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.

 

Can stem cells help people recovering from a stroke? You asked, and the experts answered

FacebookLive_AskExperts_Stroke_IMG_1656

We recently held our first ever Facebook Live event. It was focused on the use of stem cells and recovery from a stroke and featured three great guests: Dr. Gary Steinberg, chief of Neurosurgery at Stanford, Sonia Coontz, a patient of Dr. Steinberg’s, and CIRM’s own Science Officer Dr. Lila Collins.

We had an amazing response from people during the event and in the days since then with some 6,750 people watching the video and almost 1,000 people reacting by posting a comment or sharing it with friends. It was one of the most successful things we have ever done on Facebook so it’s not surprising that we plan on doing many more Facebook Live ‘Ask the Expert’ events in the future. We will post more details of that as we finalize them.

We tried to cover as many topics as possible during the hour but there were simply too many questions for us to get to all of them. So here is a recap of the key issues we covered, and a few we didn’t have a chance to answer.

Let’s start with Dr. Steinberg’s explanation of the research that led to his current clinical trial:

Dr. Steinberg: “I got interested in this about 18 years ago when I took human cells and transplanted them into rodent models of stroke. What we found was that when we transplanted those cells into the stroke region, the core of the stroke, they didn’t survive very well but when we moved them a few millimeters away from the stroke they not only survived but they migrated to the stroke.

The reason they migrate is that the stem cells have receptors on them that interact with chemicals given off by the stroke environment and that’s why they migrate to the stroke site. And when they get to the site they can turn into different kinds of cells. Very importantly we found these mice and rats that had behavioral problems – walking, moving – as a result of the stroke, we found we could improve their neurological outcomes with the stem cells.

With the help of CIRM, which has been very generous, we were fortunate enough to receive about $24 million in funding over the last 8 years, from 2010, to move this therapy into the clinic to understand the basic mechanisms of the recovery and to start clinical trials

One of the surprising things was that our initial notion was that the cells we transplanted into the brains would initially turn into the cells in the brain affected by the stroke and reconstitute those circuits. We were shocked to find that that was not what was happening, that only a few of the transplanted cells turned into neurons. The way they were recovering function was by secreting very powerful growth factors and molecules and proteins that enhanced native recovery or the ability of the normal brain to recover itself. Some of these processes included outgrowth of neurons, new connections, new synapses, not from the stem cells but from the native cells already in the brain.

This is not cell replacement but enhancing native recovery and, in a simple sense, what the cells are doing, we believe, is to change the adult brain, which has a hard time recovering from a stroke, into an infant brain and infants recover very well after a stroke.”

All this work was focused on ischemic strokes, where a blockage cuts off blood flow to the brain. But people like Cheryl Ward wanted to know: “Will this work for hemorrhagic stroke?” That’s where a blood vessel in the brain leaks or ruptures.

Dr. Steinberg: “I suspect we will be generalizing this therapy into hemorrhagic patients very, very soon and there’s no reason why it shouldn’t work there. The reason we didn’t start there is that 85% of strokes are ischemic and only 15% are hemorrhagic so it’s a smaller population but a very, very important population because when patients have a hemorrhage from a stroke they are often more seriously disabled than from ischemic.”

Dr. Lila Collins: “I would like to highlight one trial for hemorrhagic stroke with the Mayo Clinic and that’s using mesenchymal stem cells (normally found in bone marrow or blood). It’s an early stage, Phase 1 safety study in patients with recent cerebral hemorrhage.  They are looking at improvements in neurological function and patients have to be treated within 72 hours after the stroke.”

Dr. Steinberg explained that because it’s more difficult to enroll patients within 72 hours of a stroke that we may end up offering a combination of therapies spread out over months or even years.

Dr. Steinberg: “It may be that and we may figure this out in the next 5 to 10 years, that you might want to treat patients acutely (right away) with an intravenous therapy in the first 72 hours and then you might want to come in again sub-acutely within a few months, injecting the cells into the brain near the stroke, and then maybe come in chronically a few years later if there are still problems and place the cells directly in the brain. So, lots of ways to think about how to use this in the future.”

James Russell suffered a stroke in 2014 and wrote:

“My left side was affected. My vision was also impacted. Are any stroke patients being given stem cells seeing possible improvement in visual neglect?”

Dr. Steinberg: “We don’t know the answer to that yet, it’s quite possible. It’s true these vision circuits are not dead and could be resurrected. We have not targeted visual pathways in our work, we have targeted motor functions, but I would also be optimistic that we could target patients who have vision problems from stroke. It’s a very important area.

A number of people wondered if stem cells can help people recovering from a stroke can they also help people with other neurological conditions.

Hanifa Gaphoor asked “What about Parkinson’s disease?” and Ginnievive Patch wondered “Do you feel hopeful for neurological illnesses like Huntington’s disease and ALS? Dr. Steinberg was cautiously optimistic.

Dr. Steinberg: “We’ve extended this kind of treatment not just for ischemic stroke but into traumatic brain injury (TBI) and we just completed a trial for patients with chronic TBI or who have suffered a trauma to the brain. Many other indications may be possible. In fact, now that we know these circuits are not dead or irreversibly injured, we believe we could even extend this to neurodegenerative diseases like ALS, Parkinson’s, maybe even to Alzheimer’s disease in the future. So, lots of hope but we don’t want to oversell this, and we want to make sure this is done in a rigorous fashion.”

Several people had questions about using their own adipose, or fat stem cells, in therapies being offered at clinics around the US and in other countries. Cheri Hicks asked: “I’m curious if adipose stem cell being used at clinics at various places is helpful or beneficial?”

Dr. Steinberg: “I get emails or calls from patients every week saying should I go to Russia, India or Mexico and get stem cell transplants which are done not as part of a rigorous trial and I discourage patients from getting stem cells that are not being given in a controlled fashion. For one thing, patients have been getting hurt by these treatments in these clinics; they have developed tumors and infections and other problems. In many cases we don’t even know what the cells are, there’s not published information and the patients pay cash for this, of course.”

At CIRM we also worry about people going to clinics, in the US and in other countries, where they are getting therapies that have not been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other appropriate regulatory bodies. That’s why we have created this page on our website to help people who want a stem cell therapy but don’t know what to look for in a clinical trial or what questions to ask to make sure it’s a legitimate trial, one that’s been given the go-ahead by the FDA.

Bret Ryan asked: “What becomes of the implanted cells?”

Dr. Steinberg: We found after transplanting the cells, one week after the transplant, we see a new abnormality in the premotor cortex, the area of the brain that controls motor function. We saw a new abnormality there or a new signal that disappears after a month and never comes back. But the size of that temporary abnormality after one week correlates very closely with the degree of recovery after six months, one year and two years.

One of the interesting things is that it doesn’t seem to be necessary for the cells to survive long term to have beneficial effects. The cells we used in the SanBio trial don’t survive more than a month and yet they seem to aid recovery function in our pilot studies which is sustained for years.”

And of course, many people, such as Karen Smart, wanted to know how they could get the therapy. Right now, the clinical trial is fully enrolled but Stanford is putting together a waiting list for future trials. If you are interested and would like more information, please email: stemcellstudy@stanford.edu.

Sonia Coontz, the patient who was also a key part of the Facebook Live event, has an amazing story to tell. She was left devastated, physically and emotionally, after having a stroke. But then she heard about Dr. Steinberg’s clinical trial and it changed her life. Here’s her story.

We were thrilled to receive all of your comments and questions during our first Facebook Live event. It’s this kind of dialogue between scientists, patients and the public that will be critical for the continued support of our mission to accelerate stem cell treatments to patients with unmet medical needs.

Due to the response, we plan to regularly schedule these “Ask the Expert” events. What disease area would you like us to focus on next time? Leave us a comment or email info@cirm.ca.gov

 

Can stem cells help people recover from a stroke? Join us for a Facebook Live event this Thursday, May 31 for the answers

AskExpertsMAY2018[1]

Stroke is one of the leading causes of death in the US and the leading cause of serious, long-term disability. But could stem cell therapies change that and help people who’ve had a brain attack?  Could stem cells help repair the damage caused by a stroke and restore a person’s ability to speak normally, to be able to walk without a limp or regain strength in their hands and arms?

To find out the answers to these and other questions joins us for “Ask the Expert”, a special Facebook Live event this Thursday, May 31, from noon till 1pm PDT

 The event will feature Dr. Gary Steinberg, the Chair of Neurosurgery at Stanford University. Dr. Steinberg is currently running a CIRM-funded clinical trial targeting stroke.

We will also be joined by CIRM Senior Science Officer Lila Collins, PhD who can talk about the broad range of other projects using stem cells to help people recover from a stroke.

We are also delighted to welcome Sonia Coontz, who suffered a devastating stroke several years ago and made a remarkable recovery after getting a stem cell therapy.

To join us for the event, all you have to do is go to our Facebook page on Thursday at noon (PDT) and you should see a video playing, which you can watch on mobile or desktop. Click the video to enter viewing mode.

Also, make sure to “like” our page before the event to receive a notification that we’ve gone live.

And we want to hear from you, so you will be able to post questions for the experts to answer or, you can email them directly to us at info@cirm.ca.gov

We look forward to seeing you there.

 

‘Ask The Expert’ on Facebook Live about the power of stem cells to reverse damage caused by a stroke.

facebook-live-brand-awarenessIt’s not often you get a chance to ask a world class stem cell expert a question about their work, and how it might help you or someone you love. But on Thursday, May 31 you can do just that.

CIRM is hosting a special ‘Ask the Expert’ event on Facebook Live. The topic is Strokes and Stem Cells. Just head over to our Facebook Page on May 31st from noon till 1pm PST to experience it live. You can also re-watch the event any time after the broadcast has ended from our Facebook videos page.

Steinberg

We will be joined by Dr. Gary Steinberg, chair of neurosurgery at Stanford University, who will talk to us about his work in helping reverse the damage caused by a stroke, even for people who experienced a brain attack several years ago.

CIRM Senior Science Officer, Dr. Lila Collins, will talk about other stem cell research targeting stroke, its promise and some of the problems that still need to be overcome.

You will have a chance to ask questions of both our experts, either live on the day or by sending us questions in advance at info@cirm.ca.gov.

We’ll post reminders on Facebook so make sure to follow us. But for now, mark the date and time on your diary and please feel free to share this information with anyone you think might be interested.

It promises to be a fascinating event.

 

 

Celebrating Exciting CIRM-Funded Discovery Research on World Parkinson’s Day

April 11th is World Parkinson’s Disease Awareness Day. To mark the occasion, we’re featuring the work of CIRM-funded researchers who are pursuing new, promising ideas to treat patients with this debilitating neurodegenerative disease.


Birgitt Schuele, Parkinson’s Institute

CIRM Grant: Quest Award – Discovery Stage Research

Research: Birgitt and her team at the Parkinson’s Institute in Sunnyvale, California, are using CRISPR gene editing technology to reduce the levels of a toxic protein called alpha synuclein, which builds up in the dopaminergic brain cells affected by Parkinson’s disease.

Birgitt Schuele

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

Parkinson’s disease in a dish. Dopaminergic neurons made from Parkinson’s patient induced pluripotent stem cells. (Image credit: Birgitt Schuele)


Jeanne Loring, Scripps Research Institute

CIRM Grant: Quest Award – Discovery Stage Research

Research: Jeanne Loring and her team at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California, are deriving dopaminergic neurons from the iPSCs of Parkinson’s patients. Their goal is to develop a personalized, stem cell-based therapy for PD.

Jeanne Loring

“We are working toward a patient-specific neuron replacement therapy for Parkinson’s disease.  By the time PD is diagnosed, people have lost more than half of their dopamine neurons in a specific part of the brain, and loss continues over time.  No drug can stop the loss or restore the neurons’ function, so the best possible option for long term relief of symptoms is to replace the dopamine neurons that have died.  We do this by making induced pluripotent stem cells from individual PD patients and turning them into the exact type of dopamine neuron that has been lost.  By transplanting a patient’s own cells, we will not need to use potentially dangerous immunosuppressive drugs.  We plan to begin treating patients in a year to two years, after we are granted FDA approval for the clinical therapy.”

Skin cells from a Parkinson’s patient (left) were reprogrammed into induced pluripotent stem cells (center) that were matured into dopaminergic neurons (right) to model Parkinson’s disease. (Image credit: Jeanne Loring)


Justin Cooper-White, Scaled BioLabs Inc.

CIRM Grant: Quest Award – Discovery Stage Research

Research: Justin Cooper-White and his team at Scaled Biolabs in San Francisco are developing a tool that will make clinical-grade dopaminergic neurons from the iPSCs of PD patients in a rapid and cost-effective manner.

Justin Cooper-White

“Treating Parkinson’s disease with iPSC-derived dopaminergic neuron transplantation has a strong scientific and clinical rationale. Even the best protocols are long and complex and generally have highly variable quality and yield of dopaminergic neurons. Scaled Biolabs has developed a technology platform based on high throughput microfluidics, automation, and deep data which can optimize and simplify the road from iPSC to dopaminergic neuron, making it more efficient and allowing a rapid transition to GMP-grade derivation of these cells.  In our first 6 months of CIRM-funded work, we believe we have already accelerated and simplified the production of a key intermediate progenitor population, increasing the purity from the currently reported 40-60% to more than 90%. The ultimate goal of this work is to get dopaminergic neurons to the clinic in a robust and economical manner and accelerate treatment for Parkinson’s patients.”

High throughput differentiation of dopaminergic neuron progenitors in  microbioreactor chambers in Scaled Biolabs’ cell optimization platform. Different chambers receive different differentiation factors, so that optimal treatments for conversion to dual-positive cells can be determined (blue: nuclei, red: FOXA2, green: LMX1A).


Xinnan Wang, Stanford University

CIRM Grant: Basic Biology V

Research: Xinnan Wang and her team at Stanford University are studying the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in the brain cells affected in Parkinson’s disease.

Xinnan Wang

“Mitochondria are a cell’s power plants that provide almost all the energy a cell needs. When these cellular power plants are damaged by stressful factors present in aging neurons, they release toxins (reactive oxygen species) to the rest of the neuron that can cause neuronal cell death (neurodegeneration).  We hypothesized that in Parkinson’s mutant neurons, mitochondrial quality control is impaired thereby leading to neurodegeneration. We aimed to test this hypothesis using neurons directly derived from Parkinson’s patients (induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neurons).”

Dopaminergic neurons derived from human iPSCs shown in green, yellow and red. (Image credit: Atossa Shaltouki, Stanford)


Related Blogs:

Friday Roundup: A better kind of blood stem cell transplant; Encouraging news from spinal cord injury trial; Finding an “elusive” cell that could help diabetics

Cool Instagram image of the week:

Pancreatic Progenitors

Diabetes Research Institute scientists have confirmed that the unique stem cells reside within large ducts of the human pancreas. Two such ducts (green) surrounded by three islets (white) are shown. [Diabetes Research Institute Foundation]

Chemo- and radiation-free blood stem cell transplant showing promise

Bubble baby disease, also known as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), is an inherited disorder that leaves newborns without an effective immune system. Currently, the only approved treatment for SCID is a blood stem cell transplant, in which the patient’s defective immune system cells are eliminated by chemotherapy or radiation to clear out space for cells from a healthy, matched donor. Even though the disease can be fatal, physicians loathe to perform a stem cell transplant on bubble baby patients:

Shizuru“Physicians often choose not to give chemotherapy or radiation to young children with SCID because there are lifelong effects: neurological impairment, growth delays, infertility, risk of cancer, etc.,” says Judith Shizuru, MD, PhD, professor of medicine at Stanford University.

To avoid these complications, Dr. Shizuru is currently running a CIRM-funded clinical trial testing a gentler approach to prepare patients for blood stem cell transplants. She presented promising, preliminary results of the trial on Tuesday at the annual meeting of Stanford’s Center for Definitive and Curative Medicine.

Trial participants are receiving a protein antibody called CD117 before their stem cell transplant. Previous studies in animals showed that this antibody binds to the surface of blood stem cells and blocks the action of a factor which is required for stem cell survival. This property of CD117 provides a means to get rid of blood stem cells without radiation or chemotherapy.

Early results in two participants indicate that, 6 and 9 months after receiving the CD117 blood stem cell transplants, the donor cells have successfully established themselves in the patients and begun making immune cells.

Spinal cord injury trial reports more promising results:

AsteriasRegular readers of our blog will already know about our funding for the clinical trial being run by Asterias Biotherapeutics to treat spinal cord injuries. The latest news from the company is very encouraging, in terms of both the safety and effectiveness of the treatment.

Asterias is transplanting stem cells into patients who have suffered recent injuries that have left them paralyzed from the neck down. It’s hoped the treatment will restore connections at the injury site, allowing patients to regain some movement and feeling in their hands and arms.

This week the company announced that of the 25 patients they have treated there have been no serious side effects. In addition:

  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans show that in more than 90 percent of the patients the cells appear to show signs of engraftment
  • At least 75 percent of those treated have recovered at least one motor level, and almost 20 percent have recovered two levels

In a news release, Michael Mulroy, Asterias’ President and CEO, said:

“The positive safety profile to date, the evidence supporting engraftment of the cells post-implantation, and the improvements we are seeing in upper extremity motor function highlight the promising findings coming from this Phase 1/2a clinical trial, which will guide us as we work to design future studies.”

There you are! Finding the “elusive” human pancreatic progenitor cells – the story behind our cool Instagram image of the week.

Don’t you hate it when you lose something and can’t find it? Well imagine the frustration of scientists who were looking for a group of cells they were sure existed but for decades they couldn’t locate them. Particularly as those cells might help in developing new treatments for diabetes.

Diabetes-Research-Institute_University-of-Miami-Miller-School-of-MedicineWell, rest easy, because scientists at the Diabetes Research Institute at the University of Miami finally found them.

In a study, published in Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, the researchers show how they found these progenitor cells in the human pancreas, tucked away in the glands and ducts of the organ.

In type 1 diabetes, the insulin-producing cells in the pancreas are destroyed. Finding these progenitor cells, which have the ability to turn into the kinds of cells that produce insulin, means researchers could develop new ways to regenerate the pancreas’ ability to function normally.

That’s a long way away but this discovery could be an important first step along that path.

Stem Cell Roundup: Lab-grown meat, stem cell vaccines for cancer and a free kidney atlas for all

Here are the stem cell stories that caught our eye this week.

Cool Stem Cell Photo: Kidneys in the spotlight

At an early stage, a nephron forming in the human kidney generates an S-shaped structure. Green cells will generate the kidneys’ filtering device, and blue and red cells are responsible for distinct nephron activities. (Image/Stacy Moroz and Tracy Tran, Andrew McMahon Lab, USC Stem Cell)

I had to take a second look at this picture when I first saw it. I honestly thought it was someone’s scientific interpretation of Vincent van Gogh’s Starry Night. What this picture actually represents is a nephron. Your kidney has over a million nephrons packed inside it. These tiny structures filter our blood and remove waste products by producing urine.

Scientists at USC Stem Cell are studying kidney development in animals and humans in hopes of gaining new insights that could lead to improved stem cell-based technologies that more accurately model human kidneys (by coincidence, we blogged about another human kidney study on Tuesday). Yesterday, these scientists published a series of articles in the Journal of American Society of Nephrology that outlines a new, open-source kidney atlas they created. The atlas contains a catalog of high resolution images of different structures representing the developing human kidney.

CIRM-funded researcher Andrew McMahon summed it up nicely in a USC news release:

“Our research bridges a critical gap between animal models and human applications. The data we collected and analyzed creates a knowledge-base that will accelerate stem cell-based technologies to produce mini-kidneys that accurately represent human kidneys for biomedical screening and replacement therapies.”

And here’s a cool video of a developing kidney kindly provided by the authors of this study.

Video Caption: Kidney development begins with a population of “progenitor cells” (green), which are similar to stem cells. Some progenitor cells (red) stream out and aggregate into a ball, the renal vesicle (gold). As each renal vesicle grows, it radically morphs into a series of shapes — can you spot the two S-shaped bodies (green-orange-pink structures)? – and finally forms a nephron. Each human kidney contains one million mature nephrons, which form an expansive tubular network (white) that filters the blood, ensuring a constant environment for all of our body’s functions. (Video courtesy of Nils Lindstorm, Andy McMahon, Seth Ruffins and the Microscopy Core Facility at the Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at the Keck School of Medicine of USC)


Lab-grown hamburgers coming to a McDonald’s near you…

“Lab-grown meat is coming, whether you like it or not” sure makes a splashy headline! This week, Wired magazine featured two Bay Area startup companies, Just For All and Finless Foods, dedicated to making meat-in-a-dish in hopes of one day reducing our dependence on livestock. The methods behind their products aren’t exactly known. Just For All is engineering “clean meat” from cells. On the menu currently are cultured chorizo, nuggets, and foie gras. I bet you already guessed what Finless Foods specialty is. The company is isolating stem-like muscle progenitor cells from fish meat in hopes of identifying a cell that will robustly create the cell types found in fish meat.

Just’s tacos made with lab-grown chorizo. (Wired)

I find the Wired article particularly interesting because of the questions and issues Wired author Matt Simon raises. Are clean meat companies really more environmentally sustainable than raising livestock? Currently, there isn’t enough data to prove this is the case, he argues. And what about the feasibility of convincing populations that depend on raising livestock for a living to go “clean”? And what about flavor and texture? Will people be willing to eat a hamburger that doesn’t taste and ooze in just the right way?

As clean meat technologies continue to advance and become more affordable, I’ll be interested to see what impact they will have on our eating habits in the future.


Induced pluripotent stem cells could be the next cancer vaccine

Our last story is about a new Cell Stem Cell study that suggests induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) could be developed into a vaccine against cancer. CIRM-funded scientist Joseph Wu and his team at Stanford University School of Medicine found that injecting iPSCs into mice that were transplanted with breast cancer cells reduced the formation of tumors.

The team dug deeper and discovered that iPSCs shared similarities with cancer cells with respect to the panel of genes they express and the types of proteins they carry on their cell surface. This wasn’t surprising to them as both cells represent an immature development stage. Because of these similarities, injecting iPSCs primed the mouse’s immune system to recognize and reject similar cells like cancer cells.

The team will next test their approach on human cancer cells in the lab. Joseph Wu commented on the potential future of iPSC-based vaccines for cancer in a Stanford news release:

“Although much research remains to be done, the concept itself is pretty simple. We would take your blood, make iPS cells and then inject the cells to prevent future cancers. I’m very excited about the future possibilities.”

 

Seeing is believing. Proof a CIRM-funded therapy is making a difference

ThelmaScreenShotFB

Thelma, participant in the CAMELLIA clinical trial

You have almost certainly never heard of Thelma, or met her, or know anything about her. She’s a lady living in England who, if it wasn’t for a CIRM-funded therapy, might not be living at all. She’s proof that what we do, is helping people.

Thelma is featured in a video about a treatment for acute myeloid leukemia, one of the most severe forms of blood cancer. Thelma took part in a clinical trial, called CAMELLIA, at Oxford Cancer Centre in Oxford, UK. The clinical trial uses a therapy that blocks a protein called CD47 that is found on the surface of cancer cells, including cancer stem cells which can evade traditional therapies. The video was shot to thank the charity Bloodwise for raising the funds to pay for the trial.

Prof. Paresh Vyas of Oxford University, who was part of the clinical trial team that treated Thelma, says patients with this condition face long odds.

“Patients with acute myeloid leukemia have the most aggressive blood cancer. We really haven’t had good treatments for this condition for the last 40 years.”

While this video was shot in England, featuring English nurses and doctors and patients, the therapy itself was developed here in California, first at Stanford University under the guidance of Irv Weissman and, more recently, at Forty Seven Inc. That company is now about to test their approach in a CIRM-funded clinical trial here in the US.

This is an example of how CIRM doesn’t just fund research, we invest in it. We help support it at every stage, from the earliest research through to clinical trials. Without our early support this work may not have made it this far.

The Forty Seven Inc. therapy uses the patient’s own immune system to help fight back against cancer stem cells. It’s looking very promising. But you don’t have to take our word for it. Take Thelma’s.

Creating a platform to help transplanted stem cells survive after a heart attack

heart

Developing new tools to repair damaged hearts

Repairing, even reversing, the damage caused by a heart attack is the Holy Grail of stem cell researchers. For years the Grail seemed out of reach because the cells that researchers transplanted into heart attack patients didn’t stick around long enough to do much good. Now researchers at Stanford may have found a way around that problem.

In a heart attack, a blockage cuts off the oxygen supply to muscle cells. Like any part of our body starved off oxygen the muscle cells start to die, and as they do the body responds by creating a layer of scars, effectively walling off the dead tissue from the surviving healthy tissue.  But that scar tissue makes it harder for the heart to effectively and efficiently pump blood around the body. That reduced blood flow has a big impact on a person’s ability to return to a normal life.

In the past, efforts to transplant stem cells into the heart had limited success. Researchers tried pairing the cells with factors called peptides to help boost their odds of surviving. That worked a little better but most of the peptides were also short-lived and weren’t able to make a big difference in the ability of transplanted cells to stick around long enough to help the heart heal.

Slow and steady approach

Now, in a CIRM-funded study published in the journal Nature Biomedical Engineering, a team at Stanford – led by Dr. Joseph Wu – believe they have managed to create a new way of delivering these cells, one that combines them with a slow-release delivery mechanism to increase their chances of success.

The team began by working with a subset of bone marrow cells that had been shown in previous studies to have what are called “pro-survival factors.” Then, working in mice, they identified three peptides that lived longer than other peptides. That was step one.

Step two involved creating a matrix, a kind of supporting scaffold, that would enable the researchers to link the three peptides and combine them with a delivery system they hoped would produce a slow release of pro-survival factors.

Step three was seeing if it worked. Using fluorescent markers, they were able to show, in laboratory tests, that unlinked peptides were rapidly released over two or three days. However, the linked peptides had a much slower release, lasting more than 15 days.

Out of the lab and into animals

While these petri dish experiments looked promising the big question was could this approach work in an animal model and, ultimately, in people. So, the team focused on cardiac progenitor cells (CPCs) which have shown potential to help repair damaged hearts, but which also have a low survival rate when transplanted into hearts that have experienced a heart attack.

The team delivered CPCs to the hearts of mice and found the cells without the pro-survival matrix didn’t last long – 80 percent of the cells were gone four days after they were injected, 90 percent were gone by day ten. In contrast the cells on the peptide-infused matrix were found in large numbers up to eight weeks after injection. And the cells didn’t just survive, they also engrafted and activated the heart’s own survival pathways.

Impact on heart

The team then tested to see if the treatment was helping improve heart function. They did echocardiograms and magnetic resonance imaging up to 8 weeks after the transplant surgery and found that the mice treated with the matrix combination had a statistically improved left ventricular function compared to the other mice.

Jayakumar Rajadas, one of the authors on the paper told CIRM that, because the matrix was partly made out of collagen, a substance the FDA has already approved for use in people, this could help in applying for approval to test it in people in the future:

“This paper is the first comprehensive report to demonstrate an FDA-compliant biomaterial to improve stem cell engraftment in the ischemic heart. Importantly, the biomaterial is collagen-based and can be readily tested in humans once regulatory approval is obtained.”

 

Modeling the Human Brain in 3D

(Image from Pasca Lab, Stanford University)

Can you guess what the tiny white balls are in this photo? I’ll give you a hint, they represent the organ that you’re using right now to answer my question.

These are 3D brain organoids generated from human pluripotent stem cells growing in a culture dish. You can think of them as miniature models of the human brain, containing many of the brain’s various cell types, structures, and regions.

Scientists are using brain organoids to study the development of the human nervous system and also to model neurological diseases and psychiatric disorders. These structures allow scientists to dissect the inner workings of the brain – something they can’t do with living patients.

Brain-in-a-Dish

Dr. Sergiu Pasca is a professor at Stanford University who is using 3D cultures to understand human brain development. Pasca and his lab have previously published methods to make different types of brain organoids from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) that recapitulate human brain developmental events in a dish.

Sergiu Pasca, Stanford University (Image credit: Steve Fisch)

My colleague, Todd Dubnicoff, blogged about Pasca’s research last year:

“Using brain tissue grown from patient-derived iPSCs, Dr. Sergiu Pasca and his team recreated the types of nerve cell circuits that form during the late stages of pregnancy in the fetal cerebral cortex, the outer layer of the brain that is responsible for functions including memory, language and emotion. With this system, they observed irregularities in the assembly of brain circuitry that provide new insights into the cellular and molecular causes of neuropsychiatric disorders like autism.”

Pasca generated brain organoids from the iPSCs of patients with a genetic disease called Timothy Syndrome – a condition that causes heart problems and some symptoms of autism spectrum disorder in children. By comparing the nerve cell circuits in patient versus healthy brain organoids, he observed a disruption in the migration of nerve cells in the organoids derived from Timothy Syndrome iPSCs.

“We’ve never been able to recapitulate these human-brain developmental events in a dish before,” said Pasca in a press release, “the process happens in the second half of pregnancy, so viewing it live is challenging. Our method lets us see the entire movie, not just snapshots.”

The Rise of 3D Brain Cultures

Pasca’s lab is just one of many that are working with 3D brain culture technologies to study human development and disease. These technologies are rising in popularity amongst scientists because they make it possible to study human brain tissue in normal and abnormal conditions. Brain organoids have also appeared in the mainstream news as novel tools to study how epidemics like the Zika virus outbreak affect the developing fetal brain (more here and here).

While these advances are exciting and promising, the field is still in its early stages and the 3D organoid models are far from perfect at representing the complex biology of the human brain.

Pasca addresses the progress and the hurdles of 3D brain cultures in a review article titled “The rise of three-dimensional brain cultures” published this week in the journal Nature. The article, describes in detail how pluripotent stem cells can assemble into structures that represent different regions of the human brain allowing scientists to observe how cells interact within neural circuits and how these circuits are disrupted by disease.

The review goes on to compare different approaches for creating 3D brain cultures (see figure below) and their different applications. For instance, scientists are culturing organoids on microchips (brains-on-a-chip) to model the blood-brain barrier – the membrane structure that protects the brain from circulating pathogens in the blood but also makes drug delivery to brain very challenging. Brain organoids are also being used to screen for new drugs and to model complex diseases like Alzheimer’s.

Human pluripotent stem cells, adult stem cells or cancer cells  can be used to derive microfluidics-based organs-on-a-chip (top), undirected organoids (middle), and region-specific brain organoids or organ spheroids (bottom). These 3D cultures can be manipulated with CRISPR-Cas9 genome-editing technologies, transplanted into animals or used for drug screening. (Pasca, Nature)

Pasca ends the review by identifying the major hurdles facing 3D brain culture technologies. He argues that “3D cultures only approximate the appearance and architecture of neural tissue” and that the cells and structures within these organoids are not always predictable. These issues can be address over time by enforcing quality control in how these 3D cultures are made and by using new biomaterials that enable the expansion and maturation of these cultures.

Nonetheless, Pasca believes that 3D brain cultures combined with advancing technologies to study them have “the potential to give rise to novel features for studying human brain development and disease.”

He concludes the review with a cautiously optimistic outlook:

“This is an exciting new field and as with many technologies, it may follow a ‘hype’ cycle in which we overestimate its effects in the short run and underestimate its effects in the long run. A better understanding of the complexity of this platform, and bringing interdisciplinary approaches will accelerate our progress up a ‘slope of enlightenment’ and into the ‘plateau of productivity’.”

3D brain culture from the Pasca Lab, Stanford University


Related Links: