Facebook Live: Ask the Stem Cell Team

On December 12th we hosted our latest ‘Facebook Live: Ask the Stem Cell Team’ event. This time around we really did mean team. We had a host of our Science Officers answering questions from friends and supporters of CIRM. We got a lot of questions and didn’t have enough time to address them all. So here’s answers to all the questions.

What are the obstacles to using partial cellular reprogramming to return people’s entire bodies to a youthful state. Paul Hartman.  San Leandro, California

Dr. Kelly Shepard

Dr. Kelly Shepard: Certainly, scientists have observed that various manipulations of cells, including reprogramming, partial reprogramming, de-differentiation and trans-differentiation, can restore or change properties of cells, and in some cases, these changes can reflect a more “youthful” state, such as having longer telomeres, better proliferative capacity, etc. However, some of these same rejuvenating properties, outside of their normal context, could be harmful or deadly, for example if a cell began to grow and divide when or where it shouldn’t, similar to cancer. For this reason, I believe the biggest obstacles to making this approach a reality are twofold: 1)  our current, limited understanding of the nature of partially reprogrammed cells; and 2) our inability to control the fate of those cells that have been partially reprogrammed, especially if they are inside a living organism.  Despite the challenges, I think there will be step wise advances where these types of approaches will be applied, starting with specific tissues. For example, CIRM has recently funded an approach that uses reprogramming to make “rejuvenated” versions of T cells for fighting lung cancer.  There is also a lot of interest in using such approaches to restore the reparative capacity of aged muscle. Perhaps some successes in these more limited areas will be the basis for expanding to a broader use.

************************************

STROKE

What’s going on with Stanford’s stem cell trials for stroke? I remember the first trial went really well In 2016 have not heard anything about since? Elvis Arnold

Dr. Lila Collins

Dr. Lila Collins: Hi Elvis, this is an evolving story.  I believe you are referring to SanBio’s phase 1/2a stroke trial, for which Stanford was a site. This trial looked at the safety and feasibility of SanBio’s donor or allogeneic stem cell product in chronic stroke patients who still had motor deficits from their strokes, even after completing physical therapy when natural recovery has stabilized.  As you note, some of the treated subjects had promising motor recoveries. 

SanBio has since completed a larger, randomized phase 2b trial in stroke, and they have released the high-level results in a press release.  While the trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving motor deficits in chronic stroke, SanBio conducted a very similar randomized trial in patients with stable motor deficits from chronic traumatic brain injury (TBI).  In this trial, SanBio saw positive results on motor recovery with their product.  In fact, this product is planned to move towards a conditional approval in Japan and has achieved expedited regulatory status in the US, termed RMAT, in TBI which means it could be available more quickly to patients if all goes well.  SanBio plans to continue to investigate their product in stroke, so I would stay tuned as the work unfolds. 

Also, since you mentioned Stanford, I should note that Dr Gary Steinberg, who was a clinical investigator in the SanBio trial you mentioned, will soon be conducting a trial with a different product that he is developing, neural progenitor cells, in chronic stroke.  The therapy looks promising in preclinical models and we are hopeful it will perform well for patients in the clinic.

*****************************

I am a stroke survivor will stem cell treatment able to restore my motor skills? Ruperto

Dr. Lila Collins:

Hi Ruperto. Restoring motor loss after stroke is a very active area of research.  I’ll touch upon a few ongoing stem cell trials.  I’d just like to please advise that you watch my colleague’s comments on stem cell clinics (these can be found towards the end of the blog) to be sure that any clinical research in which you participate is as safe as possible and regulated by FDA.

Back to stroke, I mentioned SanBio’s ongoing work to address motor skill loss in chronic stroke earlier.  UK based Reneuron is also conducting a phase 2 trial, using a neural progenitor cell as a candidate therapy to help recover persistent motor disability after stroke (chronic).  Dr Gary Steinberg at Stanford is also planning to conduct a clinical trial of a human embryonic stem cell-derived neuronal progenitor cell in stroke.

There is also promising work being sponsored by Athersys in acute stroke. Athersys published results from their randomized, double blinded placebo controlled Ph2 trial of their Multistem product in patients who had suffered a stroke within 24-48 hours.  After intravenous delivery, the cells improved a composite measure of stroke recovery, including motor recovery.  Rather than acting directly on the brain, Multistem seems to work by traveling to the spleen and reducing the inflammatory response to a stroke that can make the injury worse.

Athersys is currently recruiting a phase 3 trial of its Multistem product in acute stroke (within 1.5 days of the stroke).  The trial has an accelerated FDA designation, called RMAT and a special protocol assessment.  This means that if the trial is conducted as planned and it reaches the results agreed to with the FDA, the therapy could be cleared for marketing.  Results from this trial should be available in about two years. 

********************************

Questions from several hemorrhagic stroke survivors who say most clinical trials are for people with ischemic strokes. Could stem cells help hemorrhagic stroke patients as well?

Dr. Lila Collins:

Regarding hemorrhagic stroke, you are correct the bulk of cell therapies for stroke target ischemic stroke, perhaps because this accounts for the vast bulk of strokes, about 85%.

That said, hemorrhagic strokes are not rare and tend to be more deadly.  These strokes are caused by bleeding into or around the brain which damages neurons.  They can even increase pressure in the skull causing further damage.  Because of this the immediate steps treating these strokes are aimed at addressing the initial bleeding insult and the blood in the brain.

While most therapies in development target ischemic stroke, successful therapies developed to repair neuronal damage or even some day replace lost neurons, could be beneficial after hemorrhagic stroke as well.

We are aware of a clinical trial targeting acute hemorrhagic stroke that is being run by the Mayo clinic in Jacksonville Florida.

****************************

I had an Ischemic stroke in 2014, and my vision was also affected. Can stem cells possibly help with my vision issues. James Russell

Dr. Lila Collins:

Hi James. Vision loss from stroke is complex and the type of loss depends upon where the stroke occurred (in the actual eye, the optic nerve or to the other parts of the brain controlling they eye or interpreting vision).  The results could be:

  1. Visual loss from damage to the retina
  2. You could have a normal eye with damage to the area of the brain that controls the eye’s movement
  3. You could have damage to the part of the brain that interprets vision.

You can see that to address these various issues, we’d need different cell replacement approaches to repair the retina or the parts of the brain that were damaged. 

Replacing lost neurons is an active effort that at the moment is still in the research stages.  As you can imagine, this is complex because the neurons have to make just the right connections to be useful. 

*****************************

VISION

Is there any stem cell therapy for optical nerve damage? Deanna Rice

Dr. Ingrid Caras

Dr. Ingrid Caras: There is currently no proven stem cell therapy to treat optical nerve damage, even though there are shady stem cell clinics offering treatments.  However, there are some encouraging early gene therapy studies in mice using a virus called AAV to deliver growth factors that trigger regeneration of the damaged nerve. These studies suggest that it may be possible to restore at least some visual function in people blinded by optic nerve damage from glaucoma

****************************

I read an article about ReNeuron’s retinitis pigmentosa clinical trial update.  In the article, it states: “The company’s treatment is a subretinal injection of human retinal progenitors — cells which have almost fully developed into photoreceptors, the light-sensing retinal cells that make vision possible.” My question is: If they can inject hRPC, why not fully developed photoreceptors? Leonard

Dr. Kelly Shepard: There is evidence from other studies, including from other tissue types such as blood, pancreas, heart and liver, that fully developed (mature) cell types tend not to engraft as well upon transplantation, that is the cells do not establish themselves and survive long term in their new environment. In contrast, it has been observed that cells in a slightly less “mature” state, such as those in the progenitor stage, are much more likely to establish themselves in a tissue, and then differentiate into more mature cell types over time. This question gets at the crux of a key issue for many new therapies, i.e. what is the best cell type to use, and the best timing to use it.

****************************

My question for the “Ask the Stem Cell Team” event is: When will jCyte publish their Phase IIb clinical trial results. Chris Allen

Dr. Ingrid Caras: The results will be available sometime in 2020.

*****************************

I understand the hRPC cells are primarily neurotropic (rescue/halt cell death); however, the literature also says hRPC can become new photoreceptors.  My questions are: Approximately what percentage develop into functioning photoreceptors? And what percentage of the injected hRPC are currently surviving? Leonard Furber, an RP Patient

Dr. Kelly Shepard: While we can address these questions in the lab and in animal models, until there is a clinical trial, it is not possible to truly recreate the environment and stresses that the cells will undergo once they are transplanted into a human, into the site where they are expected to survive and function. Thus, the true answer to this question may not be known until after clinical trials are performed and the results can be evaluated. Even then, it is not always possible to monitor the fate of cells after transplantation without removing tissues to analyze (which may not be feasible), or without being able to transplant labeled cells that can be readily traced.

Dr. Ingrid Caras – Although the cells have been shown to be capable of developing into photoreceptors, we don’t know if this actually happens when the cells are injected into a patient’s eye.   The data so far suggest that the cells work predominantly by secreting growth factors that rescue damaged retinal cells or even reverse the damage. So one possible outcome is that the cells slow or prevent further deterioration of vision. But an additional possibility is that damaged retinal cells that are still alive but are not functioning properly may become healthy and functional again which could result in an improvement in vision.

**********************************

DIABETES

What advances have been made using stem cells for the treatment of Type 2 Diabetes? Mary Rizzo

Dr. Ross Okamura

Dr. Ross Okamura: Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) is a disease where the body is unable to maintain normal glucose levels due to either resistance to insulin-regulated control of blood sugar or insufficient insulin production from pancreatic beta cells.  The onset of disease has been associated with lifestyle influenced factors including body mass, stress, sleep apnea and physical activity, but it also appears to have a genetic component based upon its higher prevalence in certain populations. 

Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) differs from T2D in that in T1D patients the pancreatic beta cells have been destroyed by the body’s immune system and the requirement for insulin therapy is absolute upon disease onset rather than gradually developing over time as in many T2D cases.  Currently the only curative approach to alleviate the heavy burden of disease management in T1D has been donor pancreas or islet transplantation. However, the supply of donor tissue is small relative to the number of diabetic patients.  Donor islet and pancreas transplants also require immune suppressive drugs to prevent allogenic immune rejection and the use of these drugs carry additional health concerns.  However, for some patients with T1D, especially those who may develop potentially fatal hypoglycemia, immune suppression is worth the risk.

To address the issue of supply, there has been significant activity in stem cell research to produce insulin secreting beta cells from pluripotent stem cells and recent clinical data from Viacyte’s CIRM funded trial indicates that implanted allogeneic human stem cell derived cells in T1D patients can produce circulating c-peptide, a biomarker for insulin.  While the trial is not designed specifically to cure insulin-dependent T2D patients, the ability to produce and successfully engraft stem cell-derived beta cells would be able to help all insulin-dependent diabetic patients.

It’s also worth noting that there is a sound scientific reason to clinically test a patient-derived pluripotent stem cell-based insulin-producing cells in insulin-dependent T2D diabetic patients; the cells in this case could be evaluated for their ability to cure diabetes in the absence of needing to prevent both allogeneic and autoimmune responses.

***********************************

SPINAL CORD INJURY

Is there any news on clinical trials for spinal cord injury? Le Ly

Kevin McCormack: The clinical trial CIRM was funding, with Asterias (now part of a bigger company called Lineage Cell Therapeutics, is now completed and the results were quite encouraging. In a news release from November of 2019 Brian Culley, CEO of Lineage Cell Therapeutics, described the results this way.

“We remain extremely excited about the potential for OPC1 (the name of the therapy used) to provide enhanced motor recovery to patients with spinal cord injuries. We are not aware of any other investigative therapy for SCI (spinal cord injury) which has reported as encouraging clinical outcomes as OPC1, particularly with continued improvement beyond 1 year. Overall gains in motor function for the population assessed to date have continued, with Year 2 assessments measuring the same or higher than at Year 1. For example, 5 out of 6 Cohort 2 patients have recovered two or more motor levels on at least one side as of their Year 2 visit whereas 4 of 6 patients in this group had recovered two motor levels as of their Year 1 visit. To put these improvements into perspective, a one motor level gain means the ability to move one’s arm, which contributes to the ability to feed and clothe oneself or lift and transfer oneself from a wheelchair. These are tremendously meaningful improvements to quality of life and independence. Just as importantly, the overall safety of OPC1 has remained excellent and has been maintained 2 years following administration, as measured by MRI’s in patients who have had their Year 2 follow-up visits to date. We look forward to providing further updates on clinical data from SCiStar as patients continue to come in for their scheduled follow up visits.”

Lineage Cell Therapeutics plans to meet with the FDA in 2020 to discuss possible next steps for this therapy.

In the meantime the only other clinical trial I know that is still recruiting is one run by a company called Neuralstem. Here is a link to information about that trial on the www.clinicaltrials.gov website.

*********************************

ALS

Now that the Brainstorm ALS trial is finished looking for new patients do you have any idea how it’s going and when can we expect to see results? Angela Harrison Johnson

Dr. Ingrid Caras: The treated patients have to be followed for a period of time to assess how the therapy is working and then the data will need to be analyzed.  So we will not expect to see the results probably for another year or two.

***********************************

AUTISM

Are there treatments for autism or fragile x using stem cells? Magda Sedarous

Dr. Kelly Shepard: Autism and disorders on the autism spectrum represent a collection of many different disorders that share some common features, yet have different causes and manifestations, much of which we still do not understand. Knowing the origin of a disorder and how it affects cells and systems is the first step to developing new therapies. CIRM held a workshop on Autism in 2009 to brainstorm potential ways that stem cell research could have an impact. A major recommendation was to exploit stem cells and new technological advances to create cells and tissues, such as neurons, in the lab from autistic individuals that could then be studied in great detail.  CIRM followed this recommendation and funded several early-stage awards to investigate the basis of autism, including Rett Syndrome, Fragile X, Timothy Syndrome, and other spectrum disorders. While these newer investigations have not yet led to therapies that can be tested in humans, this remains an active area of investigation. Outside of CIRM funding, we are aware of more mature studies exploring the effects of umbilical cord blood or other specific stem cell types in treating autism, such as an ongoing clinical trial conducted at Duke University.

**********************************

PARKINSON’S DISEASE

What is happening with Parkinson’s research? Hanifa Gaphoor

Dr. Kent Fitzgerald

Dr. Kent Fitzgerald: Parkinson’s disease certainly has a significant amount of ongoing work in the regenerative medicine and stem cell research. 

The nature of cell loss in the brain, specifically the dopaminergic cells responsible for regulating the movement, has long been considered a good candidate for cell replacement therapy.  

This is largely due to the hypothesis that restoring function to these cells would reverse Parkinson’s symptoms. This makes a lot of sense as front line therapy for the disease for many years has been dopamine replacement through L-dopa pills etc.  Unfortunately, over time replacing dopamine through a pill loses its benefit, whereas replacing or fixing the cells themselves should be a more permanent fix. 

Because a specific population of cells in one part of the brain are lost in the disease, multiple labs and clinicians have sought to replace or augment these cells by transplantation of “new” functional cells able to restore function to the area an theoretically restore voluntary motor control to patients with Parkinson’s disease. 

Early clinical research showed some promise, however also yielded mixed results, using fetal tissue transplanted into the brains of Parkinson’s patients.   As it turns out, the cell types required to restore movement and avoid side effects are somewhat nuanced.  The field has moved away from fetal tissue and is currently pursuing the use of multiple stem cell types that are driven to what is believed to be the correct subtype of cell to repopulate the lost cells in the patient. 

One project CIRM sponsored in this area with Jeanne Loring sought to develop a cell replacement therapy using stem cells from the patients themselves that have been reprogrammed into the kinds of cell damaged by Parkinson’s.  This type of approach may ultimately avoid issues with the cells avoiding rejection by the immune system as can be seen with other types of transplants (i.e. liver, kidney, heart etc).

Still, others are using cutting edge gene therapy technology, like the clinical phase project CIRM is sponsoring with Krystof Bankiewicz to investigate the delivery of a gene (GDNF) to the brain that may help to restore the activity of neurons in the Parkinson’s brain that are no longer working as they should. 

The bulk of the work in the field of PD at the present remains centered on replacing or restoring the dopamine producing population of cells in the brain that are affected in disease.   

********************************

HUNTINGTON’S DISEASE

Any plans for Huntington’s? Nikhat Kuchiki

Dr. Lisa Kadyk

Dr. Lisa Kadyk: The good news is that there are now several new therapeutic approaches to Huntington’s Disease that are at various stages of preclinical and clinical development, including some that are CIRM funded.   One CIRM-funded program led by Dr. Leslie Thompson at UC Irvine is developing a cell-based therapeutic that consists of neural stem cells that have been manufactured from embryonic stem cells.   When these cells are injected into the brain of a mouse that has a Huntington’s Disease mutation, the cells engraft and begin to differentiate into new neurons.  Improvements are seen in the behavioral and electrophysiological deficits in these mutant mice, suggesting that similar improvements might be seen in people with the disease.   Currently, CIRM is funding Dr. Thompson and her team to carry out rigorous safety studies in animals using these cells, in preparation for submitting an application to the FDA to test the therapy in human patients in a clinical trial.   

There are other, non-cell-based therapies also being tested in clinical trials now, using  anti-sense oligonucleotides (Ionis, Takeda) to lower the expression of the Huntington protein.  Another HTT-lowering approach is similar – but uses miRNAs to lower HTT levels (UniQure, Voyager)

******************************

TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY (TBI)

My 2.5 year old son recently suffered a hypoxic brain injury resulting in motor and speech disabilities. There are several clinical trials underway for TBI in adults. My questions are:

  • Will the results be scalable to pediatric use and how long do you think it would take before it is available to children?
  •  
  • I’m wondering why the current trials have chosen to go the route of intracranial injections as opposed to something slightly less invasive like an intrathecal injection?
  • Is there a time window period in which stem cells should be administered by, after which the administration is deemed not effective?

Dr. Kelly Shepard:  TBI and other injuries of the nervous system are characterized by a lot of inflammation at the time of injury, which is thought to interfere with the healing process- and thus some approaches are intended to be delivered after that inflammation subsides. However, we are aware of approaches that intend to deliver a therapy to a chronic injury, or one that has occurred  previously. Thus, the answer to this question may depend on how the intended therapy is supposed to work. For example, is the idea to grow new neurons, or is it to promote the survival of neurons of other cells that were spared by the injury? Is the therapy intended to address a specific symptom, such as seizures? Is the therapy intended to “fill a gap” left behind after inflammation subsides, which might not restore all function but might ameliorate certain symptoms.? There is still a lot we don’t understand about the brain and the highly sophisticated network of connections that cannot be reversed by only replacing neurons, or only reducing inflammation, etc. However, if trials are well designed, they should yield useful information even if the therapy is not as effective as hoped, and this information will pave the way to newer approaches and our technology and understanding evolves.

********************************

We have had a doctor recommending administering just the growth factors derived from MSC stem cells. Does the science work that way? Is it possible to isolate the growth factors and boost the endogenous growth factors by injecting allogenic growth factors?

Dr. Stephen Lin

Dr. Stephen Lin:  Several groups have published studies on the therapeutic effects in non-human animal models of using nutrient media from MSC cultures that contain secreted factors, or extracellular vesicles from cells called exosomes that carry protein or nucleic acid factors.  Scientifically it is possible to isolate the factors that are responsible for the therapeutic effect, although to date no specific factor or combination of factors have been identified to mimic the effects of the undefined mixtures in the media and exosomes.  At present no regulatory approved clinical therapy has been developed using this approach. 

************************************

PREDATORY STEM CELL CLINICS

What practical measures are being taken to address unethical practitioners whose bad surgeries are giving stem cell advances a bad reputation and are making forward research difficult? Kathy Jean Schultz

Dr. Geoff Lomax

Dr. Geoff Lomax: Terrific question! I have been doing quite a bit research into the history of this issue of unethical practitioners and I found an 1842 reference to “quack medicines.” Clearly this is nothing new. In that day, the author appealed to make society “acquainted with the facts.”

In California, we have taken steps to (1) acquaint patients with the facts about stem cell treatments and (2) advance FDA authorized treatments for unmet medical needs.

  • First, CIRM work with Senator Hernandez in 2017 to write a law the requires provides to disclose to patient that a stem cell therapy has not been approved by the Food and Drug administration.
  • We continue to work with the State Legislature and Medical Board of California to build on policies that require accurate disclosure of the facts to patients.
  • Second, our clinical trial network the — Alpha Stem Cell Clinics – have supported over 100 FDA-authorized clinical trials to advance responsible clinical research for unmet medical needs.

*****************************************

I’m curious if adipose stem cell being used at clinics at various places in the country is helpful or beneficial? Cheri Hicks

Adipose tissue has been widely used particularly in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Many practitioners suggest adipose cells are beneficial in this context. With regard to regenerative medicine and / or the ability to treat disease and injury, I am not aware of any large randomized clinical trials that demonstrate the safety and efficacy of adipose-derived stem cells used in accordance with FDA guidelines.

I went to a “Luncheon about Stem Cell Injections”. It sounded promising. I went thru with it and got the injections because I was desperate from my knee pain. The price of stem cell injections was $3500 per knee injection. All went well. I have had no complications, but haven’t noticed any real major improvement, and here I am a year later. My questions are:

 1) I wonder on where the typical injection cells are coming from?

  2) I wonder what is the actual cost of the cells?

3) What kind of results are people getting from all these “pop up” clinics or established clinics that are adding this to there list of offerings?

*********************************

Dr. Geoff Lomax: You raise a number of questions and point here; they are all very good and it’s is hard to give a comprehensive response to each one, but here is my reaction:

  • There are many practitioners in the field of orthopedics who sincerely believe in the potential of cell-based treatments to treat injury / pain
  • Most of the evidence presented is case reports that individuals have benefited
  • The challenge we face is not know the exact type of injury and cell treatments used.
  • Well controlled clinical trials would really help us understand for what cells (or cell products) and for what injury would be helpful
  • Prices of $3000 to $5000 are not uncommon, and like other forms of private medicine there is often a considerable mark-up in relation to cost of goods.
  • You are correct that there have not been reports of serious injury for knee injections
  • However the effectiveness is not clear while simultaneously millions of people have been aided by knee replacements.

*************************************

Do stem cells have benefits for patients going through chemotherapy and radiation therapy? Ruperto

Dr. Kelly Shepard: The idea that a stem cell therapy could help address effects of chemotherapy or radiation is being and has been pursued by several investigators over the years, including some with CIRM support. Towards the earlier stages, people are looking at the ability of different stem cell-derived neural cell preparations to replace or restore function of certain brain cells that are damaged by the effects of chemotherapy or radiation. In a completely different type of approach, a group at City of Hope is exploring whether a bone marrow transplant with specially modified stem cells can provide a protective effect against the chemotherapy that is used to treat a form of brain cancer, glioblastoma. This study is in the final stage of development that, if all goes well, culminates with application to the FDA to allow initiation of a clinical trial to test in people.

Dr. Ingrid Caras: That’s an interesting and valid question.  There is a Phase 1 trial ongoing that is evaluating a novel type of stem/progenitor cell from the umbilical cord of healthy deliveries.  In animal studies, these cells have been shown to reduce the toxic effects of chemotherapy and radiation and to speed up recovery. These cells are now being tested in a First-in-human clinical trial in patients who are undergoing high-dose chemotherapy to treat their disease.

There is a researcher at Stanford, Michelle Monje, who is investigating that the role of damage to stem cells in the cognitive problems that sometimes arise after chemo- and radiation therapy (“chemobrain”).  It appears that damage to stem cells in the brain, especially those responsible for producing oligodendrocytes, contributes to chemobrain.  In CIRM-funded work, Dr. Monje has identified small molecules that may help prevent or ameliorate the symptoms of chemobrain.

*****************************************

Is it possible to use a technique developed to fight one disease to also fight another? For instance, the bubble baby disease, which has cured (I think) more than 50 children, may also help fight sickle cell anemia?  Don Reed.

Dr. Lisa Kadyk: Hi Don. Yes, the same general technique can often be applied to more than one disease, although it needs to be “customized” for each disease.   In the example you cite, the technique is an “autologous gene-modified bone marrow transplant” – meaning the cells come from the patient themselves.  This technique is relevant for single gene mutations that cause diseases of the blood (hematopoietic) system.  For example, in the case of “bubble baby” diseases, a single mutation can cause failure of immune cell development, leaving the child unable to fight infections, hence the need to have them live in a sterile “bubble”.   To cure that disease, blood stem cells, which normally reside in the bone marrow, are collected from the patient and then a normal version of the defective gene is introduced into the cells, where it is incorporated into the chromosomes.   Then, the corrected stem cells are transplanted back into the patient’s body, where they can repopulate the blood system with cells expressing the normal copy of the gene, thus curing the disease.  

A similar approach could be used to treat sickle cell disease, since it is also caused by a single gene mutation in a gene (beta hemoglobin) that is expressed in blood cells.  The same technique would be used as I described for bubble baby disease but would differ in the gene that is introduced into the patient’s blood stem cells. 

*****************************************

Is there any concern that CIRM’s lack of support in basic research will hamper the amount of new approaches that can reach clinical stages? Jason

Dr. Kelly Shepard: CIRM always has and continues to believe that basic research is vital to the field of regenerative medicine. Over the past 10 years CIRM has invested $904 million in “discovery stage/basic research”, and about $215 million in training grants that supported graduate students, post docs, clinical fellows, undergraduate, masters and high school students performing basic stem cell research. In the past couple of years, with only a limited amount of funds remaining, CIRM made a decision to invest most of the remaining funds into later stage projects, to support them through the difficult transition from bench to bedside. However, even now, CIRM continues to sponsor some basic research through its Bridges and SPARK Training Grant programs, where undergraduate, masters and even high school students are conducting stem cell research in world class stem cell laboratories, many of which are the same laboratories that were supported through CIRM basic research grants over the past 10 years. While basic stem cell research continues to receive a substantial level of support from the NIH ($1.8 billion in 2018, comprehensively on stem cell projects) and other funders, CIRM believes continued support for basic research, especially in key areas of stem cell research and vital opportunities, will always be important for discovering and developing new treatments.

********************************

What is the future of the use of crispr cas9 in clinical trials in california/globally. Art Venegas

Dr. Kelly Shepard: CRISPR/Cas9 is a powerful gene editing tool. In only a few years, CRISPR/Cas9 technology has taken the field by storm and there are already a few CRISPR/Cas9 based treatments being tested in clinical trials in the US. There are also several new treatments that are at the IND enabling stage of development, which is the final testing stage required by the FDA before a clinical trial can begin. Most of these clinical trials involving CRISPR go through an “ex vivo” approach, taking cells from the patient with a disease causing gene, correcting the gene in the laboratory using CRISPR, and reintroducing the cells carrying the corrected gene back into the patient for treatment.  Sickle cell disease is a prime example of a therapy being developed using this strategy and CIRM funds two projects that are preparing for clinical trials with this approach.  CRISPR is also being used to develop the next generation of cancer T-cell therapies (e.g. CAR-T), where T-cells – a vital part of our immune system – are modified to target and destroy cancer cell populations.  Using CRISPR to edit cells directly in patients “in vivo” (inside the body) is far less common currently but is also being developed.  It is important to note that any FDA sanctioned “in vivo” CRISPR clinical trial in people will only modify organ-specific cells where the benefits cannot be passed on to subsequent generations. There is a ban on funding for what are called germ line cells, where any changes could be passed down to future generations.

CIRM is currently supporting multiple CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing projects in California from the discovery or most basic stage of research, through the later stages before applying to test the technique in people in a clinical trial.

While the field is new – if early safety signals from the pioneering trials are good, we might expect a number of new CRISPR-based approaches to enter clinical testing over the next few years. The first of these will will likely be in the areas of bone marrow transplant to correct certain blood/immune or  metabolic diseases, and cancer immunotherapies, as these types of approaches are the best studied and furthest along in the pipeline.

**********************************

Explain the differences between gene therapy and stem cell therapy? Renee Konkol

Dr. Stephen Lin:  Gene therapy is the direct modification of cells in a patient to treat a disease.  Most gene therapies use modified, harmless viruses to deliver the gene into the patient.  Gene therapy has recently seen many success in the clinic, with the first FDA approved therapy for a gene induced form of blindness in 2017 and other approvals for genetic forms of smooth muscle atrophy and amyloidosis. 

Stem cell therapy is the introduction of stem cells into patients to treat a disease, usually with the purpose of replacing damaged or defective cells that contribute to the disease.  Stem cell therapies can be derived from pluripotent cells that have the potential to turn into any cell in the body and are directed towards a specific organ lineage for the therapy.  Stem cell therapies can also be derived from other cells, called progenitors, that have the ability to turn into a limited number of other cells in the body. for example hematopoietic or blood stem cells (HSCs), which are found in bone marrow, can turn into other cells of the blood system including B-cells and T-cells: while mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), which are usually found in fat tissue, can turn into bone, cartilage, and fat cells.  The source of these cells can be from the patient’s own body (autologous) or from another person (allogeneic).

Gene therapy is often used in combination with cell therapies when cells are taken from the patient and, in the lab, modified genetically to correct the mutation or to insert a correct form of the defective gene, before being returned to patients.  Often referred to as “ex vivo gene therapy” – because the changes are made outside the patient’s body – these therapies include Chimeric Antigen Receptor T (CAR-T) cells for cancer therapy and gene modified HSCs to treat blood disorders such as severe combined immunodeficiency and sickle cell disease. This is an exciting area that has significantly improved and even cured many people already.

***********************************

Currently, how can the outcome of CIRM stem cell medicine projects and clinical trials be soundly interpreted when their stem cell-specific doses are not known? James L. Sherley, M.D., Ph.D., Director. Asymmetrex, LLC

Dr. Stephen Lin:  Stem cell therapies that receive approval to conduct clinical trials must submit a package of data to the FDA that includes studies that demonstrate their effectiveness, usually in animal models of the disease that the cell therapy is targeting.  Those studies have data on the dose of the cell therapy that creates the therapeutic effect, which is used to estimate cell doses for the clinical trial.  CIRM funds discovery and translational stage awards to conduct these types of studies to prepare cell therapies for clinical trials.  The clinical trial is also often designed to test multiple doses of the cell therapy to determine the one that has the best therapeutic effect.   Dosing can be very challenging with cell therapies because of issues including survival, engraftment, and immune rejection, but CIRM supports studies designed to provide data to give the best estimate possible.

*****************************************

Is there any research on using stem cells to increase the length of long bones in people?” For example, injecting stem cells into the growth plates to see if the cells can be used to lengthen limbs. Sajid

Dr. Kelly Shepard: There is quite a lot of ongoing research seeking ways to repair bones with stem cell based approaches, which is not the same but somewhat related. Much of this is geared towards repairing the types of bone injuries that do not heal well naturally on their own (large gaps, dead bone lesions, degenerative bone conditions). Also, a lot of this research involves engineering bone tissues in the lab and introducing the engineered tissue into a bone lesion that need be repaired. What occurs naturally at the growth plate is a complex interaction between many different cell types, much of which we do not fully understand. We do not fully understand how to use the cells that are used to engineer bone tissue in the lab. However, a group at Stanford, with some CIRM support, recently discovered a “skeletal stem cell” that exists naturally at the ends of human bones and at sites of fracture.  These are quite different than MSCs and offer a new path to be explored for repairing and generating bone. 

Stem cell treatment restores man’s sight in right eye after 25 years

James O’Brien, recipient of a stem cell treatment that restored the vision in his right eye

At 18 years old, there are several life-changing moments that young people look forward to. For some, it involves graduating from high school, starting college, and being able to cast a vote in an election. For others, this momentous occasion symbolizes the official start of adulthood.

For James O’ Brien, this milestone was marked by a rather unfortunate event where ammonia was thrown at his face in a random attack. As a result of this incident, the surface of his right eye was burned and he was left completely blind in his right eye.

Fast forward 25 years and thanks to an experimental stem cell treatment, James is able to see out of his right eye for the first time since the attack.

“Being able to see with both eyes – it’s a small thing that means the world. Basically I went from near-blindness in that eye to being able to see everything.” said O’Brien in a news release from Daily Heralds.

Dr. Sajjad Ahmad and a team of surgeons at the Moorfields Eye Hospital in London removed healthy stem cells from O’Brien’s left eye and grew these cells in a lab for months. After an adequate number of healthy stem cells from O’Briens left eye were grown, the surgeons then cut the scar tissue in his right eye and replaced it with the healthy stem cells.

They then waited a year after the procedure for the cells to settle down before inserting a cornea – which plays a key role in vision and focuses light – from a deceased donor.

“This is going to have a huge impact. A lot of these patients are young men so it affects their work, their lives, those around them. It’s not just the vision that drops, it’s the pain.” said Dr. Ahmad in the news release previously mentioned.

The procedure used took over 20 years to develop and Dr. Ahmad hopes to continue to develop the procedure for patients that have been blinded in both eyes by chemicals or have lost their vision through degenerative conditions.

CIRM has funded three clinical trials in vision loss to date. Two of these trials are being conducted by Dr. Henry Klassen for an eye condition known as retinitis pigmentosa and have shown promising results. The third trial is being conducted by Dr. Mark Humayun for another eye condition known as age-related macular degeneration (AMD) which has also shown promising results.

See video below for a news segment of James O’Brien on BBC News:

Stem cell stories that caught our eye: 3 blind mice no more and a tale of two tails

Stem cell image of the week: The demise of Three Blind Mice nursery rhyme (Todd Dubnicoff)
Our stem cell image of the week may mark the beginning of the end of the Three Blind Mice nursery rhyme and, more importantly, usher in a new treatment strategy for people suffering from vision loss. That’s because researchers from Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York report in Nature the ability to reprogram support cells in the eyes of blind mice to become photoreceptors, the light-sensing cells that enable sight. The image is an artistic rendering of the study results by team led Dr. Bo Chen, PhD.

Aug16_2018_BoChen_MullerGlia_Eye3930249103

An artist’s rendering incorporates the images of the Müller glia-derived rod photoreceptors. Image credit: Bo Chen, Ph.D.

The initial inspiration for this project came from an observation in zebrafish. These creatures have the remarkable ability to restore vision after severe eye injuries. It turns out that, in response to injury, a type of cell in the eye called Muller glia – which helps maintain the structure and function of the zebrafish retina – transforms into rod photoreceptors, which allow vision in low light.

Now, Muller glia are found in humans and mice too, so the research team sought to harness this shape-shifting, sight-restoring ability of the Muller glia but in the absence of injury. They first injected a gene into the eyes of mice born blind that stimulated the glia cells to divide and grow. Then, to mimic the reprogramming process seen in zebrafish, specific factors were injected to cause the glia to change identity into photoreceptors.

The researchers showed that the glia-derived photoreceptors functioned just like those observed in normal mice and made the right connections with nerve cells responsible for sending visual information to the brain. The team’s next steps are to not only show the cells are functioning properly in the eye and brain but to also do behavioral studies to confirm that the mice can do tasks that require vision.

If these studies pan out, it could lead to a new therapeutic strategy for blinding diseases like retinitis pigmentosa and macular degeneration. Rather than transplanting replacement cells, this treatment approach would spur our own eyes to repair themselves. In the meantime, CIRM-funded researchers have studies currently in clinical trials testing stem cell-based treatments for retinitis pigmentosa and macular degeneration.

A tale of two tails: one regenerates, the other, not quite so much (Kevin McCormack) One of the wonders of nature, well two if you want to be specific, is how both salamanders and lizards are able to regrow their tails if they lose them. But there is a difference. While salamanders can regrow a tail that is almost identical to the original, lizard’s replacements are rather less impressive. Now researchers have found out why.

081518_LR_regeneration_inline_730

In these fluorescence microscopy images, cross sections of original lizard and salamander tails (left) show cartilage (green) and nerve cells (red). In the regenerated tails (right), the lizard’s is made up mostly of cartilage, while the salamander also has developed new nerve cells. Image: Thomas Lozito

The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows how a lizard’s new tail doesn’t have bone but instead has cartilage, and also lacks nerve cells. The key apparently is the stem cells both use to regenerate the tail. Salamanders use neural stem cells from their spinal cord and turn them into other types of nervous system cell, such as neurons. Lizards neural stem cells are not able to do this.

The researchers, from the University of Pittsburgh, tested their findings by placing neural stem cells from the axolotl salamander into tail stumps from geckos. They noted that, as those tails regrew, some of those transplanted cells turned into neurons.

In an interview in Science News, study co-author Thomas Lozito says the team hope to take those findings and, using the CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing tool, see if they can regenerate body parts in other animals:

 “My goal is to make the first mouse that can regenerate its tail. We’re kind of using lizards as a stepping-stone.”

Stem Cell Patch Restores Vision in Patients with Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Stem cell-derived retinal pigmented epithelial cells. Cell borders are green and nuclei are red. (Photo Credit: Dennis Clegg, UCSB Center for Stem Cell Biology and Engineering)

Two UK patients suffering from vision loss caused by age-related macular degeneration (AMD) have regained their sight thanks to a stem cell-based retinal patch developed by researchers from UC Santa Barbara (UCSB). The preliminary results of this promising Phase 1 clinical study were published yesterday in the journal Nature Biotechnology.

AMD is one of the leading causes of blindness and affects over six million people around the world. The disease causes the blurring or complete loss of central vision because of damage to an area of the retina called the macula. There are different stages (early, intermediate, late) and forms of AMD (wet and dry). The most common form is dry AMD which occurs in 90% of patients and is characterized by a slow progression of the disease.

Patching Up Vision Loss

In the current study, UCSB researchers engineered a retinal patch from human embryonic stem cells. These stem cells were matured into a layer of cells at the back of the eye, called the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), that are damaged in AMD patients. The RPE layer was placed on a synthetic patch that is implanted under the patient’s retina to replace the damaged cells and hopefully improve the patient’s vision.

The stem cell-based eyepatches are being implanted in patients with severe vision loss caused by the wet form of AMD in a Phase 1 clinical trial at the Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in London, England. The trial was initiated by the London Project to Cure Blindness, which was born from a collaboration between UCSB Professor Peter Coffey and Moorsfields retinal surgeon Lyndon da Cruz. Coffey is a CIRM grantee and credited a CIRM Research Leadership award as one of the grants that supported this current study.

The trial treated a total of 10 patients with the engineered patches and reported 12-month data for two of these patients (a woman in her 60s and a man in his 80s) in the Nature Biotech study. All patients were given local immunosuppression to prevent the rejection of the implanted retinal patches. The study reported “three serious adverse events” that required patients to be readmitted to the hospital, but all were successfully treated. 12-months after treatment, the two patients experienced a significant improvement in their vision and went from not being able to read at all to reading 60-80 words per minute using normal reading glasses.

Successfully Restoring Sight

Douglas Waters, the male patient reported on, was diagnosed with wet AMD in July 2015 and received the treatment in his right eye a few months later. He spoke about the remarkable improvement in his vision following the trial in a news release:

“In the months before the operation my sight was really poor, and I couldn’t see anything out of my right eye. I was struggling to see things clearly, even when up-close. After the surgery my eyesight improved to the point where I can now read the newspaper and help my wife out with the gardening. It’s brilliant what the team have done, and I feel so lucky to have been given my sight back.”

This treatment is “the first description of a complete engineered tissue that has been successfully used in this way.” It’s exciting not only that both patients had a dramatic improvement in their vision, but also that the engineered patches were successful at treating an advanced stage of AMD.

The team will continue to monitor the patients in this trial for the next five years to make sure that the treatment is safe and doesn’t cause tumors or other adverse effects. Peter Coffey highlighted the significance of this study and what it means for patients suffering from AMD in a UCSB news release:

Peter Coffey

“This study represents real progress in regenerative medicine and opens the door to new treatment options for people with age-related macular degeneration. We hope this will lead to an affordable ‘off-the-shelf’ therapy that could be made available to NHS patients within the next five years.”

CIRM-Funded Clinical Trials Targeting Brain and Eye Disorders

This blog is part of our Month of CIRM series, which features our Agency’s progress towards achieving our mission to accelerate stem cell treatments to patients with unmet medical needs.

 This week, we’re highlighting CIRM-funded clinical trials to address the growing interest in our rapidly expanding clinical portfolio. Our Agency has funded a total of 40 trials since its inception. 23 of these trials were funded after the launch of our Strategic Plan in 2016, bringing us close to the half way point of our goal to fund 50 new clinical trials by 2020.

Today we are featuring CIRM-funded trials in our neurological and eye disorders portfolio.  CIRM has funded a total of nine trials targeting these disease areas, and seven of these trials are currently active. Check out the infographic below for a list of our currently active trials.

For more details about all CIRM-funded clinical trials, visit our clinical trials page and read our clinical trials brochure which provides brief overviews of each trial.

jCyte gets FDA go-ahead for Fast Track review process of Retinitis Pigmentosa stem cell therapy

21 century cures

When the US Congress approved, and President Obama signed into law, the 21st Century Cures Act last year there was guarded optimism that this would help create a more efficient and streamlined, but no less safe, approval process for the most promising stem cell therapies.

Even so many people took a wait and see approach, wanting a sign that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would follow the recommendations of the Act rather than just pay lip service to it.

This week we saw encouraging signs that the FDA is serious when it granted Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) status to the CIRM-funded jCyte clinical trial for a rare form of blindness. This is a big deal because RMAT seeks to accelerate approval for stem cell therapies that demonstrate they can help patients with unmet medical needs.

klassen

jCyte co-founder Dr. Henry Klassen

jCyte’s work is targeting retinitis pigmentosa (RP), a genetic disease that slowly destroys the cells in the retina, the part of the eye that converts light into electrical signals which the brain then interprets as vision. At first people with RP lose their night and peripheral vision, then the cells that help us see faces and distinguish colors are damaged. RP usually strikes people in their teens and, by the time they are 40, many people are legally blind.

jCyte’s jCell therapy uses what are called retinal progenitor cells, injected into the eye, which then release protective factors to help repair and rescue diseased retinal cells. The hope is this will stop the disease’s progression and even restore some vision to people with RP.

Dr. Henry Klassen, jCyte’s co-founder and a professor at UC Irvine, was understandably delighted by the designation. In a news release, he said:

“This is uplifting news for patients with RP. At this point, there are no therapies that can help them avoid blindness. We look forward to working with the FDA to speed up the clinical development of jCell.”

FDA

On the FDA’s blog – yes they do have one – it says researchers:

“May obtain the RMAT designation for their drug product if the drug is intended to treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions and if there is preliminary clinical evidence indicating that the drug has the potential to address unmet medical needs for that disease or condition. Sponsors of RMAT-designated products are eligible for increased and earlier interactions with the FDA, similar to those interactions available to sponsors of breakthrough-designated therapies. In addition, they may be eligible for priority review and accelerated approval.”

Paul Bresge

jCyte CEO Paul Bresge

jCyte is one of the first to get this designation, a clear testimony to the quality of the work done by Dr. Klassen and his team. jCyte CEO Paul Bresge says it may help speed up their ability to get this treatment to patients.

 

“We are gratified by the FDA’s interest in the therapeutic potential of jCell and greatly appreciate their decision to provide extra support. We are seeing a lot of momentum with this therapy. Because it is well-tolerated and easy to administer, progress has been rapid. I feel a growing sense of excitement among patients and clinicians. We look forward to getting this critical therapy over the finish line as quickly as possible.”

Regular readers of this blog will already be familiar with the story of Rosie Barrero, one of the first group of people with RP who got the jCell therapy. Rosie says it has helped restore some vision to the point where she is now able to read notes she wrote ten years ago, distinguish colors and, best of all, see the faces of her children.

RMAT is no guarantee the therapy will be successful. But if the treatment continues to show promise, and is safe, it could mean faster access to a potentially life-changing therapy, one that could ultimately rescue many people from a lifetime of living in the dark.

 

 

A stem cell clinical trial for blindness: watch Rosie’s story

Everything we do at CIRM is laser-focused on our mission: to accelerate stem cell treatments for patients with unmet medical needs. So, you might imagine what a thrill it is to meet the people who could be helped by the stem cell research we fund. People like Rosie Barrero who suffers from Retinitis Pigmentosa (RP), an inherited, incurable form of blindness, which she describes as “an impressionist painting in a foggy room”.

The CIRM team first met Rosie Barrero back in 2012 at one of our governing Board meetings. She and her husband, German, attended the meeting to advocate for a research grant application submitted by UC Irvine’s Henry Klassen. The research project aimed to bring a stem cell-based therapy for RP to clinical trials. The Board approved the project giving a glimmer of hope to Rosie and many others stricken with RP.

Now, that hope has become a reality in the form of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved clinical trial which Rosie participated in last year. Sponsored by jCyte, a company Klassen founded, the CIRM-funded trial is testing the safety and effectiveness of a non-surgical treatment for RP that involves injecting stem cells into the eye to help save or even restore the light-sensing cells in the back of the eye. The small trial has shown no negative side effects and a larger, follow-up trial, also funded by CIRM, is now recruiting patients.

Almost five years after her first visit, Rosie returned to the governing Board in February and sprinkled in some of her witty humor to describe her preliminary yet encouraging results.

“It has made a difference. I’m still afraid of public speaking but early on [before the clinical trial] it was much easier because I couldn’t see any of you. But, hello everybody! I can see you guys. I can see this room. I can see a lot of things.”

After the meeting, she sat down for an interview with the Stem Cellar team to talk about her RP story and her experience as a clinical trial participant. The three-minute video above is based on that interview. Watch it and be inspired!

Stories that caught our eye: new target for killing leukemia cancer stem cells and stem cell vesicles halt glaucoma

New stem cell target for acute myeloid leukemia (Karen Ring).  A new treatment for acute myeloid leukemia, a type of blood cancer that turns bone marrow stem cells cancerous, could be in the works in the form of a cancer stem cell destroying antibody.

13192

Acute Myeloid Leukemia (Credit: Medscape)

Scientists from the NYU Langone Medical Center and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center identified a protein called CD99 that appears more abundantly on the surface of abnormal blood cancer stem cells compared to healthy blood stem cells. They developed an antibody that specifically recognizes and kills the CD99 wielding cancer stem cells while leaving the healthy blood stem cells unharmed.

The CD99 antibody was effective at killing human AML stem cells in a dish and in mice that were transplanted with the same type of cancer stem cells. Further studies revealed that the CD99 antibody when attached to the surface of cancer stem cells, sets off a cascade of enzyme activity that causes these cells to die. These findings suggest that cancer stem cells express more CD99 as a protective mechanism against cell death.

In an interview with Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, Chris Park, senior author on the Science Translational Medicine study, explained the importance of their work:

“Our findings not only identify a new molecule expressed on stem cells that drive these human malignancies, but we also show that antibodies against this target can directly kill human AML stem cells. While we still have important details to work out, CD99 is likely to be an exploitable therapeutic target for most AML and MDS patients, and we are working urgently to finalize a therapy for human testing.”

While this work is still in the early stages, Dr. Park stressed that his team is actively working to translate their CD99 antibody therapy into clinical trials.

“With the appropriate support, we believe we can rapidly determine the best antibodies for use in patients, produce them at the quality needed to verify our results, and apply for permission to begin clinical trials.”

 

Peculiar stem cell function may help treat blindness (Todd Dubnicoff). Scientists at the National Eye Institute (NEI) have uncovered a novel function that stem cells use to carry out their healing powers and it may lead to therapies for glaucoma, the leading cause of blindness in United States. Reporting this week in Stem Cells Translational Medicine, the researchers show that stem cells send out regenerative signals by shedding tiny vesicles called exosomes. Once thought to be merely a garbage disposal system, exosomes are now recognized as an important means of communication between cells. As they bud off from the cells, the exosomes carry proteins and genetic material that can be absorbed by other cells.

Microscopy image shows exosomes (green) surrounding retinal ganglion cells (orange and yellow). Credit: Ben Mead

Microscopy image shows exosomes (green) surrounding retinal ganglion cells (orange and yellow). Credit: Ben Mead

The researchers at NEI isolated exosomes from bone marrow stem cells and injected them into the eyes of rats with glaucoma symptoms. Without treatment, these animals lose about 90 percent of their retinal ganglion cells, the cells responsible for forming the optic nerve and for sending visual information to the brain. With the exosome treatment, the rats only lost a third of the retinal ganglion cells. The team determined that microRNAs – small genetic molecules that can inhibit gene activity – inside the exosome were responsible for the effect.

Exosomes have some big advantages over stem cells when comes to developing and manufacturing therapies which lead author Ben Mead explains in a press release picked up by Eureka Alert:

“Exosomes can be purified, stored and precisely dosed in ways that stem cells cannot.”

We’ll definitely keep our eyes on this development. If these glaucoma studies continue to look promising it stands to reason that there would be exosome applications in many other diseases.

Cured by Stem Cells

cirm-2016-annual-report-web-12

To get anywhere you need a good map, and you need to check it constantly to make sure you are still on the right path and haven’t strayed off course. A year ago the CIRM Board gave us a map, a Strategic Plan, that laid out our course for the next five years. Our Annual Report for 2016, now online, is our way of checking that we are still on the right path.

I think, without wishing to boast, that it’s safe to say not only are we on target, but we might even be a little bit ahead of schedule.

The Annual Report is chock full of facts and figures but at the heart of it are the stories of the people who are the focus of all that we do, the patients. We profile six patients and one patient advocate, each of whom has an extraordinary story to tell, and each of whom exemplifies the importance of the work we support.

brenden_stories_of_hope

Brenden Whittaker: Cured

Two stand out for one simple reason, they were both cured of life-threatening conditions. Now, cured is not a word we use lightly. The stem cell field has been rife with hyperbole over the years so we are always very cautious in the way we talk about the impact of treatments. But in these two cases there is no need to hold back: Evangelina Padilla Vaccaro and Brenden Whittaker have been cured.

evangelina

Evangelina: Cured

 

In the coming weeks we’ll feature our conversations with all those profiled in the Annual Report, giving you a better idea of the impact the stem cell treatments have had on their lives and the lives of their family. But today we just wanted to give a broad overview of the Annual Report.

The Strategic Plan was very specific in the goals it laid out for us. As an agency we had six big goals, but each Team within the agency, and each individual within those teams had their own goals. They were our own mini-maps if you like, to help us keep track of where we were individually, knowing that every time an individual met a goal they helped the Team get closer to meeting its goals.

As you read through the report you’ll see we did a pretty good job of meeting our targets. In fact, we missed only one and we’re hoping to make up for that early in 2017.

But good as 2016 was, we know that to truly fulfill our mission of accelerating treatments to patients with unmet medical needs we are going to have do equally well, if not even better, in 2017.

That work starts today.

 

Stem cell stories that caught our eye: potential glaucoma therapy, Parkinson’s model, clinical trial list, cancer immune therapy

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.

Stem cells may be option in glaucoma.  A few (potentially) blind mice did not run fast enough in an Iowa lab. But lucky for them they did not run into a farmer’s wife wielding a knife. Instead they had their eye sight saved by a team at the University of Iowa that corrected the plumbing in the back of their eyes with stem cells. They had a rodent version of glaucoma, which allows fluid to build up in the eye causing pressure that eventually damages the optic nerve and leads to blindness.

The fluid buildup results from a breakdown of the trabecular meshwork, a patch of cells that drains fluid from the eye. The Iowa researchers repaired that highly valuable patch with cells grown from iPS type stem cells created by reprogramming adult cells into an embryonic-like state. The trick with any early stage stem cell is getting it to mature into the desired tissue. This team pulled that off by growing the cells in a culture dish that had previously housed trabecular meshwork cells, which must have left behind some chemical signals that directed the growth of the stem cells.

The cells restored proper drainage in the mice. Also notable, the cells not only acted to replace damaged tissue directly, but they also seem to have summoned the eye’s own healing powers to do more repair. The research team also worked at the university affiliated Veterans Affairs Hospital, and the VA system issued a press release on the work published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences, which was posted by Science Codex.

A “mini-brain” from a key area.   The brain is far from a uniform organ. Its many distinct divisions have very different functions. A few research teams have succeeded in coaxing stem cells into forming multi-layered clumps of cells referred to as “brain organoids” that mimic some brain activity, but those have generally been parts of the brain near the surface responsible for speech, learning and memory. Now a team in Singapore has created an organoid that shows activity of the mid-brain, that deep central highway for signals key to vision, hearing and movement.

The midbrain houses the dopamine nerves damaged or lost in Parkinson’s disease, so the mini-brains in lab dishes become immediate candidates for studying potential therapies and they are likely to provide more accurate results than current animal models.

 “Considering one of the biggest challenges we face in PD research is the lack of accessibility to the human brains, we have achieved a significant step forward. The midbrain organoids display great potential in replacing animals’ brains which are currently used in research,” said Ng Huck Hui of A*Star’s Genome Institute of Singapore where the research was conducted in a press release posted by Nanowerk.

The website Mashable had a reporter at the press conference in Singapore when the institute announce the publication of the research in Cell Stem Cell. They have some nice photos of the organoids as well as a microscopic image showing the cells containing a black pigment typical of midbrain cells, one of the bits of proof the team needed to show they created what they wanted.

 

Stem cell clinical trials listings.  Not a day goes by that I, or one of my colleagues, do not refer a desperate patient or family member—often several per day—to the web site clinicaltrials.gov. We do it with a bit of unease and usually some caveats but it is the only resource out there providing any kind of searchable listing of clinical trials. Not everything listed at this site maintained by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a great clinical trial. NIH maintains the site, and sets certain baseline criteria to be listed, but the agency does not vet postings.

Over the past year a new controversy has cropped up at the site. A number of for profit clinics have registered trials that require patients to pay many thousands of dollars for the experimental stem cell procedure.  Generally, in clinical trials, participation is free for patients. Kaiser Health News, an independent news wire supported by the Kaiser Family Foundation distributed a story this week on the phenomenon that was picked up by a few outlets including the Washington Post. But the version with the best links to added information ran in Stat, an online health industry portal developed by The Boston Globe, which has become one of my favorite morning reads.

The story leads with an anecdote about Linda Smith who went to the trials site to look for stem cell therapies for her arthritic knees. She found a listing from StemGenex and called the listed contact only to find out she would first have to pay $14,000 for the experimental treatment. The company told the author that they are not charging for participation in the posted clinical trial because it only covers the observation phase after the therapy, not the procedure itself. The reporter found multiple critics who suggested the company was splitting hairs a bit too finely with that explanation.

But the NIH came in for just as much criticism for allowing those trials to be listed at all. The web site already requires organizations listing trials to disclose information about the committees that oversee the safety of the patients in the trial, and critics said they should also demand disclosure of payment requirements, or outright ban such trials from the site.

Paul-Knoepfler-2013 “The average patient and even people in health care … kind of let their guard down when they’re in that database. It’s like, ‘If a trial is listed here, it must be OK,’” said Paul Knoepfler, a CIRM grantee and fellow blogger at the University of California, Davis. “Most people don’t realize that creeping into that database are some trials whose main goal is to generate profit.”

The NIH representative quoted in the article made it sound like the agency was open to making some changes. But no promises were made.

Added note 7/30. While this post factually describes an article that appeared in the mainstream media, the role of this column, I should add that while I did not take a position on paid trials, I am thrilled Stemgenex is collecting data and look forward to them sharing that data in a timely, peer-reviewed fashion.

Off the shelf T cells.  We at CIRM got some good news this week. We always like it when we see an announcement that technology from a researcher we have supported gets licensed to a company. That commercialization moves it a giant step closer to helping patients.

This week, Kite Pharma licensed a system developed in the lab of Gay Crooks at the University of California, Los Angeles, that creates an artificial thymus “organoid” in a dish capable of mass producing the immune system’s T cells from pluripotent stem cells. Just growing stem cells in the lab yields tiny amounts of T cells. They naturally mature in our bodies in the thymus gland, and seem to need that nurturing to thrive.

T-cell based immune therapy is all the rage now in cancer therapy because early trials are producing some pretty amazing results, and Kite is a leader in the field. But up until now those therapies have all been autologous—they used the patient’s own cells and manipulate them individually in the lab. That makes for a very expensive therapy. Kite sees the Crooks technology as a way to turn the procedure into an allogeneic one—using donor cells that could be pre-made for an “off-the-shelf” therapy. Their press release also envisioned adding some genetic manipulation to make the cells less likely to cause immune complications.

FierceBiotech published a bit more analysis of the deal, but we are not going to go into more detail on the actual science now. Crooks is finalizing publication of the work in a scientific journal, and when she does you can get the details here. Stay tuned.