Stem cell stories that caught our eye: lab-grown blood stem cells and puffer fish have the same teeth stem cells as humans

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.

Scientists finally grow blood stem cells in the lab!

Two exciting stem cell studies broke through the politics-dominated headlines this week. Both studies, published in the journal Nature, demonstrated that human hematopoietic or blood stem cells can be grown in the lab.

This news is a big deal because scientists have yet to make bonafide blood stem cells from pluripotent stem cells or other human cells. These stem cells not only create all the cells in our blood and immune systems, but also can be used to develop therapies for patients with blood cancers and genetic blood disorders.

But to do these experiments, you need a substantial source of blood stem cells – something that has eluded scientists for decades. That’s where these two studies come to the rescue. One study was spearheaded by George Daley at the Boston Children’s Hospital in Massachusetts and the other was led by Shahin Rafii at the Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City.

Researchers have made blood stem cells and progenitor cells from pluripotent stem cells. Credit: Steve Gschmeissner Getty Images

George Daley and his team developed a strategy that matured human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells) into blood-forming stem and progenitor cells. It’s a two-step process that first uses a cocktail of chemicals to make hemogenic endothelium, the embryonic tissue that generates blood stem cells. The second step involved treating these intermediate cells with a combination of seven transcription factors that directed them towards a blood stem cell fate.

These modified human blood stem cells were then transplanted into mice where they developed into blood stem cells that produced blood and immune cells. First author on the study, Ryohichi Sugimura, explained the applications that their technology could be used for in a Boston Children’s Hospital news release,

“This step opens up an opportunity to take cells from patients with genetic blood disorders, use gene editing to correct their genetic defect and make functional blood cells. This also gives us the potential to have a limitless supply of blood stem cells and blood by taking cells from universal donors. This could potentially augment the blood supply for patients who need transfusions.”

The second study by Shahin Rafii and his team at Cornell used a different strategy to generate blood-forming stem cells. Instead of genetically manipulating iPS cells, they selected a more mature cell type to directly reprogram into blood stem cells. Using four transcription factors, they successfully reprogrammed mouse endothelial cells, which line the insides of blood vessels, into blood-forming stem cells that repopulated the blood and immune systems of irradiated mice.

Raffii believe his method is simpler and more efficient than Daley’s. In coverage by Nature News, he commented,

“Using the most efficient method to generate stem cells matters because every time a gene is added to a batch of cells, a large portion of the batch fails to incorporate it and must be thrown out. There is also a risk that some cells will mutate after they are modified in the lab, and could form tumors if they are implanted into people.”

To play devil’s advocate, Daley’s technique might appeal more to some because the starting source of iPS cells is much easier to obtain and culture in the lab than endothelial cells that have to be extracted from the blood vessels of animals or people. Furthermore, Daley argued that his team’s method could “be made more efficient, and [is] less likely to spur tumor growth and other abnormalities in modified cells.”

The Nature News article compares the achievements of both studies and concluded,

“Time will determine which approach succeeds. But the latest advances have buoyed the spirits of researchers who have been frustrated by their inability to generate blood stem cells from iPS cells.”

 

Humans and puffer fish have the same tooth-making stem cells.

Here’s a fun fact for your next blind date: humans and puffer fish share the same genes that are responsible for making teeth. Scientists from the University of Sheffield in England discovered that the stem cells that make teeth in puffer fish are the same stem cells that make the pearly whites in humans. Their work was published in the journal PNAS earlier this week.

Puffer fish. Photo by pingpogz on Flickr.

But if you look at this puffer fish, you’ll see a dramatic difference between its smile and ours – their teeth look more like a beak. Research has shown that the tooth-forming stem cells in puffer fish produce tooth plates that form a beak-like structure, which helps them crush and consume their prey.

So why is this shared evolution between humans and puffer fish important when our teeth look and function so differently? The scientists behind this research believe that studying the pufferfish could unearth answers about tooth loss in humans. The lead author on the study, Dr. Gareth Fraser, concluded in coverage by Phys.org,

“Our study questioned how pufferfish make a beak and now we’ve discovered the stem cells responsible and the genes that govern this process of continuous regeneration. These are also involved in general vertebrate tooth regeneration, including in humans. The fact that all vertebrates regenerate their teeth in the same way with a set of conserved stem cells means that we can use these studies in more obscure fishes to provide clues to how we can address questions of tooth loss in humans.”

Stem cell-derived blood-brain barrier gives more complete picture of Huntington’s disease

Like a sophisticated security fence, our bodies have evolved a barrier that protects the brain from potentially harmful substances in the blood but still allows the entry of essential molecules like blood sugar and oxygen. Just like in other parts of the body, the blood vessels and capillaries in the brain are lined with endothelial cells. But in the brain, these cells form extremely tight connections with each other making it nearly impossible for most things to passively squeeze through the blood vessel wall and into the brain fluid.

BloodBrainBarrier

Compared to blood vessels in other parts of the body, brain blood vessels form a much tighter seal to protect the brain.
Image source: Dana and Chris Reeve Foundation

Recent studies have shown defects in the brain-blood barrier are associated with neurodegenerative disorders like Huntington’s disease and as a result becomes leakier. Although the debilitating symptoms of Huntington’s disease – which include involuntary movements, severe mood swings and difficulty swallowing – are primarily due to the gradual death of specific nerve cells, this breakdown in the blood-brain barrier most likely contributes to the deterioration of the Huntington’s brain.

What hasn’t been clear is if mutations in Huntingtin, the gene that is linked to Huntington’s disease, directly impact the specialized endothelial cells within the blood-brain barrier or if these specialized cells are just innocent bystanders of the destruction that occurs as Huntington’s progresses. It’s an important question to answer. If the mutations in Huntingtin directly affect the blood-brain barrier then it could provide a bigger picture of how this incurable, fatal disease works. More importantly, it may provide new avenues for therapy development.

A UC Irvine research team got to the bottom of this question with the help of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) derived from the skin cells of individuals with Huntington’s disease. Their CIRM-funded study was published this week in Cell Reports.

In a first for a neurodegenerative disease, the researchers coaxed the Huntington’s disease iPSCs in a lab dish to become brain microvascular endothelial cells (BMECs), the specialized cells responsible for forming the blood-brain barrier. The researchers found that the Huntington’s BMECs themselves were indeed dysfunctional. Compared to BMECs derived from unaffected individuals, the Huntington’s BMECs weren’t as good at making new blood vessels, and the vessels they did make were leakier. So the Huntingtin mutation in these BMECs appears to be directly responsible for the faulty blood-brain barrier.

The team dug deeper into this new insight by looking for possible differences in gene activity between the healthy and Huntington’s BMECs. They found that the Wnt group of genes, which plays an important role in the development of the blood-brain barrier, are over active in the Huntington’s BMECs. This altered Wnt activity can explain the leaky defects. In fact, the use of a drug inhibitor of Wnt fixed the defects. Dr. Leslie Thompson, the team lead, described the significance of this finding in a press release:

“Now we know there are internal problems with blood vessels in the brain. This discovery can be used for possible future treatments to seal the leaky blood vessels themselves and to evaluate drug delivery to patients with HD.”

151117_lesliethompson_05_sz-1080x720

Study leader, Leslie Thompson. Steve Zylius / UCI

A companion Cell Stem Cell report, also published this week, used the same iPSC-derived blood-brain barrier system. In that study, researchers at Cedars-Sinai pinpointed BMEC defects as the underlying cause of Allan-Herndon-Dudley syndrome, another neurologic condition that causes mental deficits and movement problems. Together these results really drive home the importance of studying the blood-brain barrier function in neurodegenerative disease.

Dr. Ryan Lim, the first author on the UC Irvine study, also points to a larger perspective on the implications of this work:

“These studies together demonstrate the incredible power of iPSCs to help us more fully understand human disease and identify the underlying causes of cellular processes that are altered.”

Bridging the Gap: Regenerating Injured Bones with Stem Cells and Gene Therapy

Scientists from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center have developed a new stem cell-based technology in animals that mends broken bones that can’t regenerate on their own. Their research was published today in the journal Science Translational Medicine and was funded in part by a CIRM Early Translational Award.

Over two million bone grafts are conducted every year to treat bone fractures caused by accidents, trauma, cancer and disease. In cases where the fractures are small, bone can repair itself and heal the injury. In other cases, the fractures are too wide and grafts are required to replace the missing bone.

It sounds simple, but the bone grafting procedure is far from it and can cause serious problems including graft failure and infection. People that opt to use their own bone (usually from their pelvis) to repair a bone injury can experience intense pain, prolonged recovery time and are at risk for nerve injury and bone instability.

The Cedars-Sinai team is attempting to “bridge the gap” for people with severe bone injuries with an alternative technology that could replace the need for bone grafts. Their strategy combines “an engineering approach with a biological approach to advance regenerative engineering” explained co-senior author Dr. Dan Gazit in a news release.

Gazit’s team developed a biological scaffold composed of a protein called collagen, which is a major component of bone. They implanted these scaffolds into pigs with fractured leg bones by inserting the collagen into the gap created by the bone fracture. Over a two-week period, mesenchymal stem cells from the animal were recruited into the collagen scaffolds.

To ensure that these stem cells generated new bone, the team used a combination of ultrasound and gene therapy to stimulate the stem cells in the collagen scaffolds to repair the bone fractures. Ultrasound pulses, or high frequency sound waves undetectable by the human ear, temporarily created small holes in the cell membranes allowing the delivery of the gene therapy-containing microbubbles into the stem cells.

Image courtesy of Gazit Group/Cedars-Sinai.

Animals that received the collagen transplant and ultrasound gene therapy repaired their fractured leg bones within two months. The strength of the newly regenerated bone was comparable to successfully transplanted bone grafts.

Dr. Gadi Pelled, the other senior author on this study, explained the significance of their research findings for treating bone injuries in humans,

“This study is the first to demonstrate that ultrasound-mediated gene delivery to an animal’s own stem cells can effectively be used to treat non-healing bone fractures. It addresses a major orthopedic unmet need and offers new possibilities for clinical translation.”

You can learn more about this study by watching this research video provided by the Gazit Group at Cedars-Sinai.


Related Links:

UCSD scientists devise tiny sensors that detect forces at cellular level

A big focus of stem cell research is trying to figure how to make a stem cell specialize, or differentiate, into a desired cell type like muscle, liver or bone. When we write about these efforts in the Stem Cellar, it’s usually in terms of researchers identifying proteins that bind to a stem cell’s surface and trigger changes in gene activity inside the cell that ultimately leads to a specific cell fate.

But, that’s not the only game in town. As incredible as it sounds, affecting a cell’s shape through mechanical forces also plays a profound role in gene activity and determining a cell’s fate. In one study, mesenchymal stem cells would specialize into fat cells or bone-forming cells depending on how much the MSCs were stretched out on a petri dish.

An artist’s illustration of nano optical fibers detecting the minuscule forces produced by swimming bacteria. Credit: Rhett S. Miller/UC Regents

Since we’re talking about individual cells, the strength of these mechanical forces is tiny, making measurements nearly impossible. But now, a research team at UC San Diego has engineered a device 100 times thinner than a human hair that can detect these miniscule forces. The study, funded in part by CIRM, was reported yesterday in Nature Photonics.

The device is made of a very thin optical fiber that’s coated with a resin which contains gold particles. The fiber is placed directly into the liquid that cells are grown in and then hit with a beam of light. The light is scattered by the gold particles and measured with a conventional light microscope. Forces and even sound waves caused by cells in the petri dish change the intensity of the light scattering which is detected by the microscope.

Donald Sirbuly,
team lead

In this study, the researchers measured astonishingly small forces (0.0000000000001 pound of force, to be exact!) in a culture of gut bacteria which swim around in the solution with the help of their whip-like flagella. The team also detected the sound of beating heart muscle cells at a level that’s a thousand times below the range of human hearing.

Dr. Donald Sirbuly, the team lead and a professor at UCSD’s Jacobs School of Engineering is excited about the research possibilities with this device:

“This work could open up new doors to track small interactions and changes that couldn’t be tracked before,” he said in a press release.

Bradley Fikes, the biotechnology reporter for the San Diego Union Tribune, reached out to others in the field to get their take on potential applications of this nanofiber device. Dr. John Marohn at Columbia University told Fikes in a news article (subscription is needed to access) that it could help stem cell scientists’ fully understand all of the intricacies of cell fate:

“So one of the cues that cells get, and they listen to these cues to decide how to change how to evolve, are just outside forces. This would give a way to kind of feel the outside forces that the cells feel, in a noninvasive way.”

And Eli Rothenberg at NYU School of Medicine, also not part of the study, summed up the device’s novelty, power and ease of use in an interview with Fikes:

“One of the main challenges in measuring things in biology is forces. We have no idea what’s going on in terms of forces in cells, in term of motion of molecules, the forces they interact with. But these sensors, you can put anywhere. They’re tiny, you can place them on the cells. If a cancer cell’s surface is moving, you can measure the forces…The fabrication of this device is quite straightforward. So, the simplicity of having this device and what you can measure with it, that’s kind of striking.”

 

 

Positively good news from Asterias for CIRM-funded stem cell clinical trial for spinal cord injury

AsteriasWhenever I give a talk on stem cells one of the questions I invariably get asked is “how do you know the cells are going where you want them to and doing what you want them to?”

The answer is pretty simple: you look. That’s what Asterias Biotherapeutics did in their clinical trial to treat people with spinal cord injuries. They used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to see what was happening at the injury site; and what they saw was very encouraging.

Asterias is transplanting what they call AST-OPC1 cells into patients who have suffered recent injuries that have left them paralyzed from the neck down.  AST-OPC1 are oligodendrocyte progenitor cells, which develop into cells that support and protect nerve cells in the central nervous system, the area damaged in spinal cord injury. It’s hoped the treatment will restore connections at the injury site, allowing patients to regain some movement and feeling.

Taking a closer look

Early results suggest the therapy is doing just that, and now follow-up studies, using MRIs, are adding weight to those findings.

The MRIs – taken six months after treatment – show that the five patients given a dose of 10 million AST-OPC1 cells had no evidence of lesion cavities in their spines. That’s important because often, after a spinal cord injury, the injury site expands and forms a cavity, caused by the death of nerve and support cells in the spine, that results in permanent loss of movement and function below the site, and additional neurological damage to the patient.

Another group of patients, treated in an earlier phase of the clinical trial, showed no signs of lesion cavities 12 months after their treatment.

Positively encouraging

In a news release, Dr. Edward Wirth, the Chief Medical Officer at Asterias, says this is very positive:

“These new follow-up results based on MRI scans are very encouraging, and strongly suggest that AST-OPC1 cells have engrafted in these patients post-implantation and have the potential to prevent lesion cavity formation, possibly reducing long-term spinal cord tissue deterioration after spinal cord injury.”

Because the safety data is also encouraging Asterias is now doubling the dose of cells that will be transplanted into patients to 20 million, in a separate arm of the trial. They are hopeful this dose will be even more effective in helping restore movement and function in patients.

We can’t wait to see what they find.

Stem cell stories that caught our eye: update on Capricor’s heart attack trial; lithium on the brain; and how stem cells do math

Capricor ALLSTARToday our partners Capricor Therapeutics announced that its stem cell therapy for patients who have experienced a large heart attack is unlikely to meet one of its key goals, namely reducing the scar size in the heart 12 months after treatment.

The news came after analyzing results from patients at the halfway point of the trial, six months after their treatment in the Phase 2 ALLSTAR clinical trial which CIRM was funding. They found that there was no significant difference in the reduction in scarring on the heart for patients treated with donor heart-derived stem cells, compared to patients given a placebo.

Obviously this is disappointing news for everyone involved, but we know that not all clinical trials are going to be successful. CIRM supported this research because it clearly addressed an unmet medical need and because an earlier Phase 1 study had showed promise in helping prevent decline in heart function after a heart attack.

Yet even with this failure to repeat that promise in this trial,  we learned valuable lessons.

In a news release, Dr. Tim Henry, Director of the Division of Interventional Technologies in the Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and a Co-Principal Investigator on the trial said:

“We are encouraged to see reductions in left ventricular volume measures in the CAP-1002 treated patients, an important indicator of reverse remodeling of the heart. These findings support the biological activity of CAP-1002.”

Capricor still has a clinical trial using CAP-1002 to treat boys and young men developing heart failure due to Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD).

Lithium gives up its mood stabilizing secrets

As far back as the late 1800s, doctors have recognized that lithium can help people with mood disorders. For decades, this inexpensive drug has been an effective first line of treatment for bipolar disorder, a condition that causes extreme mood swings. And yet, scientists have never had a good handle on how it works. That is, until this week.

evan snyder

Evan Snyder

Reporting in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a research team at Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute have identified the molecular basis of the lithium’s benefit to bipolar patients.  Team lead Dr. Evan Snyder explained in a press release why his group’s discovery is so important for patients:

“Lithium has been used to treat bipolar disorder for generations, but up until now our lack of knowledge about why the therapy does or does not work for a particular patient led to unnecessary dosing and delayed finding an effective treatment. Further, its side effects are intolerable for many patients, limiting its use and creating an urgent need for more targeted drugs with minimal risks.”

The study, funded in part by CIRM, attempted to understand lithium’s beneficial effects by comparing cells from patient who respond to those who don’t (only about a third of patients are responders). Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) were generated from both groups of patients and then the cells were specialized into nerve cells that play a role in bipolar disorder. The team took an unbiased approach by looking for differences in proteins between the two sets of cells.

The team zeroed in on a protein called CRMP2 that was much less functional in the cells from the lithium-responsive patients. When lithium was added to these cells the disruption in CRMP2’s activity was fixed. Now that the team has identified the molecular location of lithium’s effects, they can now search for new drugs that do the same thing more effectively and with fewer side effects.

The stem cell: a biological calculator?

math

Can stem cells do math?

Stem cells are pretty amazing critters but can they do math? The answer appears to be yes according to a fascinating study published this week in PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Stem cells, like all cells, process information from the outside through different receptors that stick out from the cells’ outer membranes like a satellite TV dish. Protein growth factors bind those receptors which trigger a domino effect of protein activity inside the cell, called cell signaling, that transfers the initial receptor signal from one protein to another. Ultimately that cascade leads to the accumulation of specific proteins in the nucleus where they either turn on or off specific genes.

Intuition would tell you that the amount of gene activity in response to the cell signaling should correspond to the amount of protein that gets into the nucleus. And that’s been the prevailing view of scientists. But the current study by a Caltech research team debunks this idea. Using real-time video microscopy filming, the team captured cell signaling in individual cells; in this case they used an immature muscle cell called a myoblast.

goentoro20170508

Behavior of cells over time after they have received a Tgf-beta signal. The brightness of the nuclei (circled in red) indicates how much Smad protein is present. This brightness varies from cell to cell, but the ratio of brightness after the signal to before the signal is about the same. Image: Goentoro lab, CalTech.

To their surprise the same amount of growth factor given to different myoblasts cells led to the accumulation of very different amounts of a protein called Smad3 in the cells’ nuclei, as much as a 40-fold difference across the cells. But after some number crunching, they discovered that dividing the amount of Smad3 after growth factor stimulation by the Smad3 amount before growth stimulation was similar in all the cells.

As team lead Dr. Lea Goentoro mentions in a press release, this result has some very important implications for studying human disease:

“Prior to this work, researchers trying to characterize the properties of a tumor might take a slice from it and measure the total amount of Smad in cells. Our results show that to understand these cells one must instead measure the change in Smad over time.”

Kidney Disease: There’s an Organ-on-a-Chip for That

“There’s an app for that” is a well-known phrase trademarked by Apple to promote how users can do almost anything they do on a computer on their mobile phone. Apps are so deeply ingrained in everyday life that it’s hard for some people to imagine living without them. (I know I’d be lost without google maps or my Next Bus app!)

An estimated 2.2 million mobile apps exist for iPhones. Imagine if this multitude of apps were instead the number of stem cell models available for scientists to study human biology and disease. Scientists dream of the day when they can respond to questions about any disease and say, “there’s a model for that.” However, a future where every individual or disease has its own personalized stem cell line is still far away.

In the meantime, scientists are continuing to generate stem cell-based technologies that answer important questions about how our tissues and organs function and what happens when they are affected by disease. One strategy involves growing human stem cells on microchips and developing them into miniature organ systems that function like the organs in our bodies.

Kidney-on-a-chip

A group of scientists from Harvard’s Wyss Institute are using organ-on-a-chip technology to model a structure in the human kidney, called a glomerulus, that’s essential for filtering the body’s blood. It’s made up of a meshwork of blood vessels called capillaries that remove waste, toxic products, and excess fluid from the blood by depositing them into the urine.

The glomerulus also contains cells called podocytes that wrap around the capillaries and leave thin slits for blood to filter through. Diseases that affect podocytes or the glomerulus structure can cause kidney failure early or later in life, which is why the Harvard team was so interested to model this structure using their microchip technology.

They developed a method to mature human pluripotent stem cells into podocytes by engineering an environment similar to that of a real kidney on a microchip. Using a combination of kidney-specific factors and extracellular matrix molecules, which form a supportive environment for cells within tissues and organs, the team generated mature podocytes from human stem cells in three weeks. Their study was published in Nature Biomedical Engineering and was led by Dr. Donald Ingber, Founding Director of the Wyss Institute.

3D rendering of the glomerulus-on-a-chip derived from human stem cells. (Wyss Institute at Harvard University)

First author, Samaira Musah, explained how their glomerulus-on-a-chip works in a news release,

“Our method not only uses soluble factors that guide kidney development in the embryo, but, by growing and differentiating stem cells on extracellular matrix components that are also contained in the membrane separating the glomerular blood and urinary systems, we more closely mimic the natural environment in which podocytes are induced and mature. We even succeeded in inducing much of this differentiation process within a channel of the microfluidic chip, where by applying cyclical motions that mimic the rhythmic deformations living glomeruli experience due to pressure pulses generated by each heartbeat, we achieve even greater maturation efficiencies.”

Over 90% of stem cells successfully developed into functional podocytes that could properly filter blood by selectively filtering different blood proteins. The podocytes also were susceptible to a chemotherapy drug called doxorubicin, proving that they are suitable for modeling the effects of drug toxicity on kidneys.

Kidney podocyte derived from human stem cells. (Wyss Institute)

Ingber highlighted the potential applications of their glomerulus-on-a-chip technology,

Donald Ingber, Wyss Institute

“The development of a functional human kidney glomerulus chip opens up an entire new experimental path to investigate kidney biology, carry out highly personalized modeling of kidney diseases and drug toxicities, and the stem cell-derived kidney podocytes we developed could even offer a new injectable cell therapy approach for regenerative medicine in patients with life-threatening glomerulopathies in the future.”

There’s an organ-on-a-chip for that!

The Wyss Institute team has developed other organ-on-chips including lungs, intestine, skin and bone marrow. These miniature human systems are powerful tools that scientists hope will “revolutionize drug development, disease modeling and personalized medicine” by reducing the cost of research and the reliance on animal models according to the Wyss Institute technology website.

What started out as a microengineering experiment in Ingber’s lab a few years ago is now transforming into a technology “that is now poised to have a major impact on society” Ingber further explained. If organs-on-chips live up to these expectations, you might one day hear a scientist say, “Don’t worry, there’s an organ-on-a-chip for that!”


Related Links:

Engineered bone tissue improves stem cell transplants

Bone marrow transplants are currently the only approved stem cell-based therapy in the United States. They involve replacing the hematopoietic, or blood-forming stem cells, found in the bone marrow with healthy stem cells to treat patients with cancers, immune diseases and blood disorders.

For bone marrow transplants to succeed, patients must undergo radiation therapy to wipe out their diseased bone marrow, which creates space for the donor stem cells to repopulate the blood system. Radiation can lead to complications including hair loss, nausea, fatigue and infertility.

Scientists at UC San Diego have a potential solution that could make current bone marrow transplants safer for patients. Their research, which was funded in part by a CIRM grant, was published yesterday in the journal PNAS.

Engineered bone with functional bone marrow in the center. (Varghese Lab)

Led by bioengineering professor Dr. Shyni Varghese, the team engineered artificial bone tissue that contains healthy donor blood stem cells. They implanted the engineered bone under the skin of normal mice and watched as the “accessory bone marrow” functioned like the real thing by creating new blood cells.

The implant lasted more than six months. During that time, the scientists observed that the cells within the engineered bone structure matured into bone tissue that housed the donor bone marrow stem cells and resembled how bones are structured in the human body. The artificial bones also formed connections with the mouse circulatory system, which allowed the host blood cells to populate the implanted bone tissue and the donor blood cells to expand into the host’s bloodstream.

Normal bone structure (left) and engineered bone (middle) are very similar. Bone tissue shown on top right and bone marrow cells on bottom right. (Varghese lab)

The team also implanted these artificial bones into mice that received radiation to mimic the procedures that patients typically undergo before bone marrow transplants. The engineered bone successfully repopulated the blood systems of the irradiated mice, similar to how blood stem cell functions in normal bone.

In a UC San Diego news release, Dr. Varghese explained how their technology could be translated into the clinic,

“We’ve made an accessory bone that can separately accommodate donor cells. This way, we can keep the host cells and bypass irradiation. We’re working on making this a platform to generate more bone marrow stem cells. That would have useful applications for cell transplantations in the clinic.”

The authors concluded that engineered bone tissue would specifically benefit patients who needed bone marrow transplants for non-cancerous bone marrow-related diseases such as sickle cell anemia or thalassemia where there isn’t a need to destroy cancer-causing cells.

A call to put the ‘public’ back in publication, and make stem cell research findings available to everyone

Opening the door

Opening the door to scientific knowledge

Thomas Gray probably wasn’t thinking about stem cell research when, in 1750 in his poem “Elegy in a Country Churchyard”, he wrote: “Full many a flower is born to blush unseen”. But a new study says that’s precisely what seems to happen to the findings of many stem cell clinical trials. They take place, but no details of their findings are ever made public. They blush, if they blush at all, unseen.

The study, in the journal Stem Cell Reports, says that only around 45 percent of stem cell clinical trials ever have their results published in peer-reviewed journals. Which means the results of around 55 percent of stem cell clinical trials are never shared with either the public or the scientific community.

Now, this finding apparently is not confined to stem cell research. Previous studies have shown a similar lack of publication of the results of more conventional therapies. Nonetheless, it’s a little disappointing – to say the least – to find out that so much knowledge and potentially valuable data is being lost due to lack of publication.

Definitely not full disclosure

Researchers at the University of Alberta in Canada used the US National Institute of Health’s (NIH) clinicaltrials.gov website as their starting point. They identified 1,052 stem cell clinical trials on the site. Only 393 trials were completed and of these, just 179 (45.4 percent) published their findings in a peer-reviewed journal.

In an interview in The Scientist, Tania Bubela, the lead researcher, says they chose to focus on stem cell clinical trials because of extensive media interest and the high public expectations for the field:

“When you have a field that is accused of over promising in some areas, it is beholden of the researchers in that field to publish the results of their trials so that the public and policy makers can realistically estimate the potential benefits.”

Now, it could be argued that publishing in a peer-reviewed journal is a rather high bar, that many researchers may have submitted articles but were rejected. However, there are other avenues for researchers to publish their findings, such as posting results on the clinicaltrials.gov database. Only 37 teams (3.5 percent) did that.

Why do it?

In the same article in The Scientist, Leigh Turner, a bioethicist at the University of Minnesota, raises the obvious question:

“The study shows a gap between studies that have taken place and actual publication of the data, so a substantial number of trials testing cell-based interventions are not entering the public domain. The underlying question is, what is the ethical and scientific basis to exposing human research subjects to risk if there is not going to be any meaningful contribution to knowledge at the end of the process?”

In short, why do it if you are not going to let anyone know what you did and what you found?

It’s a particularly relevant question when you consider that much of this research was supported with taxpayer dollars from the NIH and other institutions. So, if the public is paying for this research, doesn’t the public have a right to know what was learned?

Right to know

At CIRM we certainly think so. We expect and encourage all the researchers we fund to publish their findings. There are numerous ways and places to do that. For example, we expect each grantee to post a lay summary of their progress which we publish on our website. Stanford’s Dr. Joseph Wu’s progress reports for his work on heart disease shows you what those look like.

We also require researchers conducting clinical trials that we are funding to submit and post their trial results on the clinicaltrials.gov website.

The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR), agrees and recently updated its Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation calling on researchers to publish, as fully as possible, their clinical trial results.

That is true regardless of whether or not the clinical trial showed it was both safe and effective, or whether it showed it was unsafe and ineffective. We can learn as much from failure as we can from success. But to do that we need to know what the results are.

Publishing only positive findings skews the scientific literature, and public perception of this work. Ignoring the negative could mean that other scientists waste a lot of time and money trying to do something that has already demonstrated it won’t work.

Publication should be a requirement for all research, particularly publicly funded research. It’s time to put the word “public” back in publication.

 

 

Keeping intestinal stem cells in their prime

Gut stem cells (green) in the small intestine of a mouse.

The average length of the human gut is 25 feet long. That’s equivalent to four really tall people or five really short people lined up head to toe. Intestinal stem cells have the fun job of regenerating and replacing ALL the cells that line the gut. Therefore, it’s important for these stem cells to be able to self-renew, a process that replenishes the stem cell population. If this important biological process is disrupted, the intestine is at risk for diseases like inflammatory bowel disease and cancer.

This week, Stanford Medicine researchers published new findings about the biological processes responsible for regulating the regenerative capacity of intestinal stem cells. Their work, which was partially funded by CIRM, was published in the journal Nature.

Priming gut stem cells to self-renew

Scientists know that the self-renewal of intestinal stem cells is very important for a happy, functioning gut, but the nuances of what molecules and signaling pathways regulate this process have yet to be figured out. The Stanford team, led by senior author and Stanford Professor Dr. Calvin Kuo, studied two signaling pathways, Wnt and R-Spondin, that are involved in the self-renewal of intestinal stem cells in mice.

Dr. Calvin Kuo, Stanford Medicine.

“The cascade of events comprising the Wnt signaling pathway is crucial to stem cell self-renewal,” Dr. Kuo explained in an email exchange. “The Wnt pathway can be induced by either hormones classified as “Wnts” or “R-spondins”.  However, it is not known if Wnts or R-spondins cooperate to induce Wnt signaling, and if these Wnts and R-spondins have distinct functions or if they can mutually substitute for each other.   We explored how Wnts and R-spondins might cooperate to regulate intestinal stem cells – which are extremely active and regenerate the 25-foot lining of the human intestine every week.”

The team used different reagents to activate or block Wnt or R-spondin signaling and monitored the effects on intestinal stem cells. They found that both were important for the self-renewal of intestinal stem cells, but that they played different roles.

“Our work revealed that Wnts and R-spondins are not equivalent and that they have very distinct functions even though they both trigger the Wnt signaling cascade,” said Dr. Kuo. “Both Wnts and R-spondins are required to maintain intestinal stem cells.  However, Wnts perform more of a subservient “priming” function, where they prepare intestinal stem cells for the action of R-spondin, which is the active catalyst for inducing intestinal stem cells to divide.”

The authors believe that this multi-step regulation, involving priming and self-renewal factors could apply to stem cell systems in other organs and tissues in the body. Some of the researchers on this study including Dr. Kuo are pursuing this idea through a new company called Surrozen, which produces artificial bioengineered Wnt molecules that don’t require activation like natural Wnt molecules. These Wnt molecules were used in the current study and are explained in more detail in a separate Nature article published at the same time.

The company believes that artificial Wnts will be useful for understanding stem cell biology and potentially for therapeutic applications. Dr. Kuo explained,

“The new surrogate Wnts are easily produced and can circulate in the bloodstream, unlike natural Wnts.  There may be medical applications of these bioengineered Wnt surrogates in stimulating various stem cell compartments of the body, given the wide range of stem cells that are governed by natural Wnts.”