Cell takes a look at the impact that state funding for stem cell research has had on scientific publications. The question the researchers posed was; have the states that fund stem cell research seen an increase in their share of scientific publications in the field? The answer, at least in California’s case, is absolutely yes.

Let’s back up a little. In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s the field of stem cell research was considered quite controversial, particularly when it came to human embryonic stem cells (hESCs). To help scientists get around some of the restrictions that were placed on the use of federal funds to do hESC research a number of states voted to provide their own funding for this work. This research focuses on four of the biggest supporters of this work: California, Connecticut, Maryland, and New York.

The researchers looked at the following factors:

  1. The percentage of scientific publications in the U.S.
  2. With at least one author from those four states.
  3. That focused on hESCs and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs).
  4. Comparing the numbers from before the state funding kicked in to after.

Finally – stay with me here, we’re almost done – they compared those numbers to the number of publications for two other areas of non-controversial biomedical research, RNAi and cancer. For California the results were clear. The percentage of papers on RNAi and cancer from 1996 – 2013, that had at least one California author, stayed fairly consistent (between 15-18%). However, the percentage of papers on hESCs and iPSCS with a California author rose from zero in 1998 and 2006 (the year each was discovered) to a high of 45 percent in 2009. That has since dropped down a little but still remains consistently high.

Study graphic study code The article says the reason for this is really rather obvious: “that state funding programs appear to have contributed to over-performance in the field.”

“After the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) issued its first grants in April 2006, the share of articles acknowledging California funding increased rapidly. Between 2010 and 2013, approximately 55% of hESC-related articles published with at least one California author acknowledged state funding, suggesting that this funding program played an important role as California maintained and built upon its early leadership in the field.”

Connecticut also saw its share of publications rise, though not as dramatically as California. Maryland and New York, in contrast, saw their share of publications remain consistent. However, as the researchers point out, with California gobbling up so much more of the available space in these journals, the fact that both states kept their share consistent was an achievement in itself.

The researchers acknowledge that scientific publications are “only one measure of the impact of state science programs” and say it’s important we look at other measures as well – such as how many clinical trials arise from that research. Nonetheless they conclude by saying:

“This analysis illustrating the relative performance of states in the production of stem-cell-related research publications provides a useful starting point for policymakers and, potentially, voters considering the future of state stem cell funding efforts as well as others interested in state science and technology policy more generally.”

Our Tainted Food Supply: Its Lasting Effects on Stem Cells May Explain Declines in Sperm Counts

Spermatozoons, floating to ovuleIn the science fiction film, Children of Men, humans in the year 2027 face extinction due to decades of infertility. This premise doesn’t seem all that far-fetched when you consider studies in the U.S., Japan, and Europe over the past two decades that point to declining sperm counts. A 2013 study, for instance, that followed 26,000 French men for 17 years reported a 32% drop in sperm counts. And a study of 5000 Danish men with a median age of 19 found 40% had sperm counts corresponding to infertility or decreased fertility.

So what’s going on here? One line of evidence blames exposure to chemicals that leach into our food and water supply. A possible culprit is the much-despised Bisphenol-A, or BPA, a man-made chemical found in plastic bottles, the inner linings of canned food and even receipt paper used at your local grocery store. BPA is known as a hormone disruptor because it interferes with normal hormone activity in the body by mimicking the female hormone estrogen. Lab animals exposed to low levels of BPA have shown increased incidence of certain cancers, neurological problems, diabetes, obesity, female reproduction problems and, yes, decreased sperm counts.

BPA_shutterstock_243369064Data published last week in PLOS Genetics appears to have pinpointed the link between BPA and decreased sperm counts: stem cells. Specifically the so-called spermatogonial stem cells that give rise to sperm. In the Washington State University study, the research team gave newborn male mice daily oral doses of BPA for about two weeks. The chemical exposure negatively affected this spermatogonial stem cell population by disrupting the processing of the cells’ DNA and, in turn, the development of fully mature sperm. The team got similar results replacing BPA with synthetic estrogen found in birth control pills. This form of estrogen is also known to contaminate our water supply even after sewage treatment.

A surprising and even scary twist to these results is that the brief exposure of BPA or estrogen in the newborn male mice permanently changed their stem cells. The team confirmed this observation by transplanting the spermatogonial stem cells from BPA-exposed mice into the testes of mice that never received BPA. In this case, these mice still exhibited reduced sperm production. As senior author Nancy Hunt points out in an interview with Scientific American, the exposure to these chemicals:

“is not simply affecting sperm being produced now, but impacting the stem cell population, and that will affect sperm produced throughout the lifetime.”

It’s remains debatable whether the detectable BPA or estrogen levels in our food and water supply is high enough to actually cause health problems in humans. In 2013 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) downplayed possible worries on its website:

“Is BPA safe? Yes. Based on FDA’s ongoing safety review of scientific evidence, the available information continues to support the safety of BPA for the currently approved uses in food containers and packaging.”

Still, this recent study and others like it certainly warrant further investigation. University of Missouri scientist Frederick vom Saal, who was not part of the study, put it this way in his interview with Scientific American:

“It’s important in future studies to see if the stem cell changes from exposure are passed to future generations… Since most people are consistently exposed to BPA and other estrogenic compounds, each generation could have it a bit worse.”

 

 

 

Scientists Send Rodents to Space; Test New Therapy to Prevent Bone Loss

In just a few months, 40 very special rodents will embark upon the journey of a lifetime.

shutterstock_200932226

Today UCLA scientists are announcing the start of a project that will test a new therapy that has the potential to slow, halt or even reverse bone loss due to disease or injury.

With grant funding from the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS), a team of stem cell scientists led by UCLA professor of orthopedic surgery Chia Soo will send 40 rodents to the International Space Station (ISS). Living under microgravity conditions for two months, these rodents will begin to undergo bone loss—thus closely mimicking the conditions of bone loss, known as osteoporosis, seen in humans back on Earth.

At that point, the rodents will be injected with a molecule called NELL-1. Discovered by Soo’s UCLA colleague Kang Ting, this molecule has been shown in early tests to spur bone growth. In this new set of experiments on the ISS, the researchers hope to test the ability of NELL-1 to spur bone growth in the rodents.

The team is optimistic that NELL-1 could really be key to transforming how doctors treat bone loss. Said Ting in a news release:

“NELL-1 holds tremendous hope, not only for preventing bone loss but one day even restoring healthy bone. For patients who are bed-bound and suffering from bone loss, it could be life-changing.”

“Besides testing the limits of NELL-1’s robust bone-producing efforts, this mission will provide new insights about bone biology and could uncover important clues for curing diseases such as osteoporosis,” added Ben Wu, a UCLA bioengineer responsible for initially modifying NELL-1 to make it useful for treating bone loss.

The UCLA team will oversee ground operations while the experiments will be performed by NASA scientists on the ISS and coordinated by CASIS.

These experiments are important not only for developing new therapies to treat gradual bone loss, such as osteoporosis, which normally affects the elderly, but also those who have bone loss due to trauma or injury—including bone loss due to extended microgravity conditions, a persistent problem for astronauts living on the ISS. Said Soo:

“This research has enormous translational application for astronauts in space flight and for patients on Earth who have osteoporosis or other bone-loss problems from disease, illness or trauma.”

UC Davis Surgeons Begin Clinical Trial that Tests New Way to Deliver Stem Cells; Heal Bone Fractures

Each year, approximately 8.9 million people worldwide will suffer a bone fracture. Many of these fractures heal with the help of traditional methods, but for some, the road to recovery is far more difficult.

shutterstock_243407335

After exhausting traditional treatments—such as surgically implanted pins or plates, bed rest and injections to spur bone growth—these patients can undergo a special type of stem cell transplant that directs stem cells extracted from the bone marrow to the fracture site to speed healing.

This procedure has its drawbacks, however. For example, the act of extracting cells from one’s own bone marrow and then injecting them into the fracture site requires two very painful surgical procedures: one to extract the cells, and another to implant them. Recovery times for each procedure, especially in older patients, can be significant.

Enter a team of surgeons at UC Davis. Who last week announced a ‘proof-of-concept’ clinical trial to test a device that can extract and isolate stem cells far more efficiently than before—and allow surgeons to implant the cells into the fracture in just a single surgery.

As described in HealthCanal, he procedure makes use of a reamer-irrigator-aspirator system, or RIA, that normally processes wastewater during bone drilling surgery. As its name implies, this wastewater was thought to be useless. But recent research has revealed that it is chock-full of stem cells.

The problem was that the stem cells were so diluted within the wastewater that they couldn’t be used. Luckily, a device recently developed by Sacramento-based SynGen, Inc., was able to quickly and efficiently extract the cells in high-enough concentrations to then be implanted into the patient. Instead of having to undergo two procedures—the patient now only has to undergo one.

“The device’s small size and rapid capabilities allow autologous stem cell transplantation to take place during a single operation in the operation room rather than requiring two procedures separated over a period of weeks,” said UC Davis surgeon Mark Lee, who is leading the clinical trial. “This is a dramatic difference that promises to make a real impact on healing and patient recovery.”

Hear more from Lee about how stem cells can be used to heal bone fractures in our 2012 Spotlight on Disease.

Stem cells and professional sports: a call for more science and less speculation

In the world of professional sports, teams invest tens of millions of dollars in players. Those players are under intense pressure to show a return on that investment for the team, and that means playing as hard as possible for as long as possible. So it’s no surprise that players facing serious injuries will often turn to any treatment that might get them back in the game.

image courtesy Scientific American

image courtesy Scientific American

A new study published last week in 2014 World Stem Cell Report (we blogged about it here) highlighted how far some players will go to keep playing, saying at least 12 NFL players have undergone unproven stem cell treatments in the last five years. A session at the recent World Stem Cell Summit in San Antonio, Texas showed that football is not unique, that this is a trend in all professional sports.

Dr. Shane Shapiro, an orthopedic surgeon at the Mayo Clinic, says it was an article in the New York Times in 2009 about two of the NFL players named in the World Stem Cell Report that led him to becoming interested in stem cells. The article focused on two members of the Pittsburgh Steelers team who were able to overcome injuries and play in the Super Bowl after undergoing stem cell treatment, although there was no direct evidence the stem cells caused the improvement.

“The next day, the day after the article appeared, I had multiple patients in my office with copies of the New York Times asking if I could perform the same procedure on them.”

Dr. Shapiro had experienced what has since become one of the driving factors behind many people seeking stem cell therapies, even ones that are unproven; the media reports high profile athletes getting a treatment that seems to work leading many non-athletes to want the same.

“This is not just about high profile athletes it’s also about older patients, weekend warriors and all those with degenerative joint disease, which affects around 50 million Americans. Currently for a lot of these degenerative conditions we don’t have many good non- surgical options, basically physical therapy, gentle pain relievers or steroid injections. That’s it. We have to get somewhere where we have options to slow down this trend, to slow down the progression of these injuries and problems.”

Shapiro says one of the most popular stem cell-based approaches in sports medicine today is the use of plasma rich platelets or PRP. The idea behind it makes sense, at least in theory. Blood contains platelets that contain growth factors that have been shown to help tissue heal. So injecting a patient’s platelets into the injury site might speed recovery and, because it’s the patient’s own platelets, the treatment probably won’t cause any immune response or prove to be harmful.

That’s the theory. The problem is few well-designed clinical trials have been done to see if that’s actually the case. Shapiro talked about one relatively small, non-randomized study that used PRP and in a 14-month follow-up found that 83% of patients reported feeling satisfied with their pain relief. However, 84% of this group did not have any visible improved appearance on ultrasound.

He is now in the process of carrying out a clinical trial, approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), using bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) cells harvested from the patient’s own bone marrow. Because those cells secrete growth factors such as cytokines and chemokines they hope they may have anti-inflammatory and regenerative properties. The cells will be injected into 25 patients, all of whom have arthritic knees. They hope to have results next year.

Dr. Paul Saenz is a sports medicine specialist and the team physician for the San Antonio Spurs, the current National Basketball Association champions. He says that sports teams are frequently criticized for allowing players to undergo unproven stem cell treatments but he says it’s unrealistic to expect teams to do clinical studies to see if these therapies work, that’s not their area of expertise. But he also says team physicians are very careful in what they are willing to try.

“As fervent as we are to help bring an athlete back to form, we are equally fervent in our desire not to harm a $10 million athlete. Sports physicians are very conservative and for them stem cells are never the first thing they try, they are options when other approaches have failed.”

Saenz said while there are not enough double blind, randomized controlled clinical trials he has seen many individual cases, anecdotal evidence, where the use of stem cells has made a big difference. He talked about one basketball player, a 13-year NBA veteran, who was experiencing pain and mobility problems with his knee. He put the player on a biologic regimen and performed a PRP procedure on the knee.

“What we saw over the next few years was decreased pain, and a dramatic decrease in his reliance on non-steroidal anti inflammatory drugs. We saw improved MRI findings, improved athletic performance with more time on court, more baskets and more rebounds.”

But Saenz acknowledges that for the field to advance anecdotal stories like this are not enough, well-designed clinical trials are needed. He says right now there is too much guesswork in treatments, that there is not even any agreement on best practices or standardized treatment protocols.

Dr. Shapiro says for too long the use of stem cells in sports medicine has been the realm of individual physicians or medical groups. That has to change:

“If we are ever to move forward on this it has to be opened up to the scientific community, we have to do the work, do the studies, complete the analysis, open it up to our peers, report it in a reputable journal. If we want to treat the 50 million Americans who need this kind of therapy we need to go through the FDA approval process. We can’t just continue to treat the one patient a month who can afford to pay for all this themselves. “

Tune into Famelab: “American Idol” for scientists and engineers

I sometimes joke that I consider myself and my communications colleagues the “official translators” at the stem cell agency, trying to turn complex science into everyday English. After all, the public is paying for the research that we fund and they have a right to know about the progress being made, in language they can understand.

famelab

That’s why events like Famelab are so important. Famelab is like American Idol for scientists. It’s a competition to find scientists and engineers with a flair for public communication, and to help them talk about their work to everyone, not just to their colleagues and peers. Famelab gives these scientists and engineers support, encouragement and training them to find their voices, and to put those voices to use wherever and whenever they can; in the media, in public presentations, even just in everyday conversations.

Kathy Culpin works with the British Council to promote Famelab here in the US. She says it’s vitally important for scientists to be able to talk about their work:

“At the British Council we have worked with people who are doing amazing things but they can’t communicate to a broader audience. If scientists, particularly younger scientists, are unable to communicate effectively and clearly in a way that people want to listen to, in a way that people can understand, how are they going to have public support for their work, how are they even going to be able to raise funds for their work?”

The premise behind Famelab is simple: young up-and-coming scientists have just three minutes to present their research to a panel of three judges. They can’t use any slides or charts. Nothing. All they have is the power of their voice and whatever prop they can hold in their hands. For many scientists, taking away their PowerPoint presentation is like asking them to walk a tight rope without a safety net. It’s uncomfortable territory. And yet many respond magnificently.

Here’s Lyl Tomlinson, the winner of the most recent U.S. event, competing in the international finals. Appropriately enough Lyl’s presentation was on the role of running and stem cells in improving memory.

Famelab began in England but has now spread to 19 other countries. The competition starts at the regional level before progressing on to the national finals (April 2016) and then the international competition (June 2016, at the Cheltenham Science Festival in the UK).

In the U.S. there are a number of regional heats (you can find out by going here)

NASA helps run Famelab in the U.S. Daniella Scalice, the Education and Public Outreach Lead for the Astrobiology program at the agency, says Famelab is fun, but it has a serious side to it as well:

“We feel strongly that good communications skills are essential to a scientist’s training, especially for a Federal agency like NASA where we have a responsibility to the taxpayers to ensure they understand what their hard-earned dollars are paying for.  With FameLab, we hope to make learning best practices in communications easy and fun, and provide a safe environment for young scientists to get some experience communicating and meet other like-minded scientists.”

The next event in the U.S. is here in San Francisco on Monday, December 15 at the Rickshaw Stop at 155 Fell Street. Doors open at 6.30pm, competition starts at 7:30 P.

What is most fun about Famelab is that you never really know what to expect. One person will talk about the lifespan of the wood frog, the next will discuss the latest trends on social media. One thing is certain. It is always entertaining. And informative. And engaging. And isn’t that what science is supposed to be!

If you want to see how my colleagues and I at the stem cell agency tried to get stem cell scientists to develop sharper communication skills check out our Elevator Pitch Challenge.

Ten at ten at the stem cell agency: sharing the good news about progress from the bench to the bedside

Ten years ago this month the voters of California overwhelmingly approved Proposition 71, creating the state’s stem cell agency, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, and providing $3 billion to fund stem cell research in California.

That money has helped make California a global leader in stem cell research and led to ten clinical trials that the stem cell agency is funding this year alone. Those include trials in heart disease, cancer, leukemia, diabetes, blindness, HIV/AIDS and sickle cell disease.

To hear how that work has had an impact on the lives of patients we are holding a media briefing to look at the tremendous progress that has been made, and to hear what the future holds.

When: Thursday, November 20th at 11am

Where: Eli and Edythe Broad CIRM Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at the University of Southern California, 1425 San Pablo Street, Los Angeles, CA 90033

Who: Hear from patients who have benefited from stem cell therapies, the researchers who have done the work, and the key figures in the drive to make California the global leader in stem cell research

To listen in to the event by phone:

Call in: 866.528.2256  Participant code: 1594399

For more information contact: Kevin McCormack, Communications Director, CIRM kmccormack@cirm.ca.gov

Cell: 415-361-2903