Using the AIDS virus to help children battling a deadly immune disorder

Ronnie Kashyap, patient in SCID clinical trial: Photo Pawash Priyank

More than 35 million people around the world have been killed by HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. So, it’s hard to think that the same approach the virus uses to infect cells could also be used to help children battling a deadly immune system disorder. But that’s precisely what researchers at UC San Francisco and St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital are doing.

The disease the researchers are tackling is a form of severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID). It’s also known as ‘bubble baby’ disease because children are born without a functioning immune system and in the past were protected from germs within the sterile environment of a plastic bubble. Children with this disease often die of infections, even from a common cold, in the first two years of life.

The therapy involves taking the patient’s own blood stem cells from their bone marrow, then genetically modifying them to correct the genetic mutation that causes SCID. The patient is then given low-doses of chemotherapy to create space in their bone marrow for the news cells. The gene-corrected stem cells are then transplanted back into the infant, creating a new blood supply and a repaired immune system.

Unique delivery system

The novel part of this approach is that the researchers are using an inactivated form of HIV as a means to deliver the correct gene into the patient’s cells. It’s well known that HIV is perfectly equipped to infiltrate cells, so by taking an inactivated form – meaning it cannot infect the individual with HIV – they are able to use that infiltrating ability for good.

The results were announced at the American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting and Exposition in Atlanta.

The researchers say seven infants treated and followed for up to 12 months, have all produced the three major immune system cell types affected by SCID. In a news release, lead author Ewelina Mamcarz, said all the babies appear to be doing very well:

“It is very exciting that we observed restoration of all three very important cell types in the immune system. This is something that’s never been done in infants and a huge advantage over prior trials. The initial results also suggest our approach is fundamentally safer than previous attempts.”

One of the infants taking part in the trial is Ronnie Kashyap. We posted a video of his story on our blog, The Stem Cellar.

If the stem cell-gene therapy combination continues to show it is both safe and effective it would be a big step forward in treating SCID. Right now, the best treatment is a bone marrow transplant, but only around 20 percent of infants with SCID have a sibling or other donor who is a good match. The other 80 percent have to rely on a less well-matched bone marrow transplant – usually from a parent – that can still leave the child prone to life-threatening infections or potentially fatal complications such as graft-versus-host disease.

CIRM is funding two other clinical trials targeting SCID. You can read about them here and here.

Advertisements

Hey, what’s the big idea? CIRM Board is putting up more than $16.4 million to find out

Higgins

David Higgins, CIRM Board member and Patient Advocate for Parkinson’s disease; Photo courtesy San Diego Union Tribune

When you have a life-changing, life-threatening disease, medical research never moves as quickly as you want to find a new treatment. Sometimes, as in the case of Parkinson’s disease, it doesn’t seem to move at all.

At our Board meeting last week David Higgins, our Board member and Patient Advocate for Parkinson’s disease, made that point as he championed one project that is taking a new approach to finding treatments for the condition. As he said in a news release:

“I’m a fourth generation Parkinson’s patient and I’m taking the same medicines that my grandmother took. They work but not for everyone and not for long. People with Parkinson’s need new treatment options and we need them now. That’s why this project is worth supporting. It has the potential to identify some promising candidates that might one day lead to new treatments.”

The project is from Zenobia Therapeutics. They were awarded $150,000 as part of our Discovery Inception program, which targets great new ideas that could have a big impact on the field of stem cell research but need some funding to help test those ideas and see if they work.

Zenobia’s idea is to generate induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) that have been turned into dopaminergic neurons – the kind of brain cell that is dysfunctional in Parkinson’s disease. These iPSCs will then be used to screen hundreds of different compounds to see if any hold potential as a therapy for Parkinson’s disease. Being able to test compounds against real human brain cells, as opposed to animal models, could increase the odds of finding something effective.

Discovering a new way

The Zenobia project was one of 14 programs approved for the Discovery Inception award. You can see the others on our news release. They cover a broad array of ideas targeting a wide range of diseases from generating human airway stem cells for new approaches to respiratory disease treatments, to developing a novel drug that targets cancer stem cells.

Dr. Maria Millan, CIRM’s President and CEO, said the Stem Cell Agency supports this kind of work because we never know where the next great idea is going to come from:

“This research is critically important in advancing our knowledge of stem cells and are the foundation for future therapeutic candidates and treatments. Exploring and testing new ideas increases the chances of finding treatments for patients with unmet medical needs. Without CIRM’s support many of these projects might never get off the ground. That’s why our ability to fund research, particularly at the earliest stage, is so important to the field as a whole.”

The CIRM Board also agreed to invest $13.4 million in three projects at the Translation stage. These are programs that have shown promise in early stage research and need funding to do the work to advance to the next level of development.

  • $5.56 million to Anthony Oro at Stanford to test a stem cell therapy to help people with a form of Epidermolysis bullosa, a painful, blistering skin disease that leaves patients with wounds that won’t heal.
  • $5.15 million to Dan Kaufman at UC San Diego to produce natural killer (NK) cells from embryonic stem cells and see if they can help people with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) who are not responding to treatment.
  • $2.7 million to Catriona Jamieson at UC San Diego to test a novel therapeutic approach targeting cancer stem cells in AML. These cells are believed to be the cause of the high relapse rate in AML and other cancers.

At CIRM we are trying to create a pipeline of projects, ones that hold out the promise of one day being able to help patients in need. That’s why we fund research from the earliest Discovery level, through Translation and ultimately, we hope into clinical trials.

The writer Victor Hugo once said:

“There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come.”

We are in the business of finding those ideas whose time has come, and then doing all we can to help them get there.

 

 

 

It’s time to vote for the Stem Cell Person of the Year

KnoepflerPaul14263

Paul Knoepfler

Oh well, it’s going to be another year of disappointment for me. Not only did I fail to get any Nobel Prize (I figured my blogs might give me a shot at Literature after they gave it to Bob Dylan last year), but I didn’t get a MacArthur Genius Award. Now I find out I haven’t even made the short list for the Stem Cell Person of the Year.

The Stem Cell Person of the Year award is given by UC Davis researcher, avid blogger and CIRM Grantee Paul Knoepfler. (You can vote for the Stem Cell Person of the Year here). In his blog, The Niche, Paul lists the qualities he looks for:

“The Stem Cell Person of the Year Award is an honor I give out to the person in any given year who in my view has had the most positive impact in outside-the-box ways in the stem cell and regenerative medicine field. I’m looking for creative risk-takers.”

“It’s not about who you know, but what you do to help science, medicine, and other people.”

Paul invites people to nominate worthy individuals – this year there are 20 nominees – people vote on which one of the nominees they think should win, and then Paul makes the final decision. Well, it is his blog and he is putting up the $2,000 prize money himself.

This year’s nominees are nothing if not diverse, including

  • Anthony Atala, a pioneering researcher at Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine in North Carolina
  • Bao-Ngoc Nguyen, who helped create California’s groundbreaking new law targeting clinics which offer unproven stem cell therapies
  • Judy Roberson, a tireless patient advocate, and supporter of stem cell research for Huntington’s disease

Whoever wins will be following in some big footsteps including patient advocates Ted Harada and Roman Reed, as well as scientists like Jeanne Loring, Masayo Takahashi,  and Elena Cattaneo.

So vote early, vote often.

LINK: Vote for the 2017 Stem Cell Person of the Year

Engaging the patient to create a culture of health citizenship

P4C

Health Citizenship panel discussion at Partnering for Cures: L to R: Lucia Savage, Roni Zeiger,  Claudia Williams, Jennifer Mills, Kathy Hudson, Beth Meagher

One of the buzz phrases in healthcare today is “patient engagement”. It seems that you can’t go to a medical or scientific conference without coming across a panel discussion on the topic. A recent Partnering For Cures* event in San Francisco was no exception. But here the conversation took on a very different tone, one that challenged what the term meant and then said that if we are really serious about engaging patients, then doctors and drug companies need to change the way they think and operate.

That tone was set from the start of the discussion when moderator Claudia Williams said even the term “patient engagement” suggests that it is something “being imposed, or at least allowed, from the outside; by experts and doctors and those in charge.”

Williams quoted Erin Moore, the mother of a young boy with cystic fibrosis saying “No one is more engaged than the patient. I want the experts, the doctors, the pharmaceutical companies to be engaged.”

Need to train doctors

Dr. Roni Zeiger, the former Chief Health Strategist at Google, said doctors aren’t trained to truly listen to and engage with patients, and that has to change:

“I sometimes think of myself as a recovering paternal physician. When I listen to and learn from patients and families I am surprised, every time, at the breadth and depth of the conversations. All of the things that we, in the medical field, do from designing a waiting room to designing a clinical trial to deciding when and how to have a conversation, we bring a tremendous amount of assumptions to those. And those assumptions are often wrong. I think that on a daily basis we should be looking at the key work we do and ask are there assumptions here I should throw away and talk to those I serve and get their help in redesigning things in a way that makes more sense.”

Jennifer Mills, the Director of Patient Engagement (that phrase again) at biotech giant Genentech, said those mistakes are made by everyone in the field:

“The biggest assumption for me is thinking about patients with a capital P, as a homogeneous group, instead of realizing they are also individuals. We need to address them as a group and as individuals depending on the circumstances.”

Caregivers count too

For example as people get older and rely on a partner or spouse to take care of them it may be important to not just engage with the patient but also with the caregiver. And the needs for each of them may not be the same.

At that point the conversation turned to the use of data. Lucia Savage, the Chief Privacy and Regulatory Officer at Omada Health, said it is going to be increasingly important to give people control over their own medical data, and sometimes the medical data of others.

“Caregivers need access to healthcare records. For example, I can check my mom’s labs. If I message her doctors they can share that information with me. It’s great because it helps us help her lead an independent life as an 80 year old.”

Savage also pointed out that we need to be careful how we interpret data. She said she could go shopping and buy three extra-large bags of potato chips. On the face of it that doesn’t look good. But did she buy those chips for herself or her daughter’s soccer team. The data is the same. The implications are very different.

Partnership not patronizing

The discussion ended with an attempt to outline what being a good health citizen means. Just as citizenship involves both rights and responsibilities on the part of the individual and society, health citizenship too involves rights and responsibilities on the part of the individual and the biomedical research and health care world. Patients deserve to be treated as individuals who have a vested interest in their own health. They don’t need “experts” to talk down or patronize them or assume they know best.

Mills says she is seeing progress in this area:

“Companies are moving from assuming what patients need to asking what they need. We once assumed that if we were in the therapeutic area long enough we didn’t need to ask what patients need. I’m seeing that change.”

Deloitte Consulting’s Beth Meagher said we need to look beyond technology and focus on the people:

“Humility is going to be the killer app. The true innovators are really being humble and realizing that to have the kind of impact they are looking for, there is a need to work in a way they haven’t before. “

*Partnering for Cures is a project of Michael Milken’s FasterCures, whose goal is to save lives by speeding up and improving the medical research system.

 

Stories that caught our eye: How dying cells could help save lives; could modified blood stem cells reverse diabetes?; and FDA has good news for patients, bad news for rogue clinics

Gunsmoke

Growing up I loved watching old cowboy movies. Invariably the hero, even though mortally wounded, would manage to save the day and rescue the heroine and/or the town.

Now it seems some stem cells perform the same function, dying in order to save the lives of others.

Researchers at Kings College in London were trying to better understand Graft vs Host Disease (GvHD), a potentially fatal complication that can occur when a patient receives a blood stem cell transplant. In cases of GvHD, the transplanted donor cells turn on the patient and attack their healthy cells and tissues.

Some previous research had found that using bone marrow cells called mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) had some success in combating GvHD. But it was unpredictable who it helped and why.

Working with mice, the Kings College team found that the MSCs were only effective if they died after being transplanted. It appears that it is only as they are dying that the MSCs engage with the individual’s immune system, telling it to stop attacking healthy tissues. The team also found that if they kill the MSCs just before transplanting them into mice, they were just as effective.

In a news article on HealthCanal, lead researcher Professor Francesco Dazzi, said the next step is to see if this will apply to, and help, people:

“The side effects of a stem cell transplant can be fatal and this factor is a serious consideration in deciding whether some people are suitable to undergo one. If we can be more confident that we can control these lethal complications in all patients, more people will be able to receive this life saving procedure. The next step will be to introduce clinical trials for patients with GvHD, either using the procedure only in patients with immune systems capable of killing mesenchymal stem cells, or killing these cells before they are infused into the patient, to see if this does indeed improve the success of treatment.”

The study is published in Science Translational Medicine.

Genetically modified blood stem cells reverse diabetes in mice (Todd Dubnicoff)

When functioning properly, the T cells of our immune system keep us healthy by detecting and killing off infected, damaged or cancerous cells in our body. But in the case of type 1 diabetes, a person’s own T cells turn against the body by mistakenly targeting and destroying perfectly normal islet cells in the pancreas, which are responsible for producing insulin. As a result, the insulin-dependent delivery of blood sugar to the energy-hungry organs is disrupted leading to many serious complications. Blood stem cell transplants have been performed to treat the disease by attempting to restart the immune system. The results have failed to provide a cure.

Now a new study, published in Science Translational Medicine, appears to explain why those previous attempts failed and how some genetic rejiggering could lead to a successful treatment for type 1 diabetes.

An analysis of the gene activity inside the blood stem cells of diabetic mice and humans reveals that these cells lack a protein called PD-L1. This protein is known to play an important role in putting the brakes on T cell activity. Because T cells are potent cell killers, it’s important for proteins like PD-L1 to keep the activated T cells in check.

Cell based image for t 1 diabetes

Credit: Andrea Panigada/Nancy Fliesler

Researchers from Boston Children’s Hospital hypothesized that adding back PD-L1 may prevent T cells from the indiscriminate killing of the body’s own insulin-producing cells. To test this idea, the research team genetically engineered mouse blood stem cells to produce the PD-L1 protein. Experiments with the cells in a petri dish showed that the addition of PD-L1 did indeed block the attack-on-self activity. And when these blood stem cells were transplanted into a diabetic mouse strain, the disease was reversed in most of the animals over the short term while a third of the mice had long-lasting benefits.

The researchers hope this targeting of PD-L1 production – which the researchers could also stimulate with pharmacological drugs – will contribute to a cure for type 1 diabetes.

FDA’s new guidelines for stem cell treatments

Gottlieb

FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb

Yesterday Scott Gottlieb, the Commissioner at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), laid out some new guidelines for the way the agency regulates stem cells and regenerative medicine. The news was good for patients, not so good for clinics offering unproven treatments.

First the good. Gottlieb announced new guidelines encouraging innovation in the development of stem cell therapies, and faster pathways for therapies, that show they are both safe and effective, to reach the patient.

At the same time, he detailed new rules that provide greater clarity about what clinics can do with stem cells without incurring the wrath of the FDA. Those guidelines detail the limits on the kinds of procedures clinics can offer and what ways they can “manipulate” those cells. Clinics that go beyond those limits could be in trouble.

In making the announcement Gottlieb said:

“To be clear, we remain committed to ensuring that patients have access to safe and effective regenerative medicine products as efficiently as possible. We are also committed to making sure we take action against products being unlawfully marketed that pose a potential significant risk to their safety. The framework we’re announcing today gives us the solid platform we need to continue to take enforcement action against a small number of clearly unscrupulous actors.”

Many of the details in the announcement match what CIRM has been pushing for some years. Randy Mills, our previous President and CEO, called for many of these changes in an Op Ed he co-wrote with former US Senator Bill Frist.

Our hope now is that the FDA continues to follow this promising path and turns these draft proposals into hard policy.

 

Using heart stem cells to help boys battling a deadly disorder

 

Caleb_Thumbnail3

Caleb Sizemore, a young man with DMD, speaks to the CIRM Board about his treatment in the Capricor clinical trial.

It’s hard to imagine how missing just one tiny protein can have such a devastating impact on a person. But with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) the lack of a single protein called dystrophin has deadly consequences. Now a new study is offering hope we may be able to help people with this rare genetic disorder.

DMD is a muscle wasting condition that steadily destroys the muscles in the arms and legs, heart and respiratory system. It affects mostly boys and it starts early in life, sometimes as young as 3 years old, and never lets up. By early teens many boys are unable to walk and are in a wheelchair. Their heart and breathing are also affected. In the past most people with DMD didn’t survive their teens. Now it’s more common for them to live into their 20’s and 30’s, but not much beyond that.

Results from a clinical trial being run by Capricor Therapeutics – and funded by CIRM – suggest we may be able to halt, and even reverse, some of the impacts of DMD.

Capricor has developed a therapy called CAP-1002 using cells derived from heart stem cells, called cardiospheres. Boys and young men with DMD who were treated with CAP-1002 experienced what Capricor calls “significant and sustained improvements in cardiac structure and function, as well as skeletal muscle function.”

In a news release Dr. Ronald Victor, a researcher at Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute and the lead investigator for the trial, said they followed these patients for 12 months after treatment and the results are encouraging:

“Because Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a devastating, muscle-wasting disease that causes physical debilitation and eventually heart failure, the improvements in heart and skeletal muscle in those treated with a single dose of CAP-1002 are very promising and show that a subsequent trial is warranted. These early results provide hope for the Duchenne community, which is in urgent need of a major therapeutic breakthrough.”

According to the 12-month results:

  • 89 percent of patients treated with CAP-1002 showed sustained or improved muscle function compared to untreated patients
  • The CAP-1002 group had improved heart muscle function compared to the untreated group
  • The CAP-1002 group had reduced scarring on their heart compared to the untreated group.

Now, these results are still very early stage and there’s a danger in reading too much into them. However, the fact that they are sustained over one year is a promising sign. Also, none of the treated patients experienced any serious side effects from the therapy.

The team at Capricor now plans to go back to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to get clearance to launch an even larger study in 2018.

For a condition like DMD, that has no cure and where treatments can simply slow down the progression of the disorder, this is a hopeful start.

Caleb Sizemore is one of the people treated in this trial. You can read his story and listen to him describing the impact of the treatment on his life.

Using stem cells to take an inside approach to fixing damaged livers

Often on the Stem Cellar we write about work that is in a clinical trial. But getting research to that stage takes years and years of dedicated work. Over the next few months we are going to profile some of the scientists we fund who are doing Discovery, or early stage research, to highlight the importance of this work in developing the treatments that could ultimately save lives.

 This first profile is by Pat Olson, Ph.D., CIRM’s Vice President of Discovery & Translation

liver

Most of us take our liver for granted.  We don’t think about the fact that our liver carries out more than 500 functions in our bodies such as modifying and removing toxins, contributing to digestion and energy production, and making substances that help our blood to clot.  Without a liver we probably wouldn’t live more than a few days.

Our liver typically functions well but certain toxins, viral infections, long-term excess alcohol consumption and metabolic diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes can have devastating effects on it.  Under these conditions, functional liver cells, called hepatocytes, die and are replaced with cells called myofibroblasts.  Myofibroblasts are cells that secrete excess collagen leading to fibrosis, a form of scarring, throughout the liver.  Eventually, a liver transplant is required but the number of donor livers available for transplant is small and the number of persons needing a functional liver is large.  Every year in the United States,  around 6,000 patients receive a new liver and more than 35,000 patients die of liver disease.

Searching for options

willenbring photo

Dr. Holger Willenbring

Dr. Holger Willenbring, a physician scientist at UCSF, is one of the CIRM-funded researchers pursuing a stem cell/regenerative medicine approach to discover a treatment for patients with severe liver disease.  There are significant challenges to treating liver disease including getting fully multi-functional hepatocytes and getting them to engraft and/or grow sufficiently to achieve adequate mass for necessary liver functions.

In previous CIRM–funded discovery research, Dr. Willenbring and his team showed that they could partially reprogram human fibroblasts (the most common cell found in connective tissue) and then turn them into immature hepatocytes.  (see our Spotlight on Liver Disease video from 2012 featuring Dr. Willenbring.) These immature hepatocytes, when transplanted into an immune-deficient mouse model of human liver failure, were shown to mature over time into hepatocytes that were comparable to normal human hepatocytes both in their gene expression and their function.

This was an important finding in that it suggested that the liver environment in a living animal (in vivo), rather than in a test tube (in vitro) in the laboratory, is important for full multi-functional maturation of hepatocytes.  The study also showed that these transplanted immature human hepatocytes could proliferate and improve the survival of this mouse model of chronic human liver disease.  But, even though this model was designed to emphasizes the growth of functional human hepatocytes, the number of cells generated was not great enough to suggest that transplantation could be avoided

A new approach

Dr. Willenbring and his team are now taking the novel approach of direct reprogramming inside the mouse.  With this approach, he seeks to avoid the challenge of low engraftment and proliferation of transplanted hepatocytes generated in the lab and transplanted. Instead, they aim to take advantage of the large number of myofibroblasts in the patient’s scarred liver by turning them directly into hepatocytes.

Recently, he and his team have shown proof-of principle that they can deliver genes to myofibroblasts and turn them into hepatocytes in a mouse. In addition these in vivo myofibroblasts-derived hepatocytes are multi-functional, and can multiply in number, and can even reverse fibrosis in a mouse with liver fibrosis.

From mice to men (women too)

Our latest round of funding for Dr. Willenbring has the goal of moving and extending these studies into human cells by improving the specificity and effectiveness of reprogramming of human myofibroblasts into hepatocytes inside the animal, rather than the lab.

He and his team will then conduct studies to test the therapeutic effectiveness and initial safety of this approach in preclinical models. The ultimate goal is to generate a potential therapy that could eventually provide hope for the 35,000 patients who die of liver disease each year in the US.

 

 

How a tiny patch of skin helped researchers save the life of a young boy battling a deadly disease

 

EB boy

After receiving his new skin, the boy plays on the grounds of the hospital in Bochum, Germany. Credit: RUB

By any standards epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is a nasty disease. It’s a genetic condition that causes the skin to blister, break and tear off. At best, it’s painful and disfiguring. At worst, it can be fatal. Now researchers in Italy have come up with an approach that could offer hope for people battling the condition.

EB is caused by genetic mutations that leave the top layer of skin unable to anchor to inner layers. People born with EB are often called “Butterfly Children” because, as the analogy goes, their skin is as fragile as the wings of a butterfly. There are no cures and the only treatment involves constantly dressing the skin, sometimes several times a day. With each change of dressing, layers of skin can be peeled away, causing pain.

epidermolysis-bullosa-29502

Hands of a person with EB

Life and death for one boy

For Hassan, a seven-year old boy admitted to the Burn Unit of the Children’s Hospital in Bochum, Germany, the condition was particularly severe. Since birth Hassan had repeatedly developed blisters all over his body, but several weeks before being admitted to the hospital his condition took an even more serious turn. He had lost skin on around 80 percent of his body and he was battling severe infections. His life hung in the balance.

Hassan’s form of EB was caused by a mutation in a single gene, called LAMB3. Fortunately, a team of researchers at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia in Italy had been doing work in this area and had a potential treatment.

To repair the damage the researchers took a leaf out of the way severe burns are treated, using layers of skin to replace the damaged surface. In this case the team took a tiny piece of skin, about half an inch square, from Hassan and, in the laboratory, used a retrovirus to deliver a corrected version of the defective gene into the skin cells.

 

They then used the stem cells in the skin to grow sizable sheets of new skin, ranging in size from about 20 to 60 square inches, and used that to replace the damaged skin.

skin-gene-therapy-graphic-ap-ps-171108_3x5_992

In the study, published in the journal Nature, the researchers say the technique worked quickly:

“Upon removal of the non-adhering gauze (ten days after grafting) epidermal engraftment was evident. One month after grafting, epidermal regeneration was stable and complete. Thus approximately 80% of the patient’s TBSA (total body surface area) was restored by the transgenic epidermis.”

The engrafted skin not only covered all the damaged areas, it also proved remarkably durable. In the two years since the surgery the skin has remained, in the words of the researchers, “stable and robust, and does not blister, itch, or require ointment or medications.”

In an interview in Science, Jakub Tolar, an expert on EB at the University of Minnesota, talked about the significance of this study:

“It is very unusual that we would see a publication with a single case study anymore, but this one is a little different. This is one of these [studies] that can determine where the future of the field is going to go.”

Because the treatment focused on one particular genetic mutation it won’t be a cure for all EB patients, but it could provide vital information to help many people with the disease. The researchers identified a particular category of cells that seemed to play a key role in helping repair the skin. These cells, called holoclones, could be an important target for future research.

The researchers also said that if a child is diagnosed with EB at birth then skin cells can be taken and turned into a ready-made supply of the sheets that can be used to treat skin lesions when they develop. This would enable doctors to treat problems before they become serious, rather than have to try and repair the damage later.

As for Hassan, he is now back in school, leading a normal life and is even able to play soccer.

 

 

Surprise findings about bone marrow transplants could lead to more effective stem cell therapies

Surgery_0

Bone marrow transplant: Photo courtesy FierceBiotech

Some medical therapies have been around for so long that we naturally assume we understand how they work. That’s not always the case. Take aspirin for example. It’s been used for more than 4,000 years to treat pain and inflammation but it was only in the 1970’s that we really learned how it works.

The same is now true for bone marrow transplants. Thanks to some skilled research at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.

Bone marrow transplants have been used for decades to help treat deadly blood cancers such as leukemia and lymphoma. The first successful bone marrow transplant was in the late 1950’s, involving identical twins, one of whom had leukemia. Because the twins shared the same genetic make-up the transplant avoided potentially fatal problems like graft-vs-host-disease, where the transplanted cells attack the person getting them. It wasn’t until the 1970’s that doctors were able to perform transplants involving people who were not related or who did not share the same genetic make-up.

In a bone marrow or blood stem cell transplant, doctors use radiation or chemotherapy to destroy the bone marrow in a patient with, say, leukemia. Then cancer-free donor blood stem cells are transplanted into the patient to help create a new blood system, and rebuild their immune system.

Surprise findings

In the study, published in the journal Science Translational Medicine, the researchers were able to isolate a specific kind of stem cell that helps repair and rebuild the blood and immune system.

The team found that a small subset of blood stem cells, characterized by having one of three different kinds of protein on their surface – CD34 positive, CD45RA negative and CD90 positive – did all the work.

In a news release Dr. Hans-Peter Kiem, a senior author on the study, says some of their initial assumptions about how bone marrow transplants work were wrong:

“These findings came as a surprise; we had thought that there were multiple types of blood stem cells that take on different roles in rebuilding a blood and immune system. This population does it all.”

Tracking the cells

The team performed bone-marrow transplants on monkeys and then followed those animals over the next seven years, observing what happened as the donor cells grew and multiplied.

They tracked hundreds of thousands of cells in the blood and found that, even though the cells with those three proteins on the surface made up just five percent of the total blood supply, they were responsible for rebuilding the entire blood and immune system.

Study co-author Dr. Jennifer Adair said they saw evidence of this rebuilding within 10 days of the transplant:

“Our ability to track individual blood cells that developed after transplant was critical to demonstrating that these really are stem cells.”

Hope for the future

It’s an important finding because it could help researchers develop new ways of delivering bone marrow transplants that are both safer and more effective. Every year some 3,000 people die because they cannot find a matching donor. Knowing which stem cells are specifically responsible for an effective transplant could help researchers come up with ways to get around that problem.

Although this work was done in monkeys, the scientists say humans have similar kinds of stem cells that appear to act in the same way. Proving that’s the case will obviously be the next step in this research.

 

A Patient Advocate’s Personal Manifesto

Janni and Obama

President Obama and Janni Lehrer-Stein

Janni Lehrer-Stein was just 26 when she was diagnosed with a degenerative eye disease and told she was going to be blind within six months. The doctor who gave her the news told her “But don’t worry, people like you are usually hit and killed by a bus long before they go completely blind.”

At the time she was recently married, had just graduated law school and landed her dream job with the government in Washington DC, litigating workplace discrimination. The news about her eyesight stopped her in her tracks.

But not for long. If you ever met Janni you would know that nothing stops her for long.

I was fortunate enough to hear Janni talk at a Foundation Fighting Blindness event in the San Francisco Bay Area last weekend. I was part of a panel discussion on new approaches to treating vision loss, including the research that CIRM is funding.

Janni didn’t talk about stem cells, instead she focused on the importance of the patient advocate voice, community, and their determination. She said one of the most important things anyone battling a life-threatening or life-changing disease or disorder needs to remember is that it’s not about disability, it’s about capability. It’s about what you can do rather than what you cannot.

Janni laid out her “manifesto” for things she says will help you keep that thought uppermost in your mind.

1) Show up. It’s that simple and that important. You have to show up. You have to get educated, you have to learn all you can about your condition so you know what you can do and what you can’t do. You have to share that information with others. You have to be there for others. Don’t just show up for yourself. Show up for others who can’t be there.

2) Share this information. Janni talked about a website called My Retina Tracker which is helping drive research into the causes of retinal diseases like retinitis pigmentosa and macular degeneration, and hopefully will lead to treatments and even cures. She says the more people work together, the more we combine our resources, the more effective we can be.

3) Support the researchers. Janni says while raising awareness is important, raising money is just as important. Without money there can be no research, and without research no treatments or cures. Janni says it doesn’t matter how you do it – a charity walk, a Go Fund me campaign, petitioning your state or federal elected representatives to urge them to fund research – everything counts, every dollar helps.

4) Remember you are part of a wider community. Janni says no one ever won a battle on their own; it takes a lot of people to fight and win the right to be treated equally. And it takes a lot of effort to stop those rights from being rolled back.

Janni hasn’t let losing her sight hold her back. In 2011, she was appointed by President Obama, and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, to the National Council on Disability where she served two terms advising the President and Congress on national disability policy.

Now she has returned home to the San Francisco Bay Area, but she is no less determined to make a difference and no less determined to fight for the rights of patients and patient advocates.

In an article on Medium she shares her feelings about being a patient advocate:

“The America that I so deeply respect is one that embraces, values and respects the contributions of us all. My America includes every one of us, regardless of our gender, race, age or disability. Our America is a place where, regardless of whether we are sighted or blind, we have the same opportunities, for which we are equally considered. Our America includes every one of us who wishes to make the world a more peaceful, responsible, and inclusive environment that is tolerant of all differences and abilities, physical or otherwise. To me, those differences make our lives richer, give our contributions more meaning, and lead to a brighter future for the next generation.”