Category Archives: Stem Cell Therapy

Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) results in direct and indirect damage to neural tissues, which results in motor and sensory dysfunction, dystonia, and pathological reflex that ultimately lead to paraplegia or tetraplegia. A loss of cells, axon regeneration failure, and time-sensitive pathophysiology make tissue repair difficult. Despite various medical developments, there are currently no effective regenerative treatments. Stem cell therapy is a promising treatment for SCI due to its multiple targets and reactivity benefits. The present review focuses on SCI stem cell therapy, including bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, umbilical mesenchymal stem cells, adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells, neural stem cells, neural progenitor cells, embryonic stem cells, induced pluripotent stem cells, and extracellular vesicles. Each cell type targets certain features of SCI pathology and shows therapeutic effects via cell replacement, nutritional support, scaffolds, and immunomodulation mechanisms. However, many preclinical studies and a growing number of clinical trials found that single-cell treatments had only limited benefits for SCI. SCI damage is multifaceted, and there is a growing consensus that a combined treatment is needed.

Keywords: AD-MSCs; BM-MSCs; ESCs; EVs; NPCs; NSCs; U-MSCs; iPSCs; spinal cord injury; stem cells.

Read more from the original source:
Stem Cell Therapy for Spinal Cord Injury - PubMed

One of the most common questions Ive gotten over the last decade is, how much does stem cell therapy cost? They actually seem most often to want to know more specifically how much itshould cost.

To try to authoritatively answer this now in 2022 we need data from the present and past along with expert perspectives.

These kinds of questions on what are common and reasonable prices have continued in 2022. However, the types of queries have also evolved. Things have gotten more complicated. There are many layers to the question of cost. I cover the key elements here in todays article. In the big picture, the most worrisome potential cost is to your health if you proceed with unproven stem cell injections.

Stem cell cost questions | Stem cells cost $2,500 to $20,000| Why do stem cells cost so much? | How have stem cell prices changed? | Stem cell supplement cost | FTC actions and patients as consumers| Does insurance or Medicare cover stem cell therapy? | Patient fundraising | Looking ahead will stem cell costs go down?| References

This post is the most comprehensive look at stem cell treatment cost and costs of related therapies that Ive seen on the web, especially factoring in our inclusion of historical polling data from past years here on The Niche. The above bullet point list is what is covered in todays post and you can jump to sections that interest you most by clicking on those table of contents bullet points.

You can also watch the video I made summarizing the key points of this post below.

Furthermore, it encompasses other important issues related to insurance, fundraising, and approaches to being a smart consumer. Keep in mind that almost all stem cell therapies outside the bone marrow/hematopoietic sphere are not FDA-approved. They mostly lack rigorous data to back them up too. So this post is definitely not recommending you get them. I advise against it, but many people still want info on cost.

Lets get started.

After more than a decade of blogging about stem cells from just about every angle, its interesting to consider trends in the types of questions I get asked. Beyond cost, I also often get asked How much of a stem cell treatment price does insurance cover?

Of course, insurance (or lack thereof) directly bears on cost too. Ill get more into insurance later in the post.

In a way its not so surprising that cost is so much on peoples minds now for a few reasons.

First, as compared to many years back, people now view stem cell injections as a more everyday thing. Stem cell therapy is often available just down the street at a local strip mall.

Back in 2010 and in the 5 or so years after that, people instead more often viewed stem cells as some amazing thing out of reach to them at that time. Now people view stem cell offerings through the lens of consumers.

Sadly, another major part of the reason for the change in perceptions of stem cell treatments is the tidal wave of stem cell clinics from coast to coast in the US selling unproven and sometimes dangerous offerings.

At the same time, some universities and large medical centers also sell stem cell or similar offerings that arent proven. Im worried that that number may be increasing too and patients who may be paying there for unproven stem cells way at the very high end of the cost spectrum, sometimes above $100K.

Other stem cell suppliers and clinics market stem cell-related stuff that isnt real stem cells such as platelet rich plasma or PRP (see my comprehensive guide to PRP including a helpful infographic here) or injections of often dead perinatal stem cell products.

For all these reasons about once every year or two, I do polling asking the readers of The Niche here about their experiences.

Ive done the polling again now in 2020 in a more comprehensive form.

To have a sense of cost, we need to ask patients certain questions. How much did you pay per injection? How many injections did you get? Where did you get them?

Keep in mind that the total cost of stem cell therapy is the product of the cost per injection times the # of injections. For instance, if a stem cell injection costs $8,000 and you get 10 injections, your total cost is $80,000.

Unfortunately, the unproven stem cell clinics generally do not volunteer data on how much they charge. They also often encourage patients to get many injections.

Our 2020 polling data (you can still participate and I will update this) for stem cell treatments are in the graphic above. Here are some highlights.

The self-reported responses on cost for stem cell treatments, as indicated by respondents to our 2020 polling, suggest the price has gone up.

While the most common answer in 2019 was $2,501-$5,000, in 2020 the most common response was $10,001-$20,000, while $2,501-$5,000 was close behind.

The percentage of people paying the most, more than $100,000, was only slightly (probably non-significantly) higher in 2020, but both in 2019 and 2020 the percentage of people paying over $100K was much higher than in 2018 polling.

Keep in mind this is the cost per injection so how many injections do patients typically get? While the number of injections reported most commonly was 1 in both 2019 and 2020, in 2020, the second most common answer was 6-10 injections, a big boost from 2019. Again, more injections end up multiplying things up to boost the total cost. Only a few people in the polling had many injections, but in my view it is still striking to see anyone say theyve received more than 20 stem cell injections.

For comparison, the 2019 polling can be found here, but some of the key results are captured in a combo screenshot Ive included here. I got a lot more responses to the polling in 2019 so that makes me more confident in the data than in the 2020 polling so far, but I hope well get more responses moving forward in 2020 and if we do, again Ill update the info in this post.

What you can see from 2019 is that a plurality of respondents reported getting one stem cell injection, but 60% of people nonetheless got more than one stem cell injection.

Remarkably about 1 in 20-25 people received more than 20 stem cell injections.

About another 1 in 20 people got 6-20 injections. I find this amount of repeat injections to be surprising and concerning as it amplifies health and financial risks.

In terms of cost per injection, the results are pretty similar to 2018 (see at right below) on the whole.

This kind of polling isnt super scientific, but can gauge trends. Unfortunately, I havent really seen much other published data on stem cell clinic costs in actual journals.

I dont know if its noise or not, but the percentage of people paying over $100K is about 2-fold higher in 2019 versus 2018.

There are more people may be paying $10K-$20K as well now in 2020 vs. 2019 or 2018.

There is growing interest from the public in stem cell supplements. I did a post on this earlier in 2020 so take a look here, which was essentially a review of stem cell supplements like Regenokine. In terms of cost, while supplements are far less expensive than getting stem cell, PRP, or exosome injections, supplements are still pricey for what you get.

Its not unusual to pay $100 for a small bottle of stem cell supplements, the other factor to consider is that these supplements generally have no solid, published data behind them so you might as well be paying $100 for water. Its unclear what risks taking these supplements might bring as well.

On the economic side, you might think that the feds like the FTC would be actively pursuing false or even fraudulent marketing of stem cells via the web and other kinds of advertising, but in total so far the FTC to my knowledge has only taken relatively few actions such as this one. and then some letters for COVID-related marketing of stem cells and other biologics earlier this year in 2020.

Oddly, there were just that a couple blips of FTC activity, especially considering the sea of questionable stem cell clinic-related ads out there. This ranges from major newspapers to inflight magazines to mobile ads on a stem-cell-mobile to television. Then of course there are the infomercial seminars.

Patients should also view themselves as consumers. Savvy customers considering paying money to stem cell clinics should do their homework. I often tell patients to use at a minimum the kinds of tough standards they bring to the car-buying process. Over the last few years Consumer Reports has been interested in the stem cell treatment world and done some reporting that is worth reading.

A common question I hear is the following: is stem cell therapy covered by insurance? Unfortunately for patients desperate to try stem cells, insurance generally does not provide any coverage, which often leads them to take extreme financial measures. These steps can include fundraising (more below).

In my view, the Regenexx brand has made a big deal out of how some employers contribute towards costs of their clinics offerings. Im not so clear on where that stands today in 2020.

Does Medicare cover stem cell therapies? Medicare will generally cover the cost of established bone marrow transplantation type therapies. So stem cell transplant costs, which include hematopoietic stem cell transplant cost, are often zero for patients.

However it does not cover unproven stem cell therapies.

Patients are often reaching out to me so I know that many of them have gone to extraordinary measures to raise the money to pay to unproven stem cell clinics. Its painful to think about what little they get in return. Since we are by definition talking about unproven medical procedures here, in my view this money is largely down the drain.

If you have other data on stem cell economic issues such as what patients pay please let me know. Then theres the issue of what it actually costs the clinics per injection and in turn: whats their profit margin?

What ends up happening is that patients take out second mortgages on their houses, try to collect funds from friends and relatives, or turn to online fundraising. The internet fundraising efforts most often end up on GoFundMe. This is a trend Ive been noticing for years. Some colleagues even published a paper on this trend, a very interesting and an important read. The paper is Crowdfunding for Unproven Stem CellBased Interventions in JAMA by Jeremy Snyder,Leigh Turner , and Valorie A. Crooks. Heres a key passage:

As of December 3, 2017, our search identified 408 campaigns (GoFundMe=358; YouCaring=50) seeking donations for stem cell interventions advertised by 50 individual businesses. These campaigns requested $7439308 and received pledges for $1450011 from 13050 donors. The campaigns were shared 111044 times on social media. Two campaigns were duplicated across platforms but shared separately on social media. Of the 408 campaigns, 178 (43.6%) made statements that were definitive or certain about the interventions efficacy, 124 (30.4%) made statements optimistic or hopeful about efficacy, 63 (15.4%) made statements of both kinds, and 43 (10.5%) did not make efficacy claims. All mentions of risks (n=36) claimed the intervention had low/no risks compared with alternative treatments.

Supposedly GoFundMe has taken some steps to lower the often ethically thorny stem cell fundraising on its site, but Im not sure how much it has changed.

There is pressure on stem cell clinics now in 2022 in large part due to two factors. These could drive costs down or up depending on how things play out. First, the FDA is much more active against unproven stem cell clinics. This may mean more money from the clinics going toward paying attorneys or FDA compliance experts. Youd think this might drive costs up. However, the still large number of clinics may keep pressure to stay with keeping price tags lower.

The second factor is the COVID-19 pandemic, which has forced many clinics to stop injections temporarily. While a surprising number of clinicsI did by phone were still open in a small informal survey, others were in a holding pattern. This may lower supply which could raise prices. But I think demand is likely way down as many patients stay home to avoid COVID risks. This could be temporary though. As things start re-opening, as they are now, the clinics may be able to capitalize on pent-up demand.

To sum up, the answer to the question, How do stem cells cost? largely depends on context. Overall, clinics will charge what they think patients will pay them. It will always be a moving target. I urge patients to be cautious both medically, talking to their doctors, and financially.

Original post:
How much does stem cell therapy cost in 2022? - The Niche

Human stem cells are essential for the growth and maintenance of our organs, bones, and systems. They are also amazing tools of discovery for scientists at the Institute for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine and researchers around the world studying how to stop diseases. However, predatory businesses across the country are misusing the term stem cells to market unapproved, unproven, and unsafe procedures that are often expensive and largely ineffective. Its important to understand what stem cell therapy really means.

Lets start by creating two categories of stem cell therapies approved (by the FDA) and unapproved. Whether a stem cell therapy is approved or unapproved has critical implications for the science, effectiveness, and safety of the procedure.

(In addition to blood stem cell transplants), the FDA lists a limited number of additional approved products on its website.)

More recently, hundreds of businesses around the country referring to themselves as clinics have begun marketing various versions of stem cell therapy that promise to help patients with serious conditions like Parkinsons disease and more common ailments like joint pain. In reality, most of these types of stem cell therapy do not use stem cells at all. Rather, they remove tissues that presumably contains adult stem cells from one body part and inject those cells into another part of the body.

Furthermore, there is no proof that any stem cell therapy offered by stem cell clinics is effective or safe. Unlike FDA-approved procedures, which are subject to years of rigorous trials, unapproved treatments marketed directly to patients are developed and performed with little oversight. While stem cell clinics often tout testimonials from satisfied customers, there has never been a large-scale clinical trial to demonstrate that the perceived benefits of a stem cell therapy arent the result of a placebo effect. In recent years, the FDA has begun to expand regulations and enforcement of these clinics.

Thanks to decades of data, we know much more about the effectiveness of blood stem cell transplants. We also know they are not instant cures. While the procedure itself only lasts a few hours, recovery can take weeks. During this period, patients are monitored closely by physicians and nurses for side effects and for evidence of recovery.

There are side effects associated with approved and unapproved stem cell therapies. The possible side effects of blood stem cell transplants are detailed on the Cancer.org website. Patients considering an unapproved stem cell therapy should be aware that these procedures carry serious risks and that these risks may not be managed by a qualified care team. Injecting even a persons own tissue in a different body part has resulted in severe illness and, in some cases, blindness.

Therapies offered by stem cell clinics come with financial risk as well. Because these procedures are generally not covered by insurance, people seeking treatment are required to pay large out-of-pocket fees with no guarantee of improved health.

In their advertising, stem cell clinics promise unsubstantiated relief or even cures for everything from knee pain to Parkinsons disease, often taking advantage of vulnerable individuals who may feel they have nowhere else to turn. In reality, there is no strong evidence to back up claims that any stem cell therapy works let alone has lasting benefits.

See the original post:
How Does Stem Cell Therapy Work and What Are the Risks? | ISCRM

Lo B, Parham L: Resolving ethical issues in stem cell clinical trials: the example of Parkinson disease. J Law Med Ethics. 2010, 38: 257-266. 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00486.x.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Habets MG, van Delden JJ, Bredenoord AL: The inherent ethical challenge of first-in-human pluripotent stem cell trials. Regen Med. 2014, 9: 1-3. 10.2217/rme.13.83.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Niemansburg SL, Teraa M, Hesam H, van Delden JJ, Verhaar MC, Bredenoord AL: Stem cell trials for cardiovascular medicine: ethical rationale. Tiss Eng Part A. 2013, [Epub ahead of print]

Google Scholar

Levine R: Ethics and Regulation of Clinical Research. 1988, New York: Yale University Press

Google Scholar

Gilbert S, Kaebnick GE, Murray TH: Special Report: Animal research ethics: evolving views and practices. Hastings Center Rep. 2012, 42: S1-S39.

Article Google Scholar

Joffe S, Miller FG: Bench to bedside: mapping the moral terrain of clinical research. Hastings Center Rep. 2008, 38: 30-42.

Article Google Scholar

Arcidiacono JA, Blair JW, Benton KA: US Food and Drug Administration international collaborations for cellular therapy product regulation. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2012, 3: 38-42. 10.1186/scrt129.

Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

Caulfield T, Zarzeczny A, McCormick J, Bubela T, Critchley C, Einsiedel E, Galipeau J, Harmon S, Huynh M, Hyun I, Illes J, Isasi R, Joly Y, Laurie G, Lomax G, Longstaff H, McDonald M, Murdoch C, Ogbogu U, Owen-Smith J, Pattinson S, Premji S, von Tigerstrom B, Winickoff DE: The stem cell research environment: a patchwork of patchworks. Stem Cell Rev. 2009, 5: 82-88. 10.1007/s12015-009-9071-3.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Greely H: Assessing ESCROs: yesterday and tomorrow. Am J Bioeth. 2013, 13: 44-52.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Lomax GP, Peckman SR: Stem cell policy exceptionalism: proceed with caution. Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2012, 8: 299-304. 10.1007/s12015-011-9305-z.

Article Google Scholar

Hyun I, Lindvall O, Ahrlund-Richter L, Cattaneo E, Cavazzana-Calvo M, Cossu G, De Luca M, Fox IJ, Gerstle C, Goldstein RA, Hermeren G, High KA, Kim HO, Lee HP, Levy-Lahad E, Li L, Lo B, Marshak DR, McNab A, Munsie M, Nakauchi H, Rao M, Rooke HM, Valles CS, Srivastava A, Sugarman J, Taylor PL, Veiga A, Wong AL, Zoloth L, Daley GQ: New ISSCR guidelines underscore major principles for responsible translational stem cell research. Cell Stem Cell. 2008, 3: 607-609. 10.1016/j.stem.2008.11.009.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

International Society for Stem Cell Research: Guidelines for the clinical translation of stem cells. [http://www.isscr.org/docs/guidelines/isscrglclinicaltrans.pdf]

Caulfield T: Stem cell research and economic promises. J Law Med Ethics. 2010, 38: 303-313. 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00490.x.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Caulfield T, Rachul C, Zarzeczny A: The evolution of policy issues in stem cell research: an international survey. Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2012, 8: 1037-1042. 10.1007/s12015-012-9404-5.

Article Google Scholar

Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C: What makes clinical research ethical?. JAMA. 2000, 283: 2701-2711. 10.1001/jama.283.20.2701.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Kato K, Kimmelman J, Robert J, Sipp D, Sugarman J: Ethical and policy issues in the clinical translation of stem cells: report of a focus session at the ISSCR annual meeting. Cell Stem Cell. 2012, 11: 765-767. 10.1016/j.stem.2012.11.004.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

London AJ, Kimmelman J, Emborg ME: Beyond access vs. protection in trials of innovative therapies. Science. 2010, 328: 829-830. 10.1126/science.1189369.

Article PubMed Central CAS PubMed Google Scholar

King NM, Cohen-Haguenauer O: En route to ethical recommendations for gene transfer clinical trials. Mol Ther. 2008, 16: 432-438. 10.1038/mt.2008.13.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Dresser R: First-in-human trial participants: not a vulnerable population, but vulnerable nonetheless. J Law Med Ethics. 2009, 37: 38-50.

Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

Dresser R: Stem cell research as innovation: expanding the ethical and policy conversation. J Law Med Ethics. 2010, 38: 332-341. 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00492.x.

Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

Dresser R: Alive and well: the research imperative. J Law Med Ethics. 2012, 40: 915-921.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Dresser R: The ubiquity and utility of the therapeutic misconception. Soc Philos Policy. 2002, 19: 271-294. 10.1017/S0265052502192119.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

King NM, Henderson GE, Churchill LR, Davis AM, Hull SC, Nelson DK, Parham-Vetter PC, Rothschild BB, Easter MM, Wilfond BS: Consent forms and the therapeutic misconception: the example of gene transfer research. IRB. 2005, 27: 1-

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Hyun I: The bioethics of stem cell research and therapy. J Clin Invest. 2010, 120: 71-75. 10.1172/JCI40435.

Article PubMed Central CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Daley GQ: The promise and perils of stem cell therapeutics. Cell Stem Cell. 2012, 10: 740-749. 10.1016/j.stem.2012.05.010.

Article PubMed Central CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Sugarman J: Human stem cell ethics: beyond the embryo. Cell Stem Cell. 2008, 2: 529-533. 10.1016/j.stem.2008.05.005.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research: Guidance for industry: considerations for the design and conduct of early-phase clinical trials of cellular and gene therapy products (DRAFT). 2013, [http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/CellularandGeneTherapy/UCM359073.pdf]

Google Scholar

Sipp D: Direct-to-consumer stem cell marketing and regulatory responses. Stem Cells Translational Med. 2013, 2: 638-640. 10.5966/sctm.2013-0040.

Article Google Scholar

Weissman I: Stem cell therapies could change medicine if they get the chance. Cell Stem Cell. 2012, 10: 663-665. 10.1016/j.stem.2012.05.014.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Hyun I, Hochedlinger K, Jaenish R, Yamanaka S: New advances in iPS cell research do not obviate the need for human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2007, 4: 367-368.

Article Google Scholar

King NM, Coughlin CN, Atala A: Pluripotent stem cells: the search for the perfect source. Minn J Law Sci Technol. 2011, 12: 715-730.

Google Scholar

Ishii T, Pera RA, Greely HT: Ethical and legal issues arising in research on inducing human germ cells from pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2013, 13: 145-148. 10.1016/j.stem.2013.07.005.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Cohen CB: Renewing the Stuff of Life: Stem Cells, Ethics, and Public Policy. 2007, New York: Oxford University Press

Google Scholar

Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee, The National Academies: Final Report and 2010 Amendments to the National Academies Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. 2010, Washington, DC: National Academies Press

Google Scholar

Yamanaka S: Induced pluripotent stem cells: past, present, and future. Cell Stem Cell. 2012, 10: 678-684. 10.1016/j.stem.2012.05.005.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Pera MF: Stem cells: the dark side of induced pluripotency. Nature. 2011, 471: 46-47. 10.1038/471046a.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Obokata H, Wakayama T, Sasai Y, Kojima K, Vacanti MP, Niwa H, Yamato M, Vacanti CA: Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency. Nature. 2014, 505: 641-647. 10.1038/nature12968.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Cyranoski D: Acid bath offers easy path to stem cells. Nature. 2014, 505: 596-10.1038/505596a.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Cyranoski D: Acid-bath stem-cell study under investigation. Nature. 2014, [http://www.nature.com/news/acid-bath-stem-cell-study-under-investigation-1.14738]

Google Scholar

Kimmelman J, Baylis F, Glass KG: Stem cell trials: lessons from gene transfer research. Hastings Cent Rep. 2006, 36: 23-26.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Hyun I: Allowing innovative stem cell based therapies outside of clinical trials: ethical and policy challenges. J Law Med Ethics. 2010, 38: 277-285. 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00488.x.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Wilson JM: A history lesson for stem cells. Science. 2009, 324: 727-728. 10.1126/science.1174935.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Bretzner F, Gilbert F, Baylis F, Brownstone RM: Target populations for first-in-human embryonic stem cell research in spinal cords. Cell Stem Cell. 2011, 8: 468-475. 10.1016/j.stem.2011.04.012.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Lukovic D, Stojkovic M, Moreno-Manzano V, Bhattacharya SS, Erceg S: Perspectives and future directions of human pluripotent stem cell-based therapies: lessons from Gerons clinical trial for spinal cord injury. Stem Cells Dev. 2014, 23: 1-4. 10.1089/scd.2013.0266.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Illes J, Reimer C, Kwon BK: Stem cell clinical trials for spinal cord injury: readiness, reluctance, redefinition. Stem Cell Rev. 2011, 7: 997-1005. 10.1007/s12015-011-9259-1.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Esch MB, King TL, Shuler ML: The role of body-on-a-chip devices in drug and toxicity studies. Ann Rev Biomed Eng. 2011, 13: 55-72. 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071910-124629.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Lowenthal J, Lipnick S, Rao M, Hull SC: Specimen collection for induced pluripotent stem cell research: harmonizing the approach to informed consent. Stem Cells Translational Med. 2012, 1: 409-421. 10.5966/sctm.2012-0029.

Article Google Scholar

Lomax GP, Hull SC, Lowenthal J, Rao M, Isasi R: The DISCUSS project: induced pluripotent stem cell lines from previously collected research biospecimens and informed consent: points to consider. Stem Cells Translational Med. 2013, 2: 727-730. 10.5966/sctm.2013-0099.

Article Google Scholar

Lomax GP, Shepard KA: Return of results in translational iPS cell research: considerations for donor informed consent. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2013, 4: 6-7. 10.1186/scrt154.

Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

Hyun I: The bioethics of iPS cell based drug discovery. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011, 89: 646-647. 10.1038/clpt.2010.308.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

King NM, Coughlin CN, Furth M: Ethical issues in regenerative medicine. Wake Forest Intellectual Property Law J. 2009, 9: 216-238.

Excerpt from:
Ethical issues in stem cell research and therapy

EdiGene to Present Preliminary Safety and Efficacy Results of an Investigator Initiated Trial for ET-01, its Investigational Gene Editing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Therapy, at the 64th American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting and Exposition  Business Wire

Read the original:
EdiGene to Present Preliminary Safety and Efficacy Results of an Investigator Initiated Trial for ET-01, its Investigational Gene Editing...

Global Stem Cell Umbilical Cord Blood (UCB) Market Report 2022-2026: Increased Federal Investment in Stem Cell Therapy, and the Advent of Cord Blood Banking to Drive Sector - ResearchAndMarkets.com  Business Wire

More:
Global Stem Cell Umbilical Cord Blood (UCB) Market Report 2022-2026: Increased Federal Investment in Stem Cell Therapy, and the Advent of Cord Blood...

Global Cell Culture Protein Surface Coating Market to Grow at a CAGR of 13.82% During 2022-2031; Market to Expand on the Back of the Technological Breakthrough in Stem Cell Transplantation and Gene Therapy Kenneth Research  GlobeNewswire

Read more:
Global Cell Culture Protein Surface Coating Market to Grow at a CAGR of 13.82% During 2022-2031; Market to Expand on the Back of the Technological...

Articular cartilage damage, especially when it affects the knee joint, remains a major clinical problem due to the poor intrinsic ability for this tissue to repair itself. The major function of joint cartilage is to allow for smooth gliding of joint surfaces and to protect the surrounding bone from stress. This sort of movement is key for individuals who participate in sports such as skiing. In a wider context, though, knee cartilage damage can prevent people from running, exercising, or just moving as freely as theyd like. Articular cartilage allows the knee to absorb shock and loads up to 20 times the body weight.

There are many reasons why someone may experience articular knee cartilage damage. Regular wear and tear on the knee over time, involvement in high-stress activities, or accidents and injuries can all contribute to cartilage damage around the knee joint.

Osteoarthritis is a chronic degenerative disorder that ultimately leads to a gradual deterioration of knee joint cartilage. Osteoarthritis may also be the result of a prior injury to the knee joint such as a fracture, tendon damage, or ligament tears.

This may lead to joint instability, which can cause long-term damage to the articular cartilage. Arthritis can affect not only the cartilage but may also lead to damage of the bone beneath the cartilage, the synovial lining to the joint, ligaments, tendons, and muscles.

Adult stem cells are incredibly versatile in a medical sense. They have a potential to reliably differentiate into cartilage, bone, fat, or soft tissue. Because of this, the injection of progenitor cells, especially mesenchymal stem cells (special stem cells from adipose tissue or bone marrow), have been shown to be a better strategy to repair degenerative cartilage than implantation of differentiated cells such as articular cartilage.

In other words, when adult stem cells are injected into a knee with damaged cartilage, they can act to repair damaged tissue and build new cartilage.

Adult stem cells also display the ability to specifically address areas of inflammation and degeneration and to modify immune system activity, which can favorably influence the surrounding cartilage in areas of damage.

Encouragingly, results of pre-clinical and clinical trials have provided initial evidence of efficacy and safety in the therapeutic use of mesenchymal stem cell therapies for the treatment of knee cartilage damage and osteoarthritis. Cell-based therapy has become a key priority of tissue engineering research focused on functional replacement of cartilage and meniscus regeneration.

A year long animal study has provided research that demonstrates that stem cell treatments provide structural regeneration with mechanical properties comparable with the native cartilage.

The rest is here:
Stem Cell Therapy for Knees - thriveMD Denver & Vail, CO

rn","memberOrganisations":[{"asset_name":"Parenting Research Centre","asset_redirect_url":"https://parentingrc.org.au","asset_metadata_page_content_svg_thumbnail^as_asset:asset_url":"https://raisingchildren.net.au/__data/assets/file/0017/23264/PRC_Stacked_MasterLogo_RGB.svg","asset_url":"https://parentingrc.org.au","asset_thumbnail_url":"https://raisingchildren.net.au/__data/assets/file/0017/23264/PRC_Stacked_MasterLogo_RGB.svg"},{"asset_name":"The Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne","asset_redirect_url":"https://www.rch.org.au","asset_metadata_page_content_svg_thumbnail^as_asset:asset_url":"https://raisingchildren.net.au/__data/assets/file/0016/23263/logo-chm.svg","asset_url":"https://www.rch.org.au","asset_thumbnail_url":"https://raisingchildren.net.au/__data/assets/file/0016/23263/logo-chm.svg"},{"asset_name":"Murdoch Children's Research Institute","asset_redirect_url":"https://www.mcri.edu.au/","asset_metadata_page_content_svg_thumbnail^as_asset:asset_url":"https://raisingchildren.net.au/__data/assets/file/0018/23265/logo-mcri.svg","asset_url":"https://www.mcri.edu.au/","asset_thumbnail_url":"https://raisingchildren.net.au/__data/assets/file/0018/23265/logo-mcri.svg"}]},"footerMenuBlocks":["a23224","a23232","a23240"]}; sq.ready( function() { return sq.siteTree }, function () { sq.globalFooter('global-footer', Object.assign({}, sq.state.site, {lineage: sq.state.page.lineage}, sq.state.footer, { siteTree: sq.siteTree, view: 'GlobalFooterInner' })); } ) })(sq);

Original post:
Stem cell therapy and autism | Raising Children Network

NEW YORK, Oct. 11, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Cellectis (the Company) (Euronext Growth: ALCLS - NASDAQ: CLLS), a clinical-stage biotechnology company using its pioneering gene-editing platform to develop life-saving cell and gene therapies, announced today that the Company will present both an oral and poster at the European Society of Gene and Cell Therapys (ESGCT) 29th Congress, to be held in Edinburgh from October 11-14, 2022.

Arianna Moiani, Ph.D., Senior Scientist & Team Leader Innovation Gene Therapy, will give an oral presentation on encouraging pre-clinical data that leverages TALEN gene editing technology to develop a hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPCs)-based gene therapy to treat sickle cell disease.

Eduardo Seclen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist & Team Leader, Gene Editing, will present a poster illustrating a TALEN-based gene editing approach that reprograms HSPCs to secrete alpha-L-iduronidase (IDUA), a therapeutic enzyme missing in Mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS-I).

The pre-clinical data presented at ESGCT further demonstrate our ability to leverage TALEN gene editing technology to potentially address genetic diseases, namely, sickle cell disease and lysosomal storage diseases. By correcting a faulty mutation or inserting a corrected gene at the HSPC level, we aim to provide a lifelong supply of healthy cells in a single intervention, said Philippe Duchateau, Ph.D., Chief Scientific Officer at Cellectis. These new milestones bring us one step closer to our goal: providing a cure to patients that have failed to respond to standard therapy.

Presentation details

Pre-clinical data presentation on a non-viral DNA delivery associated with TALEN gene editing that leads to highly efficient correction of sickle cell mutation in long-term repopulating hematopoietic stem cells

Sickle cell disease stems from a single point mutation in the HBB gene which results in sickle hemoglobin.

Cellectis leveraged its TALEN technology to develop a gene editing process that leads to highly efficient HBB gene correction via homology directed repair, while mitigating potential risks associated to HBB gene knock-out.

Overall, these results show that non-viral DNA delivery associated with TALEN gene editing reduces the toxicity usually observed with viral DNA delivery and allows high levels of HBB gene correction in long-term repopulating hematopoietic stem cells.

The oral presentation titled Non-viral DNA delivery associated to TALEN gene editing leads to highly efficient correction of sickle cell mutation in long-term repopulating hematopoietic stem cells, will be made on Thursday, October 13th, 8:30AM-10:45AM BST by Arianna Moiani, Ph.D., Senior Scientist & Team Leader Innovation Gene Therapy. The presentation can be found on the Cellectis website on the day of the presentation.

Presentation details

Pre-clinical data presentation on TALEN-mediated engineering of HSPC that enables systemic delivery of IDUA

Mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS-I) is caused by deficiencies in the alpha-L-iduronidase (IDUA) gene and it is associated with severe morbidity representing a significant unmet medical need.

Cellectis established a TALEN-based ex vivo gene editing protocol to insert an IDUA-expression cassette into a specific locus of HSPC.

Editing rates in vivo were 6-9% sixteen weeks after injection, depending on the tissue analyzed (blood, spleen, bone marrow). Lastly, 8.3% of human cells were edited in the brain compartment.

Cellectis established a safe TALEN-based gene editing protocol procuring IDUA-edited HSPCs able to engraft, differentiate into multiple lineages and reach multiple tissues, including the brain.

The poster presentation titled TALEN-mediated engineering of HSPC enables systemic delivery of IDUA, will be made on Thursday, October 13th, 5:30PM - 7:15PM BST by Eduardo Seclen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist & Team Leader, Gene Editing, and can be found on Cellectis website.

About Cellectis

Cellectis is a clinical-stage biotechnology company using its pioneering gene-editing platform to develop life-saving cell and gene therapies. Cellectis utilizes an allogeneic approach for CAR-T immunotherapies in oncology, pioneering the concept of off-the-shelf and ready-to-use gene-edited CAR T-cells to treat cancer patients, and a platform to make therapeutic gene editing in hemopoietic stem cells for various diseases. As a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with over 22 years of experience and expertise in gene editing, Cellectis is developing life-changing product candidates utilizing TALEN, its gene editing technology, and PulseAgile, its pioneering electroporation system to harness the power of the immune system in order to treat diseases with unmet medical needs. Cellectis headquarters are in Paris, France, with locations in New York, New York and Raleigh, North Carolina. Cellectis is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market (ticker: CLLS) and on Euronext Growth (ticker: ALCLS).

For more information, visit http://www.cellectis.com. Follow Cellectis on social media: @cellectis, LinkedIn and YouTube.

For further information, please contact:

Media contacts:

Pascalyne Wilson,Director,Communications,+33 (0)7 76 99 14 33, media@cellectis.com

Margaret Gandolfo, Senior Manager, Communications, +1 (646) 628 0300

Investor Relation contact:

Arthur Stril, Chief Business Officer, +1 (347) 809 5980, investors@cellectis.com

Ashley R. Robinson, LifeSci Advisors, +1 617430 7577

Forward-looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws, including the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as anticipate, believe, intend, expect, plan, scheduled, could, may and will, or the negative of these and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements, which are based on our managements current expectations and assumptions and on information currently available to management. Forward-looking statements include statements about the potential of our preclinical programs and product candidates. These forward-looking statements are made in light of information currently available to us and are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including with respect to the numerous risks associated with biopharmaceutical product candidate development. With respect to our cash runway, our operating plans, including product development plans, may change as a result of various factors, including factors currently unknown to us. Furthermore, many other important factors, including those described in our Annual Report on Form 20-F and the financial report (including the management report) for the year ended December 31, 2021 and subsequent filings Cellectis makes with the Securities Exchange Commission from time to time, as well as other known and unknown risks and uncertainties may adversely affect such forward-looking statements and cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements publicly, or to update the reasons why actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future.

Attachment

See more here:
Cellectis Presents Data on Two TALEN-based Gene Therapy Preclinical Programs for Patients with ... - The Bakersfield Californian