Categories
- Global News Feed
- Uncategorized
- Alabama Stem Cells
- Alaska Stem Cells
- Arkansas Stem Cells
- Arizona Stem Cells
- California Stem Cells
- Colorado Stem Cells
- Connecticut Stem Cells
- Delaware Stem Cells
- Florida Stem Cells
- Georgia Stem Cells
- Hawaii Stem Cells
- Idaho Stem Cells
- Illinois Stem Cells
- Indiana Stem Cells
- Iowa Stem Cells
- Kansas Stem Cells
- Kentucky Stem Cells
- Louisiana Stem Cells
- Maine Stem Cells
- Maryland Stem Cells
- Massachusetts Stem Cells
- Michigan Stem Cells
- Minnesota Stem Cells
- Mississippi Stem Cells
- Missouri Stem Cells
- Montana Stem Cells
- Nebraska Stem Cells
- New Hampshire Stem Cells
- New Jersey Stem Cells
- New Mexico Stem Cells
- New York Stem Cells
- Nevada Stem Cells
- North Carolina Stem Cells
- North Dakota Stem Cells
- Oklahoma Stem Cells
- Ohio Stem Cells
- Oregon Stem Cells
- Pennsylvania Stem Cells
- Rhode Island Stem Cells
- South Carolina Stem Cells
- South Dakota Stem Cells
- Tennessee Stem Cells
- Texas Stem Cells
- Utah Stem Cells
- Vermont Stem Cells
- Virginia Stem Cells
- Washington Stem Cells
- West Virginia Stem Cells
- Wisconsin Stem Cells
- Wyoming Stem Cells
- Biotechnology
- Cell Medicine
- Cell Therapy
- Diabetes
- Epigenetics
- Gene therapy
- Genetics
- Genetic Engineering
- Genetic medicine
- HCG Diet
- Hormone Replacement Therapy
- Human Genetics
- Integrative Medicine
- Molecular Genetics
- Molecular Medicine
- Nano medicine
- Preventative Medicine
- Regenerative Medicine
- Stem Cells
- Stell Cell Genetics
- Stem Cell Research
- Stem Cell Treatments
- Stem Cell Therapy
- Stem Cell Videos
- Testosterone Replacement Therapy
- Testosterone Shots
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
Archives
Recommended Sites
Category Archives: Stem Cells
Bendable Needles Developed to Deliver Stem Cells into Brains
Posted: March 7, 2013 at 12:48 am
The flexible needles could help doctors deliver stem cells to broader areas of the brain with fewer injections. Such therapies are being investigated for Parkinson's disease, stroke and other neurodegenerative disorders
By Monya Baker and Nature magazine
The injection system can bend sideways, delivering therapeutic stem cells to the brain through fewer holes in the skull. Image: Flickr/TschiAe
As the surgical team prepared its instruments, a severed human head lay on the plastic tray, its face covered by a blue cloth. It had thawed over the past 24 hours, and a pinky-sized burr hole had been cut near the top of its skull. Scalp covered with salt-and-pepper stubble wrinkled above and below a pink strip of smooth bone.
Over the next two hours, the head would be scanned in a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machine as the researchers, led by Daniel Lim, a neurosurgeon and stem-cell scientist at the University of California, San Francisco, tested a flexible needle for delivering cells to the brain.
Several laboratories are investigating ways to treat neurological diseases by injecting cells into patients brains, and clinical trials are being conducted for Parkinsons disease, stroke and other neurodegenerative diseases. These studies follow experiments showing dramatic improvements in rats and mice. But as work on potentially therapeutic cells has surged ahead, necessary surgical techniques have lagged behind, says Lim.
In 2008 researchers led by Steven Goldman at the University of Rochester in New York showed that they could make severely disabled mice able to walk by injecting human glial progenitor cells into five sites in the rodents' brains.
Those results are encouraging, but a human brain is more than 1,000 times larger than a mouse brain, and delivering cells to the right places is much harder. People know how to get cells into animals but forget about the scale-up problem with humans, Lim says.
Necessary tools Working with bioengineers and neurosurgeons, Lim designed a needle that bends. First, a straight, thin tube is injected into the brain and a flexible nylon catheter pushed through it. A deflector inside the tube arcs the catheter up and away from the entry track, and an even narrower plunger ejects cells from the catheter. In one injection, the device can deposit cells anywhere within a 2-centimeter radius along the track, a volume bigger than an entire mouse brain.
Several researchers hope to use Lims device for clinical trials in brain cancer and neurodegenerative disease. Xianmin Zeng, a stem-cell scientist at the Buck Institute in Novato, California, who worked with Lim to test the device on swine, says she hopes to file an application to use the device in clinical trials for Parkinson's before the end of 2014.
More:
Bendable Needles Developed to Deliver Stem Cells into Brains
Posted in Stem Cells
Comments Off on Bendable Needles Developed to Deliver Stem Cells into Brains
Genetically corrected stem cells spark muscle regeneration
Posted: March 7, 2013 at 12:48 am
Mar. 5, 2013 Researchers at the University of Minnesota's Lillehei Heart Institute have combined genetic repair with cellular reprogramming to generate stem cells capable of muscle regeneration in a mouse model for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD).
The research, which provides proof-of-principle for the feasibility of combining induced pluripotent stem cell technology and genetic correction to treat muscular dystrophy, could present a major step forward in autologous cell-based therapies for DMD and similar conditions and should pave the way for testing the approach in reprogrammed human pluripotent cells from muscular dystrophy patients.
The research is published in Nature Communications.
To achieve a meaningful, effective muscular dystrophy therapy in the mouse model, University of Minnesota researchers combined three groundbreaking technologies.
First, researchers reprogrammed skin cells into "pluripotent" cells -- cells capable of differentiation into any of the mature cell types within an organism. The researchers generated pluripotent cells from the skin of mice that carry mutations in the dystrophin and utrophin genes, causing the mice to develop a severe case of muscular dystrophy, much like the type seen in human DMD patients. This provided a platform that would mimic what would theoretically occur in human models.
The second technology employed is a genetic correction tool developed at the University of Minnesota: the Sleeping Beauty Transposon, a piece of DNA that can jump into the human genome, carrying useful genes with it. Lillehei Heart Institute researchers used Sleeping Beauty to deliver a gene called "micro-utrophin" to the pluripotent cells they were attempting to differentiate.
Much like dystrophin, human micro-utrophin can support muscle fiber strength and prevent muscle fiber injury throughout the body. But one key difference between the two is in how each is perceived by the immune system. Because dystrophin is absent in muscular dystrophy patients, its presence can prompt a devastating immune system response. But in those same patients, utrophin is active and functional, making it essentially "invisible" to the immune system. This invisibility allows the micro-utrophin to replace the dystrophin and progress the process of building and repairing muscle fiber within the body.
The third technology utilized is a method to produce skeletal muscle stem cells from pluripotent cells -- a process developed in the laboratory of Rita Perlingeiro, Ph.D., the principal investigator of the latest study.
Perlingeiro's technology involves giving pluripotent cells a short pulse of a muscle stem cell protein called Pax3. The Pax3 protein pushes the pluripotent cells to become muscle stem cells, and allows them to be expanded exponentially in number. The Pax3-induced muscle stem cells were then transplanted back into the same strain of muscular dystrophy mice from which the pluripotent stem cells were originally derived.
Combined, the platforms created muscle-generating stem cells that would not be rejected by the body's immune system. According to Perlingeiro, the transplanted cells performed well in the dystrophic mice, generating functional muscle and responding to muscle fiber injury.
Continued here:
Genetically corrected stem cells spark muscle regeneration
Posted in Stem Cells
Comments Off on Genetically corrected stem cells spark muscle regeneration
Good News, Bad News and the California Stem Cell Agency
Posted: March 6, 2013 at 5:50 pm
A few weeks ago an anonymous reader
admonished the California Stem Cell Report to be more positive about
the $3 billion agency and its efforts to develop the cures that its
backers promised California voters more than eight years ago.
The comment was thoughtful and pointed
out that “almost all the time” the agency “has done the right
thing.” The reader made the remarks in the context of continuing
coverage of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report that found there
were major flaws in CIRM's operations. (The reader's comment can be found here at the end of the post.)
out that “almost all the time” the agency “has done the right
thing.” The reader made the remarks in the context of continuing
coverage of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report that found there
were major flaws in CIRM's operations. (The reader's comment can be found here at the end of the post.)
Given the reader's remarks, it seems a
good time to review the operating principles and biases of the
California Stem Cell Report.
good time to review the operating principles and biases of the
California Stem Cell Report.
Bias No. 1: Openness and transparency
come first in any government operation. They are
fundamental to the integrity of all government enterprises. Bias No.
2: The California stem cell agency is generally doing a good job at
funding stem cell research. We generally favor all manner of stem cell research.
come first in any government operation. They are
fundamental to the integrity of all government enterprises. Bias No.
2: The California stem cell agency is generally doing a good job at
funding stem cell research. We generally favor all manner of stem cell research.
Regarding our operating principles, the
goal is report news and information about the agency along with
analysis and explanation. One key to understanding what this blog
does is to understand what news is. News by definition is almost
always “bad” as opposed to “good.” News deals with the
exceptional. It is not news that millions of drivers commute to work
safely each day on California freeways. It is news when one is killed
in a traffic accident.
goal is report news and information about the agency along with
analysis and explanation. One key to understanding what this blog
does is to understand what news is. News by definition is almost
always “bad” as opposed to “good.” News deals with the
exceptional. It is not news that millions of drivers commute to work
safely each day on California freeways. It is news when one is killed
in a traffic accident.
The California Stem Cell Report also
tries to fill information voids. We understand that the stem cell
agency believes certain information is not in their best interests to
disclose. Such is always the case with both private and public
organizations. However, it is generally in the public interest to see
more information rather less, particularly information that an
organization would rather not see become public.
tries to fill information voids. We understand that the stem cell
agency believes certain information is not in their best interests to
disclose. Such is always the case with both private and public
organizations. However, it is generally in the public interest to see
more information rather less, particularly information that an
organization would rather not see become public.
Analysis and explanation of what the stem cell agency does is rare in the California media and even less seen
nationally or internationally. This blog focuses primarily on the
public policy aspects of the agency – not the science. The agency
is an unprecedented experiment that brings together big science, big
government, big academia, big business, religion, morality, ethics,
life and death in single enterprise – one that operates outside the
normal constraints of state agencies. No governor can cut CIRM's
budget. Nor can the legislature. Even tiny changes in Proposition 71,
which created CIRM, require either another vote of the people or the
super, super-majority vote of both houses of the legislature and the signature of the governor. All of
this is the result of the initiative process – a well-intended tool
that has been abused and that has also created enormous problems for the
state of California that go well beyond the stem cell agency.
nationally or internationally. This blog focuses primarily on the
public policy aspects of the agency – not the science. The agency
is an unprecedented experiment that brings together big science, big
government, big academia, big business, religion, morality, ethics,
life and death in single enterprise – one that operates outside the
normal constraints of state agencies. No governor can cut CIRM's
budget. Nor can the legislature. Even tiny changes in Proposition 71,
which created CIRM, require either another vote of the people or the
super, super-majority vote of both houses of the legislature and the signature of the governor. All of
this is the result of the initiative process – a well-intended tool
that has been abused and that has also created enormous problems for the
state of California that go well beyond the stem cell agency.
Then there is the funding of the
agency, which basically lives off the state's credit card. All the
money that goes for grants is borrowed and roughly doubles the actual
expense to taxpayers.
agency, which basically lives off the state's credit card. All the
money that goes for grants is borrowed and roughly doubles the actual
expense to taxpayers.
Since January 2005, we have posted
3,452 items on the stem cell agency because we believe the California
Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) is an important enterprise
– one that deserves more attention that it receives in the
mainstream media. Our readership includes persons at the NIH, the
National Academy of Sciences, most of the major stem cell research
centers in California, academic institutions in the Great Britain,
Canada, Norway, Germany, Russia, China, Australia, Singapore and
Korea – not to mention the agency itself and scientific journals.
3,452 items on the stem cell agency because we believe the California
Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) is an important enterprise
– one that deserves more attention that it receives in the
mainstream media. Our readership includes persons at the NIH, the
National Academy of Sciences, most of the major stem cell research
centers in California, academic institutions in the Great Britain,
Canada, Norway, Germany, Russia, China, Australia, Singapore and
Korea – not to mention the agency itself and scientific journals.
We do not attempt to replicate what the
California stem cell agency itself does, which is to post online a
prodigious amount of positive stories and good news about the agency.
To do so would serve no useful public purpose and would simply be
repetitive. That said, there is room to acknowledge the work that the
agency does, particularly the staff, but also the board. We try to
point that out from time to time.
California stem cell agency itself does, which is to post online a
prodigious amount of positive stories and good news about the agency.
To do so would serve no useful public purpose and would simply be
repetitive. That said, there is room to acknowledge the work that the
agency does, particularly the staff, but also the board. We try to
point that out from time to time.
The California Stem Cell Report also
welcomes and encourages comments, anonymous and otherwise. Directors
and executives of the agency have a standing invitation to comment at
length and have their remarks published verbatim, something almost
never seen in the mainstream media.
welcomes and encourages comments, anonymous and otherwise. Directors
and executives of the agency have a standing invitation to comment at
length and have their remarks published verbatim, something almost
never seen in the mainstream media.
Finally, given the questions raised by
the Institute of Medicine about disclosure of potential conflicts of
interests, the author of this blog and his immediate family have no
financial interests in any biotech or stem cell companies, other than
those that may be held by large mutual funds. We have no relatives
working in the field. We do have the potential personal conflicts,
cited generally by the IOM in connection with some CIRM board
members, involving relatives who have afflictions that could be
possibly be treated with stem cell therapies in the distant future.
the Institute of Medicine about disclosure of potential conflicts of
interests, the author of this blog and his immediate family have no
financial interests in any biotech or stem cell companies, other than
those that may be held by large mutual funds. We have no relatives
working in the field. We do have the potential personal conflicts,
cited generally by the IOM in connection with some CIRM board
members, involving relatives who have afflictions that could be
possibly be treated with stem cell therapies in the distant future.
Posted in Stem Cells, Stem Cell Therapy
Comments Off on Good News, Bad News and the California Stem Cell Agency
LA Times: Stem Cell Agency Conflict-of-Interest Response Only a Bandage
Posted: March 3, 2013 at 3:07 am
The Los Angeles Times yesterday modestly praised the $3 billion California stem cell agency for
taking some limited steps to deal with its longstanding conflict of
interest issues.
But the newspaper, which has the largest circulation in the state, said that was more was
needed if the agency plans to have a life after 2017, when funds for
new awards run out.
needed if the agency plans to have a life after 2017, when funds for
new awards run out.
The Times editorial said,
“After years of resisting all
criticisms of its operations, the California Institute for
Regenerative Medicine is finally listening — a little.“
The editorial continued,
“Yet the agency isn't exactly
embracing an ethical overhaul. It's doing just enough to address the
criticisms without triggering any oversight from the Legislature. The
modifications are more a bandage than a cure. Like a bandage, they
will probably do, but only for a limited time.”
The board plans to have 13 board
members with ties to recipient institutions voluntarily refrain from
voting on any grants that come before the board, not just the ones to
their institutions.
members with ties to recipient institutions voluntarily refrain from
voting on any grants that come before the board, not just the ones to
their institutions.
The Times said December's blue-ribbon
report from the Institute of Medicine identified the make-up of the
board as the “single biggest problem” at the agency. The
editorial cited figures prepared by the California Stem Cell Report
that show that about 90 percent of the $1.8 billion that the board
has awarded has gone to institutions linked to current or past
members of the board. Fifteen out of the 29 current board members
have ties to recipient institutions.
report from the Institute of Medicine identified the make-up of the
board as the “single biggest problem” at the agency. The
editorial cited figures prepared by the California Stem Cell Report
that show that about 90 percent of the $1.8 billion that the board
has awarded has gone to institutions linked to current or past
members of the board. Fifteen out of the 29 current board members
have ties to recipient institutions.
The editorial concluded,
“If the stem cell institute is just a
temporary agency that will last until its public funding runs out —
it plans to give its last grants with existing funds in 2017 — its
planned reforms will probably be enough. But if the institute wants
to be a permanent part of the research landscape — and possibly ask
for more public funding — voluntary recusals are an inadequate
patch. The agency's leaders should admit that the original setup was
flawed and seek a true fix. “
Posted in Stem Cells, Stem Cell Therapy
Comments Off on LA Times: Stem Cell Agency Conflict-of-Interest Response Only a Bandage
California Stem Cell Agency: Comparing the Critiques
Posted: March 3, 2013 at 3:07 am
State Controller John Chiang has posted
a useful, side-by-side comparison of critiques of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency, including the Institute of Medicine(IOM)
study, along with the responses from the agency.
Chiang, the state's top fiscal officer,
has additionally posted the initial remarks Jan. 23 by CIRM Chairman
Jonathan Thomas before the stem cell agency governing board on his
plan to deal with the sweeping recommendations of the IOM.
has additionally posted the initial remarks Jan. 23 by CIRM Chairman
Jonathan Thomas before the stem cell agency governing board on his
plan to deal with the sweeping recommendations of the IOM.
Regardless of one's opinion of the
board's response to the IOM, Thomas adroitly handled the discussion
and vote, not a small accomplishment given the size of the board (29
members) and the legal restrictions involving public meetings. Under
state law, Thomas could not lobby significant numbers of the board in
advance of the meeting. He was restricted to engineering the approval
in a public session, which can easily take on a life of its own given
the unwieldy size of the board and the necessity for public comment.
board's response to the IOM, Thomas adroitly handled the discussion
and vote, not a small accomplishment given the size of the board (29
members) and the legal restrictions involving public meetings. Under
state law, Thomas could not lobby significant numbers of the board in
advance of the meeting. He was restricted to engineering the approval
in a public session, which can easily take on a life of its own given
the unwieldy size of the board and the necessity for public comment.
As for the documents posted by Chiang,
he is chairman of the Citizens Financial Accountability and Oversight
Committee, the only state body specifically charged with oversight of
the agency and its board. The web site for the committee is the only
location on the Internet where Thomas' prepared remarks and the
comparison can be found.
he is chairman of the Citizens Financial Accountability and Oversight
Committee, the only state body specifically charged with oversight of
the agency and its board. The web site for the committee is the only
location on the Internet where Thomas' prepared remarks and the
comparison can be found.
Chiang's comparison chart includes not
only the IOM study, but last year's performance audit and the Little
Hoover Commission study in 2009. Missing, however, is the state
auditor's report in 2007 and its recommendation that the agency seek an attorney general's opinion on whether scientific grant reviewers must file a public financial disclosure form.
only the IOM study, but last year's performance audit and the Little
Hoover Commission study in 2009. Missing, however, is the state
auditor's report in 2007 and its recommendation that the agency seek an attorney general's opinion on whether scientific grant reviewers must file a public financial disclosure form.
Here are links to the various
documents: Thomas' prepared comments, Power Point chart used by Thomas,
comparison chart of various studies and the transcript of the Jan. 23 meeting during which the governing board approved its response.
documents: Thomas' prepared comments, Power Point chart used by Thomas,
comparison chart of various studies and the transcript of the Jan. 23 meeting during which the governing board approved its response.
Posted in Stem Cells, Stem Cell Therapy
Comments Off on California Stem Cell Agency: Comparing the Critiques
CIRM Director Prieto on Disclosure of Reviewer Financial Interests
Posted: March 3, 2013 at 3:07 am
A member of the governing board of the
$3 billion California stem cell agency is weighing in on an item on
the California Stem Cell Report that called for public disclosure of the financial interests of the scientific reviewers, who make 98
percent of the decisions on awards by the agency.
Francisco Prieto, a Sacramento
physician and a patient advocate member of the board, said in an email:
physician and a patient advocate member of the board, said in an email:
“ It seems to me there's a bit
of 'damned if we do and damned if we don't' here. If the ICOC (the
agency governing board) decides to listen to some of the members of
the public who come to our meetings and overrule a recommendation of
the Grants Working Group(GWG), we're slammed for letting emotion trump
science, or bowing to special interests. If we just accept the
rankings of the GWG and approve all their recommendations, we're
criticized for not being truly independent. I think we don't do
it often (for good reason) but should and do retain the right to look
at other factors besides those our scientific reviewers do, and make
our own decisions about funding. We are ultimately responsible, not
the scientific reviewers.
“As for the issue of their
disclosure of personal conflicts of interest, from what I've read of
the NIH processes, ours are no less strict. The NIH requires that
reviewers disclose any conflicts to their institutions which I
believe must disclose them to the NIH, but I have not seen anything
requiring them to disclose all their personal financial & other
interests publicly, as we (ICOC members) have to. When we were
assembling our group of reviewers initially, the fear was that many
of the best scientists would turn us down if we required them to make
the kind of personal disclosures we have to. I don't know how many we
might actually lose if that were the case, but as you know we do
require them to disclose to CIRM, and they have to leave the room
when any application for which they have a conflict is discussed.”
Our take: Prieto is right about the
board being perched on the horns of a dilemma, which has a lot to do
with Proposition 71, which created the agency, and American
scientific traditions, which place an extraordinary value on the
“integrity” of the review process. In this case, integrity refers
to adherence to reviewers' scientific judgments.
board being perched on the horns of a dilemma, which has a lot to do
with Proposition 71, which created the agency, and American
scientific traditions, which place an extraordinary value on the
“integrity” of the review process. In this case, integrity refers
to adherence to reviewers' scientific judgments.
Proposition 71 placed the legal
authority for grant approvals in the hands of the CIRM board, which
has overridden decisions by reviewers in only 2 percent of the cases
since 2005. However, that was enough, with at least one high profile
case coupled with public appeals, to cause the Institute of Medicine
to raise concerns about the integrity of the CIRM grant review
process. Traditionally, peer reviewers are deemed to be the most
capable of making the scientific decisions about grant applications,
rather than a board appointed by University of California chancellors
and elected state officials.
authority for grant approvals in the hands of the CIRM board, which
has overridden decisions by reviewers in only 2 percent of the cases
since 2005. However, that was enough, with at least one high profile
case coupled with public appeals, to cause the Institute of Medicine
to raise concerns about the integrity of the CIRM grant review
process. Traditionally, peer reviewers are deemed to be the most
capable of making the scientific decisions about grant applications,
rather than a board appointed by University of California chancellors
and elected state officials.
Yet, if the board concedes the
decisions to the grant reviewers, state law is likely to require
public disclosure of their financial interests, a move that the board
has opposed for years. Former CIRM Chairman Robert Klein repeatedly
advised the board during its public grant approval processes that
reviewers' actions were only ”recommendations” and that the board
was actually making the decisions. However, it has long been apparent
that the reviewers were making the de facto decisions. A CIRM memo in
January confirmed that, producing the 98 percent figure.
decisions to the grant reviewers, state law is likely to require
public disclosure of their financial interests, a move that the board
has opposed for years. Former CIRM Chairman Robert Klein repeatedly
advised the board during its public grant approval processes that
reviewers' actions were only ”recommendations” and that the board
was actually making the decisions. However, it has long been apparent
that the reviewers were making the de facto decisions. A CIRM memo in
January confirmed that, producing the 98 percent figure.
The issues involving disclosure by
reviewers, integrity of peer reviews, the language of Proposition 71
and state law are difficult and may, in some cases, be at odds.
reviewers, integrity of peer reviews, the language of Proposition 71
and state law are difficult and may, in some cases, be at odds.
However, it makes little difference
what the NIH is doing. It is a much different organization and has
had a history of conflict of interest problems that it has been
trying to work through.
what the NIH is doing. It is a much different organization and has
had a history of conflict of interest problems that it has been
trying to work through.
The trend in the academic and
scientific research community has been towards more public disclosure
rather than less because of many well-documented instances of
problems. What is at stake is the public's faith in scientific
research and the integrity of public institutions.
scientific research community has been towards more public disclosure
rather than less because of many well-documented instances of
problems. What is at stake is the public's faith in scientific
research and the integrity of public institutions.
Our thanks to Prieto for his comments
on this important subject.
on this important subject.
Posted in Stem Cells, Stem Cell Therapy
Comments Off on CIRM Director Prieto on Disclosure of Reviewer Financial Interests
California Stem Cell Agency Bonds On Sale in March
Posted: March 3, 2013 at 3:07 am
Early next month, the state of
California will sell $2.7 billion in bonds, a tiny fraction of which will go
towards the California stem cell agency.
It is all part of an arrangement that
currently involves short-term borrowing as well to keep the cash
pipeline at CIRM properly filled.
currently involves short-term borrowing as well to keep the cash
pipeline at CIRM properly filled.
To refresh some of you, the agency
subsists off money that the state borrows (bonds) instead of going to
the legislature annually for financial support. While that avoids
competing against school children, the poor, the University of
California, state colleges, parks, highways and other interests
seeking state funding, it also means that the cost of a $20 million
grant is something closer to $40 million because of the interest
expense.
subsists off money that the state borrows (bonds) instead of going to
the legislature annually for financial support. While that avoids
competing against school children, the poor, the University of
California, state colleges, parks, highways and other interests
seeking state funding, it also means that the cost of a $20 million
grant is something closer to $40 million because of the interest
expense.
The California Stem Cell Report last
week asked the state treasurer's office about the bond sale March
12-13 and what it means for the stem cell agency. Here is what Tom
Dresslar, spokesman for the treasurer, replied in an email.
week asked the state treasurer's office about the bond sale March
12-13 and what it means for the stem cell agency. Here is what Tom
Dresslar, spokesman for the treasurer, replied in an email.
“CIRM’s funding needs now are met
via the issuance of commercial paper (CP). They’re authorized
a certain amount of CP periodically. Then we work with them on
a regular basis to issue the commercial paper on an as-needed basis.
Last fall, they were authorized $160 million of CP. We will
issue the first $27 million under that authorization (this) week.
This spring, CIRM is scheduled to receive another $100 million
authorization. The Department of Finance , consulting with CIRM
officials, determined the $100 million would be needed to meet CIRM’s
funding requirements through the end of 2013.“Now, here’s where it gets a little
complicated. The state pays down the CP with bond proceeds.
The March ....bond sale includes $60 million of stem
cell bonds. Those proceeds won’t provide new money for CIRM,
but will pay down the CP proceeds CIRM already has used.”
Proposition 71, which created the stem
cell agency in 2004, authorized bond sales for stem cell research for
only 10 years. CIRM's financial timekeepers say the clock started
running when the first bonds were sold. The upshot is that the agency
will run out of money for new grants in less than four years.
cell agency in 2004, authorized bond sales for stem cell research for
only 10 years. CIRM's financial timekeepers say the clock started
running when the first bonds were sold. The upshot is that the agency
will run out of money for new grants in less than four years.
Posted in Stem Cells, Stem Cell Therapy
Comments Off on California Stem Cell Agency Bonds On Sale in March
Reprogramming Adult Cells to Stem Cells Works Better with One Gene Turned Off
Posted: March 2, 2013 at 1:46 am
Newswise HOUSTON -- (March 1, 2013) -- The removal of a genetic roadblock could improve the efficiency of converting adult cells into stem cells by 10 to 30 times, report scientists from The Methodist Hospital Research Institute and two other institutions in the latest issue of Cell.
"The discovery six years ago that scientists can convert adult cells into inducible pluripotent stem cells, or iPSCs, bolstered the dream that a patient's own cells might be reprogrammed to make patient-specific iPSCs for regenerative medicine, modeling human diseases in petri dishes, and drug screening," said Rongfu Wang, Ph.D., Principal Investigator and Director of the Center for Inflammation and Epigenetics. "But reprogramming efficiency has remained very low, impeding its applications in the clinic."
Wang and his group identified a protein encoded by the gene Jmjd3 (also called KDM6B) as a roadblock in the stem cell conversion process. Jmjd3 is known to be involved in many biological processes, including the maturation of nerve cells and immune cell differentiation.
Wang and his team are the first to identify Jmjd3's role in inhibiting the reprogramming process. They found knockdown or deletion of Jmjd3 in young mouse fibroblasts was enough to greatly enhance reprogramming efficiency.
Our findings demonstrate a previously unrecognized role of Jmjd3 in cellular reprogramming and provide molecular insight into the mechanisms by which the Jmjd3-PHF20 axis controls this process," said Helen (Yicheng) Wang, co-principal investigator.
In investigating Jmjd3 and its role in iPSC reprogramming, Wang's team found Jmjd3 has two previously unknown functions -- it helps regulate cell growth and cellular aging and Jmjd3 deactivates another nuclear protein, PHF20. The scientists learned during the study that PHF20 is required for cellular reprogramming, because cells without PHF20 failed to generate iPSCs.
"So when it comes to increasing iPSC yields, knocking down Jmjd3 is like hitting two birds with one stone," Rongfu Wang said.
Jmjd3 may not be the only genetic roadblock to stem cell conversion.
"Removal of multiple roadblocks could further enhance the reprogramming efficiency with which researchers can efficiently generate patient-specific iPSCs for clinical applications," Wang said.
###
Originally posted here:
Reprogramming Adult Cells to Stem Cells Works Better with One Gene Turned Off
Posted in Stem Cells
Comments Off on Reprogramming Adult Cells to Stem Cells Works Better with One Gene Turned Off
Bone Marrow aspirated stem cells injected into the shoulder – Video
Posted: February 28, 2013 at 4:51 pm
Bone Marrow aspirated stem cells injected into the shoulder
By: Marc Darrow
See the article here:
Bone Marrow aspirated stem cells injected into the shoulder - Video
Posted in Stem Cells
Comments Off on Bone Marrow aspirated stem cells injected into the shoulder – Video
Stem cells used to repair knees, joint damage
Posted: February 28, 2013 at 4:51 pm
by JEAN ENERSEN / KING 5 News
KING5.com
Posted on February 27, 2013 at 10:36 PM
As Baby Boomers age, the number of joint replacements is going up. But even those from Generation X are now wearing out their joints, and replacements dont last forever. Paul Lyon of Gig Harbor went to Colorado looking for a better solution. Lyon says even climbing the stairs was difficult for him, but he didnt want to get a knee replacement. So instead of surgery last September, he headed to a clinic near Denver that specializes in stem cell repair.
The Regenexx procedure allows you to take your cells and try to heal your body. Dr. Christopher Centeno pioneered this less-invasive procedure eight years ago. Stem cells are harvested from a patients hip. We take those cells, we concentrate them in much, much higher numbers, and then, we place them very precisely in the spot in need of repair, Centeno said. The clinic also treats athletes, some as young as 16, with orthopedic injuries. It fits patients like Paul, in their 40s to 80s with joint damage, who still want to push the limits. Lyon plans to get his second knee treated, but not until after ski season. He paid $7,000 for his procedure, which isnt covered by insurance. But he says his money was well spent. I've had friends who've had replacements, with great success, extremely painful, but they're still limited on what they can do so, he said. I'm hoping to be able to ski for a long time with the stem cells. Maybe I'll have to cut back on the level of skiing I'm doing, but I think I'll be OK. When Lyon skies, he hikes five hours up Crystal Mountain, then skies down. He says he couldnt have done this a year ago.
The procedure doesnt come without controversy. Its still considered experimental and doesnt work for every patient.
Related links:
Regenexx website
See the original post:
Stem cells used to repair knees, joint damage
Posted in Stem Cells
Comments Off on Stem cells used to repair knees, joint damage