Stem cell clinics make big claims but offer little evidence they can treat osteoarthritic knees

osteoarthritis knee

If someone says they have a success rate of close to 100 percent in treating a major health problem but offer little evidence to back that up, you might be excused for being more than a tad skeptical. And a new study says you would be right.

The health problem in question is osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee, something that affects almost 10 million Americans. It’s caused by the wearing down of the protective cartilage in the knee. That cartilage acts as a kind of shock absorber, so when it’s gone you have bone rubbing against bone. That’s not just painful but also debilitating, making it hard to lead an active life.

There is a lot of research taking place – including a clinical trial that CIRM is funding – that focuses on using stem cells to create new cartilage, but so far nothing has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for wider use. The reason for that is simple. No approach has yet proven it is both safe and effective.

No evidence? No worries

But that doesn’t stop many clinics around the US, and around the world, from claiming they have treatments that work and charging patients a hefty sum to get them.

In a study presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, researchers contacted 317 clinics in the US that directly market stem cell therapies to consumers. They asked the clinics for information on the cost of the procedure and their success rate.

  • Only 65 clinics responded
  • Lowest price was $1,150
  • Highest price was $12,000,
  • Average price of $5,156.

Only 36 clinics responded with information about success rates.

  • 10 claimed between 90 and 100 percent success
  • 15 claimed 80 to 90 percent success
  • 10 claimed 70 to 80 percent
  • One said just 55 percent.

None offered any evidence based on a clinical trial that supported those claims, and there was no connection between how much they charged and how successful they claimed to be.

In a news release about the study – which appears in the Journal of Knee Surgery – George Muschler, one of the lead authors, said that orthopedic surgeons have a duty to give patients the best information available about all treatment options.

“Recent systematic reviews of cellular therapies for the treatment of knee OA (over 400 papers screened) have found poor levels of evidence for the efficacy of these treatments to date. Current evidence does not justify the rapid rate of growth for these therapies.”

Nicolas Piuzzi, the other lead author on the study, says if the evidence doesn’t justify the growth in the number of clinics offering these therapies, it certainly doesn’t justify the prices they charge.

“The claim of “stem cell” therapy carries a high level of expectations for the potential benefits, but research is still many years away from providing clear evidence of effective treatment to patients. As clinicians and researchers, we have ethical, scientific, legal and regulatory concerns. Patients need to be aware of the status of research within the field. If they receive information from anyone offering a treatment claim of an 80 to 100 percent successful recovery, they should be concerned in observance of published peer-reviewed evidence.”

Stem Cell Roundup: No nerve cells for you, old man; stem cells take out the trash; clues to better tattoo removal

Stem cell image of the week: Do they or don’t they? The debate on new nerve cell growth in adult brain rages on.


Young neurons (green) are shown in the human hippocampus at the ages of (from left) birth, 13 years old and 35 years old. Images by Arturo Alvarez-Buylla lab

For the longest time, it was simply a given among scientists that once you reach adulthood, your brain’s neuron-making days were over. Then, over the past several decades, evidence emerged that the adult brain can indeed make new neurons, in a process called neurogenesis. Now the pendulum of understanding may be swinging back based on research reported this week out of Arturo Alvarez-Buylla’s lab at UCSF.

Through the careful examination of 59 human brain samples (from post mortem tissue and those collected during epilepsy surgery), Alvarez-Buylla’s team in collaboration with many other labs around the world, found lots of neurogenesis in neonatal and newborn brains. But after 1 year of age, a steep drop in the number of new neurons was observed. Those numbers continued to plummet through childhood and were barely detectable in samples from teens. New neurons were undetectable in adult brain samples.

This week’s stem cell image shows this dramatic decline of new neurons when comparing brain samples from a newborn, a 13 year-old and a 35 year-old.

It was no surprise that these surprising results, published in Nature, got quite a bit of attention by a wide range of news outlets including the LA Times, CNN, The Scientist and NPR to name just a few.

Limitless life of stem cells requires taking out the trash

It’s minding blowing to me that, given the proper nutrients, an embryonic stem cell in a lab dish can exist indefinitely. The legendary fountain of youth that Ponce de León searched in vain for is actually hidden inside these remarkable cells. So how do they do it? It’s a tantalizing question for researchers because the answers could lead to a better understanding of and eventually novel therapies for age-related diseases.


Cartoon of a proteosome, the cell’s garbage disposal. Image: Wikipedia

A team from the University of Cologne reports this week on a connection between the removal of degraded proteins and the longevity of stem cells. Cells in general use special enzymes to tag wonky proteins for the cellular trash heap, called a proteasome. Without this ability to clean up, unwanted proteins can accumulate and make cells unhealthy, a scenario that is seen in age-related diseases like Alzheimer’s. The research team found that reducing the protein disposal activity in embryonic stem cells disrupted characteristics that are specific to these cells. So, one way stem cells may keep their youthful appearance is by being good about taking out their trash.

The study was published in Scientific Reports and picked up by Science Daily.

Why tattoos stay when your skin cells don’t ( by Kevin McCormack)

We replace our skin cells every two or three weeks. As each layer dies, the stem cells in the skin replace them with a new batch. With that in mind you’d think that a tattoo, which is just ink injected into the skin with a needle, would disappear as each layer of skin is replaced. But obviously it doesn’t. Now some French researchers think they have figured out why.


Thank your macrophages for keeping your tattoo intact. Tattoo by: Sansanana

It’s not just fun science, published in the Journal of Experimental Medicine, it could also mean that that embarrassing tattoo you got saying you would love Fred or Freda forever, can one day be easily removed.

The researchers found that when the tattoo needle inflicts a wound on the skin, specialized cells called macrophages flock to the site and take up the ink. As those macrophages die, instead of the ink disappearing with them, new macrophages come along, gobble up the ink and so the tattoo lives on.

In an interview with Health News Digest, Bernard Malissen, one of the lead investigators, says the discovery, could help erase a decision made in a moment of madness:

“Tattoo removal can be likely improved by combining laser surgery with the transient ablation of the macrophages present in the tattoo area. As a result, the fragmented pigment particles generated using laser pulses will not be immediately recaptured, a condition increasing the probability of having them drained away via the lymphatic vessels.”

Stem Cell Roundup: New understanding of Huntington’s; how stem cells can double your DNA; and using “the Gary Oldman of cell types” to reverse aging

This week’s roundup highlights how we are constantly finding out new and exciting ways that stem cells could help change the way we treat disease.

Our Cool Stem Cell Image of the Week comes from our first story, about unlocking some of the secrets of Huntington’s disease. It comes from the Laboratory of Stem Cell Biology and Molecular Embryology at The Rockefeller University

Huntington's neurons

A new approach to studying and developing therapies for Huntington’s disease

Researchers at Rockefeller University report new findings that may upend the way scientists study and ultimately develop therapies for Huntington’s disease, a devastating, inherited neurodegenerative disorder that has no cure. Though mouse models of the disease are well-established, the team wanted to focus on human biology since our brains are more complex than those of mice. So, they used CRISPR gene editing technology in human embryonic stem cells to introduce the genetic mutations that cause HD.

Though symptoms typically do not appear until adulthood, the researchers were surprised to find that in their human cell-based model of HD, abnormalities in nerve cells occur at the earliest steps in brain development. These results suggest that HD therapies should focus on treatments much earlier in life.

The researchers observed another unexpected twist: cells that lack Huntingtin, the gene responsible for HD, are very similar to cells found in HD. This suggests that too little Huntingtin may be causing the disease. Up until now, the prevailing idea has been that Huntington’s symptoms are caused by the toxicity of too much mutant Huntingtin activity.

We’ll certainly be keeping an eye on how further studies using this new model affect our understanding of and therapy development for HD.

This study was published in Development and was picked by Science Daily.

How you can double your DNA


As you can imagine we get lots of questions about stem cell research here at CIRM. Last week we got an email asking if a stem cell transplant could alter your DNA? The answer is, under certain circumstances, yes it could.

A fascinating article in the Herald Review explains how this can happen. In a bone marrow transplant bad blood stem cells are killed and replaced with healthy ones from a donor. As those cells multiply, creating a new blood supply, they also carry the DNA for the donor.

But that’s not the only way that people may end up with dual DNA. And the really fascinating part of the article is how this can cause all sorts of legal and criminal problems.

One researcher’s efforts to reverse aging


Gary Oldman: Photo courtesy Variety

“Stem cells are the Gary Oldman of cell types.” As a fan of Gary Oldman (terrific as Winston Churchill in the movie “Darkest Hour”) that one line made me want to read on in a profile of Stanford University researcher Vittorio Sebastiano.

Sebastiano’s goal is, to say the least, rather ambitious. He wants to reverse aging in people. He believes that if you can induce a person’s stem cells to revert to a younger state, without changing their function, you can effectively turn back the clock.

Sebastiano says if you want to achieve big things you have to think big:

“Yes, the ambition is huge, the potential applications could be dramatic, but that doesn’t mean that we are going to become immortal in some problematic way. After all, one way or the other, we have to die. We will just understand aging in a better way, and develop better drugs, and keep people happier and healthier for a few more years.”

The profile is in the journal Nautilus.

Stem Cell Roundup: Rainbow Sherbet Fruit Fly Brains, a CRISPR/iPSC Mash-up and more

This week’s Round Up is all about the brain with some CRISPR and iPSCs sprinkled in:

Our Cool Stem Cell Image of the Week comes from Columbia University’s Zuckerman Institute:


(Credit: Jon Enriquez/Mann Lab/Columbia’s Zuckerman Institute).

This rainbow sherbet-colored scientific art is a microscopy image of a fruit fly nervous system in which brain cells were randomly labeled with different colors. It was a figure in a Neuron study published this week showing how cells derived from the same stem cells can go down very different developmental paths but then later are “reunited” to carry out key functions, such as in this case, the nervous system control of leg movements.

A new therapeutic avenue for Parkinson’s diseaseBuck Institute

Many animal models of Parkinson’s disease are created by mutating specific genes to cause symptoms that mimic this incurable, neurodegenerative disorder. But, by far, most cases of Parkinson’s are idiopathic, a fancy term for spontaneous with no known genetic cause. So, researchers at the Buck Institute took another approach: they generated a mouse model of Parkinson’s disease using the pesticide, paraquat, exposure to which is known to increase the risk of the idiopathic form of Parkinson’s.

Their CIRM-funded study in Cell Reports showed that exposure to paraquat leads to cell senescence – in which cells shut down and stop dividing – particularly in astrocytes, brain cells that support the function of nerve cells. Ridding the mice of these astrocytes relieved some of the Parkinson’s like symptoms. What makes these results so intriguing is the team’s analysis of post-mortem brains from Parkinson’s patients also showed the hallmarks of increased senescence in astrocytes. Perhaps, therapeutic approaches that can remove senescent cells may yield novel Parkinson’s treatments.

Discovery may advance neural stem cell treatments for brain disordersSanford-Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute (via Eureka Alert)

Another CIRM-funded study published this week in Nature Neuroscience may also help pave the way to new treatment strategies for neurologic disorders like Parkinson’s disease. A team at Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute (SBP) discovered a novel gene regulation system that brain stem cells use to maintain their ability to self-renew.

The study centers around messenger RNA, a molecular courier that transcribes a gene’s DNA code and carries it off to be translated into a protein. The team found that the removal of a chemical tag on mRNA inside mouse brain stem cells caused them to lose their stem cell properties. Instead, too many cells specialized into mature brain cells leading to abnormal brain development in animal studies. Team lead Jing Crystal Zhao, explained how this finding is important for future therapeutic development:


Crystal Zhao

“As NSCs are increasingly explored as a cell replacement therapy for neurological disorders, understanding the basic biology of NSCs–including how they self-renew–is essential to harnessing control of their in vivo functions in the brain.”

Researchers Create First Stem Cells Using CRISPR Genome ActivationThe Gladstone Institutes

Our regular readers are most likely familiar with both CRISPR gene editing and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technologies. But, in case you missed it late last week, a Cell Stem Cell study out of Sheng Ding’s lab at the Gladstone Institutes, for the first time, combined the two by using CRISPR to make iPSCs. The study got a lot of attention including a review by Paul Knoepfler in his blog The Niche. Check it out for more details!


Treatments, cures and clinical trials: an in-person update on CIRM’s progress

Patients and Patient Advocates are at the heart of everything we do at CIRM. That’s why we are holding three free public events in the next few months focused on updating you on the stem cell research we are funding, and our plans for the future.

Right now we have 33 projects that we have funded in clinical trials. Those range from heart disease and stroke, to cancer, diabetes, ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease), two different forms of vision loss, spinal cord injury and HIV/AIDS. We have also helped cure dozens of children battling deadly immune disorders. But as far as we are concerned we are only just getting started.

Over the course of the next few years, we have a goal of adding dozens more clinical trials to that list, and creating a pipeline of promising therapies for a wide range of diseases and disorders.

That’s why we are holding these free public events – something we try and do every year. We want to let you know what we are doing, what we are funding, how that research is progressing, and to get your thoughts on how we can improve, what else we can do to help meet the needs of the Patient Advocate community. Your voice is important in helping shape everything we do.

The first event is at the Gladstone Institutes in San Francisco on Wednesday, September 6th from noon till 1pm. The doors open at 11am for registration and a light lunch.

Gladstone Institutes

Here’s a link to an Eventbrite page that has all the information about the event, including how you can RSVP to let us know you are coming.

We are fortunate to be joined by two great scientists, and speakers – as well as being CIRM grantees-  from the Gladstone Institutes, Dr. Deepak Srivastava and Dr. Steve Finkbeiner.

Dr. Srivastava is working on regenerating heart muscle after it has been damaged. This research could not only help people recover from a heart attack, but the same principles might also enable us to regenerate other organs damaged by disease. Dr. Finkbeiner is a pioneer in diseases of the brain and has done ground breaking work in both Alzheimer’s and Huntington’s disease.

We have two other free public events coming up in October. The first is at UC Davis in Sacramento on October 10th (noon till 1pm) and the second at Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles on October 30th (noon till 1pm). We will have more details on these events in the coming weeks.

We look forward to seeing you at one of these events and please feel free to share this information with anyone you think might be interested in attending.

Stories that caught our eye: An antibody that could make stem cell research safer; scientists prepare for clinical trial for Parkinson’s disease; and the stem cell scientist running for Congress

Antibody to make stem cells safer:

There is an old Chinese proverb that states: ‘What seems like a blessing could be a curse’. In some ways that proverb could apply to stem cells. For example, pluripotent stem cells have the extraordinary ability to turn into many other kinds of cells, giving researchers a tool to repair damaged organs and tissues. But that same ability to turn into other kinds of cells means that a pluripotent stem cell could also turn into a cancerous one, endangering someone’s life.


Researchers at the A*STAR Bioprocessing Technology Institute: Photo courtesy A*STAR

Now researchers at the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) in Singapore may have found a way to stop that happening.

When you change, or differentiate, stem cells into other kinds of cells there will always be some of the original material that didn’t make the transformation. Those cells could turn into tumors called teratomas. Scientists have long sought for a way to identify pluripotent cells that haven’t differentiated, without harming the ones that have.

The team at A*STAR injected mice with embryonic stem cells to generate antibodies. They then tested the ability of the different antibodies to destroy pluripotent stem cells. They found one, they called A1, that did just that; killing pluripotent cells but leaving other cells unharmed.

Further study showed that A1 worked by attaching itself to specific molecules that are only found on the surface of pluripotent cells.

In an article on Phys.Org Andre Choo, the leader of the team, says this gives them a tool to get rid of the undifferentiated cells that could potentially cause problems:

“That was quite exciting because it now gives us a view of the mechanism that is responsible for the cell-killing effect.”

Reviving hope for Parkinson’s patients:

In the 1980’s and 1990’s scientists transplanted fetal tissue into the brains of people with Parkinson’s disease. They hoped the cells in the tissue would replace the dopamine-producing cells destroyed by Parkinson’s, and stop the progression of the disease.

For some patients the transplants worked well. For some they produced unwanted side effects. But for most they had little discernible effect. The disappointing results pretty much brought the field to a halt for more than a decade.

But now researchers are getting ready to try again, and a news story on NPR explained why they think things could turn out differently this time.


Viviane Tabar, MD; Photo courtesy Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Viviane Tabar, a stem cell researcher at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, says in the past the transplanted tissue contained a mixture of cells:

“What you were placing in the patient was just a soup of brain. It did not have only the dopamine neurons, which exist in the tissue, but also several different types of cells.”

This time Tabar and her husband, Lorenz Studer, are using only cells that have been turned into the kind of cell destroyed by the disease. She says that will, hopefully, make all the difference:

“So you are confident that everything you are putting in the patient’s brain will consist of  the right type of cell.”

Tabar and Studer are now ready to apply to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for permission to try their approach out in a clinical trial. They hope that could start as early as next year.

Hans runs for Congress:


Hans Keirstead: Photo courtesy Orange County Register

Hans Keirstead is a name familiar to many in the stem cell field. Now it could become familiar to a lot of people in the political arena too, because Keirstead has announced he’s planning to run for Congress.

Keirstead is considered by some to be a pioneer in stem cell research. A CIRM grant helped him develop a treatment for spinal cord injury.  That work is now in a clinical trial being run by Asterias. We reported on encouraging results from that trial earlier this week.

Over the years the companies he has founded – focused on ovarian, skin and brain cancer – have made him millions of dollars.

Now he says it’s time to turn his sights to a different stage, Congress. Keirstead has announced he is going to challenge 18-term Orange County Republican Dana Rohrabacher.

In an article in the Los Angeles Times, Keirstead says his science and business acumen will prove important assets in his bid for the seat:

“I’ve come to realize more acutely than ever before the deficits in Congress and how my profile can actually benefit Congress. I’d like to do what I’m doing but on a larger stage — and I think Congress provides that, provides a forum for doing the greater good.”

New stem cell technique gives brain support cells a starring role

Gage et al

The Salk team. From left: Krishna Vadodaria, Lynne Moore, Carol Marchetto, Arianna Mei, Fred H. Gage, Callie Fredlender, Ruth Keithley, Ana Diniz Mendes. Photo courtesy Salk Institute

Astrocytes are some of the most common cells in the brain and central nervous system but they often get overlooked because they play a supporting role to the more glamorous neurons (even though they outnumber them around 50 to 1). But a new way of growing those astrocytes outside the brain could help pave the way for improved treatments for stroke, Alzheimer’s and other neurological problems.

Astrocytes – which get their name because of their star shape (Astron – Greek for “star” and “kyttaron” meaning cell) – have a number of key functions in the brain. They provide physical and metabolic support for neurons; they help supply energy and fuel to neurons; and they help with detoxification and injury repair, particularly in terms of reducing inflammation.

Studying these astrocytes in the lab has not been easy, however, because existing methods of producing them have been slow, cumbersome and not altogether effective at replicating their many functions.

Finding a better way

Now a team at the Salk Institute, led by CIRM-funded Professor Fred “Rusty” Gage, has developed a way of using stem cells to create astrocytes that is faster and more effective.

Their work is published in the journal Stem Cell Reports. In a news release, Gage says this is an important discovery:

“This work represents a big leap forward in our ability to model neurological disorders in a dish. Because inflammation is the common denominator in many brain disorders, better understanding astrocytes and their interactions with other cell types in the brain could provide important clues into what goes wrong in disease.”

Stylized microscopy image of an astrocyte (red) and neuron (green). (Salk Institute)

In a step by step process the Salk team used a series of chemicals, called growth factors, to help coax stem cells into becoming, first, generic brain cells, and ultimately astrocytes. These astrocytes not only behaved like the ones in our brain do, but they also have a particularly sensitive response to inflammation. This gives the team a powerful tool in helping develop new treatment to disorders of the brain.

But wait, there’s more!

As if that wasn’t enough, the researchers then used the same technique to create astrocytes from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) – adult cells, such as skin, that have been re-engineered to have the ability to turn into any other kind of cell in the body. Those man-made astrocytes also showed the same characteristics as natural ones do.

Krishna Vadodaria, one of the lead authors on the paper, says having these iPSC-created astrocytes gives them a completely new tool to help explore brain development and disease, and hopefully develop new treatments for those diseases.

“The exciting thing about using iPSCs is that if we get tissue samples from people with diseases like multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s or depression, we will be able to study how their astrocytes behave, and how they interact with neurons.”

How Parkinson’s disease became personal for one stem cell researcher

April is Parkinson’s disease Awareness Month. This year the date is particularly significant because 2017 is the 200th anniversary of the publication of British apothecary James Parkinson’s “An Essay on the Shaking Palsy”, which is now recognized as a seminal work in describing the disease.

Schuele_headshotTo mark the occasion we talked with Dr. Birgitt Schuele, Director Gene Discovery and Stem Cell Modeling at the Parkinson’s Institute and Clinical Center in Sunnyvale, California. Dr. Schuele recently received funding from CIRM for a project using new gene-editing technology to try and halt the progression of Parkinson’s.



What got you interested in Parkinson’s research?

People ask if I have family members with Parkinson’s because a lot of people get into this research because of a family connection, but I don’t.  I was always excited by neuroscience and how the brain works, and I did my medical residency in neurology and had a great mentor who specialized in the neurogenetics of Parkinson’s. That helped fuel my interest in this area.

I have been in this field for 15 years, and over time I have gotten to know a lot of people with Parkinson’s and they have become my friends, so now I’m trying to find answers and also a cure for Parkinson’s. For me this has become personal.

I have patients that I talk to every couple of months and I can see how their disease is progressing, and especially for people with early or young onset Parkinson’s. It’s devastating. It has a huge effect on the person and their family, and on relationships, even how they have to talk to their kids about their risk of getting the disease themselves. It’s hard to see that and the impact it has on people’s lives. And because Parkinson’s is progressive, I get to see, over the years, how it affects people, it’s very hard.

Talk about the project you are doing that CIRM is funding

It’s very exciting. The question for Parkinson’s is how do you stop disease progression, how do you stop the neurons from dying in areas affected by the disease. One protein, identified in 1997 as a genetic form of Parkinson’s, is alpha-synuclein. We know from studying families that have Parkinson’s that if you have too much alpha-synuclein you get early onset, a really aggressive form of Parkinson’s.

I followed a family that carries four copies of this alpha-synuclein gene (two copies is the normal figure) and the age of onset in this family was in their mid 30’s. Last year I went to a funeral for one of these family members who died from Parkinson’s at age 50.

We know that this protein is bad for you, if you have too much it kills brains cells. So we have an idea that if you lower levels of this protein it might be an approach to stop or shield those cells from cell death.

We are using CRISPR gene editing technology to approach this. In the Parkinson’s field this idea of down-regulation of alpha-synuclein protein isn’t new, but previous approaches worked at the protein level, trying to get rid of it by using, for example, immunotherapy. But instead of attacking the protein after it has been produced we are starting at the genomic level. We want to use CRISPR as a way to down-regulate the expression of the protein, in the same way we use a light dimmer to lower the level of light in a room.

But this is a balancing act. Too much of the protein is bad, but so is too little. We know if you get rid of the protein altogether you get negative effects, you cause complications. So we want to find the right level and that’s complex because the right level might vary from person to person.

We are starting with the most extreme levels, with people who have twice as much of this protein as is normal. Once we understand that better, then we can look at people who have levels that are still higher than normal but not at the upper levels we see in early-onset Parkinson’s. They have more subtle changes in their production or expression of this protein. It’s a little bit of a juggling act and it might be different for different patients. We start with the most severe ones and work our way to the most common ones.

One of the frustrations I often hear from patients is that this is all taking so long. Why is that?

Parkinson’s has been overall frustrating for researchers as well. Around 100 years ago, Dr. Lewy first described the protein deposits and the main neuropathology in Parkinson’s. About 20 years ago, mutations in the alpha-synuclein gene were discovered, and now we know approximately 30 genes that are associated with, or can cause Parkinson’s. But it was all very descriptive. It told us what is going on but not why.

Maybe we thought it was straight forward and maybe researchers only focused on what we knew at that point. In 1957, the neurotransmitter dopamine was identified and since the 1960s people have focused on Parkinson’s as a dopamine-deficient problem because we saw the amazing effects L-Dopa had on patients and how it could help ease their symptoms.

But I would say in the last 15 years we have looked at it more closely and realized it’s more complicated than that. There’s also a loss of sense of smell, there’s insomnia, episodes of depression, and other things that are not physical symptoms. In the last 10 years or so we have really put the pieces together and now see Parkinson’s as a multi-system disease with neuronal cell death and specific protein deposits called Lewy Bodies. These Lewy Bodies contain alpha-synuclein and you find them in the brain, the gut and the heart and these are organs people hadn’t looked at because no one made the connection that constipation or depression could be linked to the disease. It turns out that Parkinson’s is much more complicated than just a problem in one particular region of the brain.

The other reason for slow progress is that we don’t have really good models for the disease that are predictive for clinical outcomes. This is why probably many clinical trials in the neurodegenerative field have failed to date. Now we have human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) from people with Parkinson’s, and iPSC-derived neurons allow us to better model the disease in the lab, and understand its underlying mechanisms  more deeply. The technology has now advanced so that the ability to differentiate these cells into nerve cells is better, so that you now have iPSC-derived neurons in a dish that are functionally active, and that act and behave like dopamine-producing neurons in the brain. This is an important advance.

Will this lead to a clinical trial?

That’s the idea, that’s our hope.

We are working with professor Dr. Deniz Kirik at the University of Lund in Sweden. He’s an expert in the field of viral vectors that can be used in humans – it’s a joint grant between us – and so what we learn from the human iPS cultures, he’ll transfer to an animal model and use his gene vector technology to see if we can see the same effects in vivo, in mice.

We are using a very special Parkinson’s mouse model – developed at UC San Francisco – that has the complete human genomic structure of the alpha-synuclein gene. If all goes well, we hope that ultimately we could be ready in a couple of years to think about preclinical testing and then clinical trials.

What are your hopes for the future?

My hope is that I can contribute to stopping disease progression in Parkinson’s. If we can develop a drug that can get rid of accumulated protein in someone’s brain that should stop the cells from dying. If someone has early onset PD and a slight tremor and minor walking problems, stopping the disease and having a low dose of dopamine therapy to control symptoms is almost a cure.

The next step is to develop better biomarkers to identify people at risk of developing Parkinson’s, so if you know someone is a few years away from developing symptoms, and you have the tools in place, you can start treatment early and stop the disease from kicking in, even before you clinically have symptoms.

Thinking about people who have been diagnosed with a disease, who are ten years into the disease, who already have side effects from the disease, it’s a little harder to think of regenerative medicine, using embryonic or iPSCs for this. I think that it will take longer to see results with this approach, but that’s the long-term hope for the future. There are many  groups working in this space, which is critical to advance the field.

Why is Parkinson’s Awareness Month important?

It’s important because, while a lot of people know about the disease, there are also a lot of misconceptions about Parkinson’s.

Parkinson’s is confused with Alzheimer’s or dementia and cognitive problems, especially the fact that it’s more than just a gait and movement problem, that it affects many other parts of the body too.

License to heal: UC Davis deal looks to advance stem cell treatment for bone loss and arthritis

Nancy Lane

Wei Yao and Nancy Lane of UC Davis: Photo courtesy UC Davis

There are many challenges in taking even the most promising stem cell treatment and turning it into a commercial product approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). One of the biggest is expertise. The scientists who develop the therapy may be brilliant in the lab but have little experience or expertise in successfully getting their work through a clinical trial and ultimately to market.

That’s why a team at U.C. Davis has just signed a deal with a startup company to help them move a promising stem cell treatment for arthritis, osteoporosis and fractures out of the lab and into people.

The licensing agreement combines the business acumen of Regenerative Arthritis and Bone Medicine (RABOME) with the scientific chops of the UC Davis team, led by Nancy Lane and Wei Yao.

They plan to test a hybrid molecule called RAB-001 which has shown promise in helping direct mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) – these are cells typically found in the bone marrow and fat tissue – to help stimulate bone growth and increase existing bone mass and strength. This can help heal people suffering from conditions like osteoporosis or hard to heal fractures. RAB-001 has also shown promise in reducing inflammation and so could prove helpful in treating people with inflammatory arthritis.

Overcoming problems

In a news article on the UC Davis website, Wei Yao, said RAB-001 seems to solve a problem that has long puzzled researchers:

“There are many stem cells, even in elderly people, but they do not readily migrate to bone.  Finding a molecule that attaches to stem cells and guides them to the targets we need provides a real breakthrough.”

The UC Davis team already has approval to begin a Phase 1 clinical trial to test this approach on people with osteonecrosis, a disease caused by reduced blood flow to bones. CIRM is funding this work.

The RABOME team also hopes to test RAB-001 in clinical trials for healing broken bones, osteoporosis and inflammatory arthritis.

CIRM solution

To help other researchers overcome these same regulatory hurdles in developing stem cell therapies CIRM created the Stem Cell Center with QuintilesIMS, a leading integrated information and technology-enabled healthcare service provider that has deep experience and therapeutic expertise. The Stem Cell Center will help researchers overcome the challenges of manufacturing and testing treatments to meet FDA standards, and then running a clinical trial to test that therapy in people.

Stem cell stories that caught our eye: building an embryo and reviving old blood stem cells

Building an embryo in the lab from stem cells
The human body has been studied for centuries yet little is known about the first 14 days of human development when the fertilized embryo implants into the mother’s uterus and begins to divide and grow. Being able to precisely examine this critical time window may help researchers better understand why 75% of conceptions never implant and why 30% of pregnancies end in miscarriage.

This lack of knowledge is due in part to a lack of embryos to study. Researchers rely on embryos donated by couples who’ve gone through in vitro fertilization to get pregnant and have left over embryos that are otherwise discarded. Using mouse stem cells, a research team from Cambridge University reports today in Nature that they’ve generated a cellular structure that has the hallmarks of a fertilized embryo.


Stem cell-modeled mouse embryo (left) Mouse embryo (right); The red part is embryonic and the blue extra-embryonic.
Credit: Sarah Harrison and Gaelle Recher, Zernicka-Goetz Lab, University of Cambridge

This technique has been tried before without success. The breakthrough here was in the types of cells used. Rather that only relying on embryonic stems cells (ESCs), this study also included extra-embryonic trophoblast stem cells (TSCs), the cell type that goes on to form the placenta.

When grown on a 3D scaffold made from biological materials, the two cell types self-organized themselves into a pattern that closely resembles the early development of a true embryo. In a press release that was picked up by many media outlets, senior author Zernicka-Goetz spoke about the importance of including both TSCs and ESCs:

“We knew that interactions between the different types of stem cell are important for development, but the striking thing that our new work illustrates is that this is a real partnership – these cells truly guide each other. Without this partnership, the correct development of shape and form and the timely activity of key biological mechanisms doesn’t take place properly.”

The researchers think that lab-made embryos from mouse or human stem cells have little chance of developing into a fetus because other cell types critical for continued growth are not included. And there’s much to be learned by focusing on these very early events:

“We are very optimistic that this will allow us to study key events of this critical stage of human development without actually having to work on embryos.  Knowing how development normally occurs will allow us to understand why it so often goes wrong,” says Zernicka-Goetz.

Reviving old blood stem cells, part 1: repair the garbage collectors
One of the reasons that our bodies begin to deteriorate in old age is a weakening, dysfunctional immune system that increases the risk for serious infection, blood cancers and chronic inflammatory diseases like atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries). Reporting this week in Nature, a UCSF research team presents evidence that a breakdown in our cell’s natural garbage collecting system may be partially to blame.

The team focused on a process called autophagy (literally meaning self “auto”-eating “phagy”) that keeps cells functioning properly by degrading faulty proteins and cellular structures. In particular, they examined autophagy in blood-forming stem cells, which give rise to all the cell types of the immune system. They found that autophagy was not working in 70 percent of blood stem cells from old mice. And these cells had all the hallmarks of an old cell. And the other 30 percent? In those cells, autophagy was fully functional and they looked like blood stem cells found in young mice.

The team went on to show that in blood stem cells, autophagy had an additional role that until now had not been observed: it helped slow the activity of the stem cells back to its default state by gobbling up excess mitochondria, the structures that produces a cell’s energy needs. Without this quieting of the stem cell, the over-active mitochondria led to chemical modification of the cell’s DNA that disrupted the blood stem cells’ ability to give rise to a proper balance of immune cells. In fact, young mice with genetic modifications that block autophagy generated blood stem cells with these old age-related characteristics.

But the researchers were also able to restore autophagy in blood stem cells collected from old mice by adding various drugs. Team lead Emmanuelle Passegué is optimistic this result could be translated into a therapeutic approach:

“This discovery might provide an interesting therapeutic angle to use in re-activating autophagy in all of the old HSCs, to slow the aging of the blood system and to improve engraftment during bone marrow or HSC transplantation,” Passegué said in a university press release.

Reviving old blood stem cells, part 2: fix the aging neighborhood
Another study this week focused on age-related disruptions in the function of blood stem cells but in this case an aging neighborhood is to blame. Blood stem cells form and hang out in areas of the bone marrow called niches. Researchers at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and the University of Ulm in Germany reported this week in EMBO that the age of the niche affects blood stem cell function.


Microscopy of bone marrow. Red staining indicates osteopotin, blue staining indicates cell nuclei. Credit: University of Ulm


When blood stem cells from two-year old mice were transplanted into the bone marrow of eight-week old mice, the older stem cells took on characteristics of young stem cells including an enhance ability to form all the different cell types of the immune system. In trying to understand what was going on, the researchers focused on a bone marrow cell called an osteoblast which gives rise to bone. Osteoblasts produce osteopontin, a protein that plays an important role in the structure of the bone marrow. The team showed that as the bone marrow ages, osteopontin levels go down. And this reduction had effects on the health of blood stem cells. But, as team lead Hartmut Geiger mentions in a press release, this impact could be reversed which points to a potential new therapeutic strategy for age-related disease:

“We show that the place where HSCs form in the bone marrow loses osteopontin upon aging, but if you give back the missing protein to the blood-forming cells they suddenly rejuvenate and act younger. Our study points to exciting novel ways to have a better immune system and possibly less blood cancer upon aging by therapeutically targeting the place where blood stem cells form.”