Two voices, one message, watch out for predatory stem cell clinics

Last week two new papers came out echoing each other about the dangers of bogus “therapies” being offered by predatory stem cell clinics and the risks they pose to patients.

The first was from the Pew Charitable Trusts entitled: ‘Harms Linked to Unapproved Stem Cell Interventions Highlight Need for Greater FDA Enforcement’ with a subtitle: Unproven regenerative medical products have led to infections, disabilities, and deaths.’

That pretty much says everything you need to know about the report, and in pretty stark terms; need for greater FDA enforcement and infections, disabilities and deaths.

Just two days later, as if in response to the call for greater enforcement, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) came out with its own paper titled: ‘Important Patient and Consumer Information About Regenerative Medicine Therapies.’ Like the Pew report the FDA’s paper highlighted the dangers of unproven and unapproved “therapies” saying it “has received reports of blindness, tumor formation, infections, and more… due to the use of these unapproved products.”

The FDA runs down a list of diseases and conditions that predatory clinics claim they can cure without any evidence that what they offer is even safe, let alone effective. It says Regenerative Medicine therapies have not been approved for the treatment of:

  • Arthritis, osteoarthritis, rheumatism, hip pain, knee pain or shoulder pain.
  • Blindness or vision loss, autism, chronic pain or fatigue.
  • Neurological conditions like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.
  • Heart disease, lung disease or stroke.

The FDA says it has warned clinics offering these “therapies” to stop or face the risk of legal action, and it warns consumers: “Please know that if you are being charged for these products or offered these products outside of a clinical trial, you are likely being deceived and offered a product illegally.”

It tells consumers if you are offered one of these therapies – often at great personal cost running into the thousands, even tens of thousands of dollars – you should contact the FDA at ocod@fda.hhs.gov.

The Pew report highlights just how dangerous these “therapies” are for patients. They did a deep dive into health records and found that between 2004 and September 2020 there were more than 360 reported cases of patients experiencing serious side effects from a clinic that offered unproven and unapproved stem cell procedures.

Those side effects include 20 deaths as well as serious and even lifelong disabilities such as:

  • Partial or complete blindness (9).
  • Paraplegia (1).
  • Pulmonary embolism (6).
  • Heart attack (5).
  • Tumors, lesions, or other growths (16).
  • Organ damage or failure in several cases that resulted in death.

More than one hundred of the patients identified had to be hospitalized.

The most common type of procedures these patients were given were stem cells taken from their own body and then injected into their eye, spine, hip, shoulder, or knee. The second most common was stem cells from a donor that were then injected.

The Pew report cites the case of one California-based stem cell company that sold products manufactured without proper safety measures, “including a failure to properly screen for communicable diseases such as HIV and hepatitis B and C.” Those products led to at least 13 people being hospitalized due to serious bacterial infection in Texas, Arizona, Kansas, and Florida.

Shocking as these statistics are, the report says this is probably a gross under count of actual harm caused by the bogus clinics. It says the clinics themselves rarely report adverse events and many patients don’t report them either, unless they are so serious that they require medical intervention.

The Pew report concludes by saying the FDA needs more resources so it can more effectively act against these clinics and shut them down when necessary. It says the agency needs to encourage doctors and patients to report any unexpected side effects, saying: “devising effective strategies to collect more real-world evidence of harm can help the agency in its efforts to curb the growth of this unregulated market and ensure that the regenerative medicine field develops into one that clinicians and patients can trust and safely access.”

We completely support both reports and will continue to work with the FDA and anyone else opposed to these predatory clinics. You can read more here about what we have been doing to oppose these clinics, and here is information that will help inform your decision if you are thinking about taking part in a stem cell clinical trial but are not sure if it’s a legitimate one.

Battling COVID and turning back the clock on stem cell funding

Coronavirus

Battling the virus that causes COVID-19 is something that is top of everyone’s mind right now. That’s why CIRM is funding 17 different projects targeting the virus. But one of the most valuable tools in helping develop vaccines against a wide variety of diseases in the past is now coming under threat. We’ll talk about both issues in a live broadcast we’re holding on Wednesday, October 14th at noon (PDT).

That date is significant because it’s Stem Cell Awareness Day and we thought it appropriate to host a meeting looking at two of the most important issues facing the field.

The first part of the event will focus on the 17 projects that CIRM is funding that target COVID-19. This includes three clinical trials aiming to treat people who have been infected with the virus and are experiencing some of the more severe effects, such as damaged lungs.

We’ll also look at some of the earlier stage research that includes:

  • Work to help develop a vaccine
  • Using muscle stem cells to help repair damage to the diaphragm in patients who have spent an extended period on a ventilator
  • Boosting immune system cells to help fight the virus

The second part of the event will look at ways that funding for stem cell research at the federal level is once again coming into question. The federal government has already imposed new restrictions on funding for fetal tissue research, and now there are efforts in Congress to restrict funding for embryonic stem cell research.

The impacts could be significant. Fetal tissue has been used for decades to help develop some of the most important vaccines used today including rubella, chickenpox, hepatitis A, and shingles. They have also been used to make approved drugs against diseases including hemophilia, rheumatoid arthritis, and cystic fibrosis.

We’ll look at some of the reasons why we are seeing these potential restrictions on the medical research and what impact they could have on the ability to develop new treatments for the coronavirus and other deadly diseases.

You can watch the CIRM Stem Cell Awareness Day live event by going here: https://www.youtube.com/c/CIRMTV/videos at noon on Wednesday, October 14th.

Feel free to share news about this event with anyone you think might be interested.

We look forward to seeing you there.

Early CIRM support helps stem cell pioneer develop promising new therapy for cancer

Irv Weissman

Irv Weissman, Ph.D., Photo: courtesy Stanford University

When you get praise from someone who has been elected to the National Academy of Sciences and has been named California Scientist of the Year you know you must be doing something right.

That’s how we felt the other day when Irv Weissman, Director of the Stanford Institute of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, issued a statement about how important the support of CIRM was in advancing his research.

The context was the recent initial public offering (IPO) of Forty Seven Inc.. a company co-founded by Dr. Weissman. That IPO followed news that two Phase 2 clinical trials being run by Forty Seven Inc. were demonstrating promising results against hard-to-treat cancers.

Dr. Weissman says the therapies used a combination of two monoclonal antibodies, 5F9 from Forty Seven Inc. and Rituximab (an already FDA-approved treatment for cancer and rheumatoid arthritis) which:

“Led to about a 50% overall remission rate when used on patients who had relapsed, multi-site disease refractory to rituximab-plus-chemotherapy. Most of those patients have shown a complete remission, although it’s too early to tell if this is complete for life.”

5F9 attacks a molecule called CD47 that appears on the surface of cancer cells. Dr. Weissman calls CD47 a “don’t eat me signal” that protects the cancer against the body’s own immune system. By blocking the action of CD47, 5F9 strips away that “don’t eat me signal” leaving the cancer vulnerable to the patient’s immune system. We have blogged about this work here and here.

The news from these trials is encouraging. But what was gratifying about Dr. Weissman’s statement is his generosity in sharing credit for the work with CIRM.

Here is what he wrote:

“What is unusual about Forty Seven is that not only the discovery, but its entire preclinical development and testing of toxicity, etc. as well as filing two Investigational New Drug [IND] applications to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the US and to the MHRA in the UK, as well as much of the Phase 1 trials were carried out by a Stanford team led by two of the discoverers, Ravi Majeti and Irving Weissman at Stanford, and not at a company.

The major support came from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine [CIRM], funded by Proposition 71, as well as the Ludwig Cancer Research Foundation at the Ludwig Center for Cancer Stem Cell Research at Stanford. CIRM will share in downstream royalties coming to Stanford as part of the agreement for funding this development.

This part of the state initiative, Proposition 71, is highly innovative and allows the discoverers of a field to guide its early phases rather than licensing it to a biotech or a pharmaceutical company before the value and safety of the discovery are sufficiently mature to be known. Most therapies at early-stage biotechs are lost in what is called the ‘valley of death’, wherein funding is very difficult to raise; many times the failure can be attributed to losing the expertise of the discoverers of the field.”

Dr. Weissman also had praise for CIRM’s funding model which requires companies that produce successful, profitable therapies – thanks to CIRM support – to return a portion of those profits to California. Most other funding agencies don’t have those requirements.

“US federal funds, from agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) similarly support discovery but cannot fund more than a few projects to, and through, early phase clinical trials. And, under the Bayh-Dole Act, the universities keep all of the equity and royalties derived from licensing discoveries. In that model no money flows back to the agency (or the public), and nearly a decade of level or less than level funding (at the national level) has severely reduced academic research. So this experiment of funding (the NIH or the CIRM model) is now entering into the phase that the public will find out which model is best for bringing new discoveries and new companies to the US and its research and clinical trials community.”

We have been funding Dr. Weissman’s work since 2006. In fact, he was one of the first recipients of CIRM funding.  It’s starting to look like a very good investment indeed.