Category Archives: Stem Cell Therapy

The chairman of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency, Jonathan Thomas, today hailed board
action last week as putting “to bed once and for all” questions
about financial conflicts of interest by members of the agency's
governing board.

“It was not an easy change to propose
and certainly not an easy one for our board members to approve. They
all care deeply about our mission and devote a great deal of thought,
time and energy to helping us do our work. So for 13 of them to agree
to abstain from a key aspect of their work was difficult to say the
least. And yet they did it because they felt it was important for the
overall goal of the agency.”

“So why did we take this approach?
It's simple. We want people to focus on the great work we do, on the
groundbreaking research we fund, and the impact we are having on the
field of regenerative medicine not just in California but throughout
the U.S. and around the world. As long as there are perceptions of
conflict of interest hanging over the Board, this will continue to be
difficult.”

“This puts the economic conflicts
issue to bed once and for all.”

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/GHXrGjkYixw/cirms-thomas-conflicts-put-to-bed-at.html

The following statement by stem cell researcher Jeanne
Loring was read at the January 23, 2013, meeting of the governing board of the California stem cell agency. Loring is director
of the Center for Regenerative Medicine at the Scripps Research
Institute in La Jolla, CA.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/l-jQiD3JTec/loring-on-patient-advocates-and-their.html

Patient advocate Don Reed, declaring that the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) 17-month study of the $3 billion California stem cell agency is "grossly misguided," this weekend nonetheless said the agency took "the high road" in its response to the study's recommendation.

Reed, of Fremont, Ca., was particularly incensed about the IOM's recommendations concerning patient advocates on the board. The IOM said that none of the board members, including patient advocates, should vote on grant applications secretly in grant review groups. The IOM said their votes should be recorded in public at full board meetings. Other patient advocates would still have seats on the grant review group, under the IOM recommendations. But they would not also be members of the governing board.

The IOM also said that CIRM should also revise its conflict of interest standards to regulate personal conflicts of interest, such as those involving particular diseases and patient advocates. Some members of the CIRM governing board bristled at the recommendation, and the board did not act on it last week.

Last Wednesday, the CIRM board acted to permit board members who are patient advocates to continue to participate in the closed door grant review sessions, but not vote on the grants at that stage. Previously patient advocates had two cuts at applications, one in the grant review group and one at the public board meeting.

Writing on the Daily Kos blog, Reed also said that no real conflicts of interest currently exist on the board, although 90 percent of the $1.7 billion that has awarded has gone to institutions tied to board members.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/SmmFtyc1zXo/patient-advocate-reed-defends-patient.html

Additional mainstream media news
coverage surfaced last Friday involving the California stem cell
agency's response to the blue-ribbon report from the Institute of
Medicine(IOM), whose concerns about the agency ranged from conflicts of interest to grant
appeals by rejected researchers.

“'I’m encouraged by this,' Shapiro
told KPCC. 'Presumably in the future they’ll take other steps. But
these are steps they could take without any legislative approval and
…I think it does respond in a pretty significant way to the spirit
of the report.'
“But Shapiro expressed concern that
the agency is making only 'small moves' to address a recommendation
that CIRM separate operations from oversight. Currently, the ICOC
functions 'both as an executor and as an overseer—competing duties
that compromise the ICOC’s critical role of providing independent
oversight and strategic direction,' according to the December IOM
report.
“'But  I do understand… that
would be a move that they would have to take over time so we’ll
have to wait and see,' Shapiro said.
“Thomas agreed and said that while
CIRMs recommendations more clearly define the roles of chairman and
president, more refinements will be likely over time.”

“Changes may be on the way at
California’s stem cell funding agency.”

“I’m still not sure I’m a fan of
all of the proposed changes, but I would say the plan is bold and
creative.”

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/A2ayEbm2Se0/ioms-shapiro-wants-to-see-more-changes.html

The California stem cell agency today
issued a press release touting “dramatic changes” at the agency in response to critical recommendations by the Institute of Medicine.

• “The 13 Board members appointed from
  institutions eligible for funding from the stem cell agency, such as
  those in the University of California system, would no longer vote on
  any grants brought before the Board but would instead abstain
• “All members of the Board would
  be able to participate in discussions on applications but only
  patient advocates and independent members of the Board would be able
  to vote on funding issues (members would continue to refrain from
  any discussion of specific applications from their institutions)
• “Patient Advocates would
  continue to be members of the Grants Working Groups but would not
  vote on individual applications
• “Programmatic review, aimed at
  balancing the agency’s portfolio, would take place at public Board
  meetings where members have a chance to make changes to
  recommendations from the Grants Working Group
• “Industry involvement would
  increase, where appropriate, on the Grants Working Group, and also
  feature in a newly constituted Scientific Advisory Board; the
  structure and membership of this group is still under discussion
• “Appeals on applications not
  recommended for funding will be handled by science staff who will
  evaluate them, determine if they merit further review by the Grants
  Working Group, and ultimately make recommendations to the Board.
  Staff will also be allowed to advocate for additional grants not
  recommended for funding by the Grants Working Group that they
  believe should be considered in programmatic review
• “The Chair and President would
  share a division of responsibilities with the President supervising
  all scientific operations and internal operational responsibilities.
  In addition the Chief Financial Officer would report to the
  President. The Chair would handle the ‘external affairs’ aspect
  of the agency, things such as financial sustainability to raise
  additional funds, state legislative relations, bond financing,
  public communications etc.
• “IOM recommendation on the
  creation of a Scientific Advisory Board to provide counsel on such
  issues as funding priorities and portfolio strategy will be
  implemented by staff
• “IOM recommendations on
  Intellectual Property will be referred to the agency’s IP
  subcommittee which will review and report back to the full board
  with options and recommendations
• “IOM recommendations on
  Sustainability: Chair, working with the President, will develop a
  plan to address this and present to the Board when ready

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/MHSytXHG-zU/stem-cell-agency-adds-fresh-details-to.html

The journal Nature today said on its
web site that the California stem cell agency plans to make a “few
changes” in response to a critical report from the Institute of
Medicine(IOM).

"Other IOM recommendations were only
indirectly addressed by (CIRM Chairman J.T.) Thomas’ plan. The IOM report had stated
that the board should restrict itself to an 'oversight' role
rather than an 'operational' role. Thomas’s recommendations
instead described ways to avoid overlapping duties. His own role as
chair is to handle 'external affairs' whereas CIRM’s president
will be to handle scientific and internal affairs."

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/JU2zXAO4Q1Q/nature-on-iom-and-california-stem-cell.html