GOLDEN, Colo. (CBS4) – In an effort to live a long and healthy life, some adults are now taking out a different kind of insurance policy. They are banking their stem cells for future use.

CBS4 Health Specialist Kathy Walsh watched one man go through the process. It’s relatively simple but it can set a person back several thousand dollars. Still, one retired engineer believes it is worth the investment.

“I am just a 54-year-old who’s trying to figure out how to get the most out of life,” Matt Rockwell said. “We’re told that we can live, at least machinery wise, we can live to 120. I’d like my 120.”

In fact, Rockwell is banking on that. In his doctor’s office in Golden, he is saving cells. Five vials of blood were collected. Then, Dr. Terry Grossman took a small sample of Rockwell’s skin cells.

Grossman practices nutritional and anti-aging medicine and has written three books about longevity.

“Right now, stem cell therapies are in their infancy,” Grossman said.

But Grossman believes the possibilities are endless.

“What’s going to be available in 10 to 20 years, it boggles the imagination,” he said.

So Grossman collects stem cells for patients and sends them away to be grown and cryopreserved. The belief is they may later be used to treat various diseases or conditions.

“Animals are having wonderful results and we are able to create, for instance, rat hearts and mouse hearts; and we are able to grow new cartilage for race horses,” Grossman said.

Rockwell was sold. He says his cells will never be younger. To him, $3,000 up front and a few hundred dollars a year is a bargain.

“I think this is the best insurance policy essentially I could buy today to ensure future health,” Rockwell said.

Some argue stem cell banking is just companies cashing in on the excitement surrounding stem cells. They say it’s not clear how useful they will be. But Rockwell says he couldn’t have dreamed of what a cellphone has become. He wants to be ready for what will be available in medicine when he turns 74

For the first time, a global team of researchers led by USC pathology Professor Cheng-Ming Chuong, M.D., Ph.D., has uncovered unique cellular and molecular mechanisms behind tooth renewal in American alligators. Their study, titled “Specialized stem cell niche enables repetitive renewal of alligator teeth,” appears in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the official journal of the United States National Academy of Sciences.

“Humans naturally only have two sets of teeth — baby teeth and adult teeth,” said Chuong. “Ultimately, we want to identify stem cells that can be used as a resource to stimulate tooth renewal in adult humans who have lost teeth. But, to do that, we must first understand how they renew in other animals and why they stop in people.”

Whereas most vertebrates can replace teeth throughout their lives, human teeth are naturally replaced only once, despite the lingering presence of a band of epithelial tissue called the dental lamina, which is crucial to tooth development. Because alligators have well-organized teeth with similar form and structure as mammalian teeth and are capable of lifelong tooth renewal, the authors reasoned that they might serve as models for mammalian tooth replacement.

“Alligator teeth are implanted in sockets of the dental bone, like human teeth,” said Ping Wu, Ph.D., assistant professor of pathology at the Keck School of Medicine and first author of the study. “They have 80 teeth, each of which can be replaced up to 50 times over their lifetime, making them the ideal model for comparison to human teeth.”

Using microscopic imaging techniques, the researchers found that each alligator tooth is a complex unit of three components — a functional tooth, a replacement tooth, and the dental lamina — in different developmental stages. The tooth units are structured to enable a smooth transition from dislodgement of the functional, mature tooth to replacement with the new tooth. Identifying three developmental phases for each tooth unit, the researchers conclude that the alligator dental laminae contain what appear to be stem cells from which new replacement teeth develop.

“Stem cells divide more slowly than other cells,” said co-author Randall B. Widelitz, Ph.D., associate professor of pathology at the Keck School of Medicine. “The cells in the alligator’s dental lamina behaved like we would expect stem cells to behave. In the future, we hope to isolate those cells from the dental lamina to see whether we can use them to regenerate teeth in the lab.”

The researchers also intend to learn what molecular networks are involved in repetitive renewal and hope to apply the principles to regenerative medicine in the future.

The authors also report novel cellular mechanisms by which the tooth unit develops in the embryo and molecular signaling that speeds growth of replacement teeth when functional teeth are lost prematurely. Co-authors include colleagues from the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, University of Georgia, National Cheng Kung University, National Taiwan University, and Xiangya Hospital in China.

The research was supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases through grants 5R01AR042177-19, 5R01AR060306-03 and 2R01AR047364-11A1.

by Amanda Kooser

A lab-grown meat strip. Doesn’t it look appetizing?
(Credit: Mark Post)
The race for a lab-grown meat alternative has been on for years. Modern Meadow, for example, has gone after a type of 3D-printed meat using bioprinting techniques. Dutch tissue engineer Mark Post is using stem cells to make a lab-grown hamburger, one that may be actually going down someone’s gullet very soon.

Post’s Cultured Beef Project has been in development at Maastricht University in the Netherlands for some time thanks to $325,000 in funding from an anonymous donor. Cow muscle stem cells are grown into miniscule strips of tissue. Each strip can take several weeks to grow. It takes 20,000 of these to make a single hamburger. It’s a time-consuming and expensive product at this stage of the project.

The resulting burger will probably have more in common taste-wise with a patty from McDonald’s than a gourmet burger from a fancy restaurant. At this point, it’s not about the flavor so much as the proof that it could be created at all. Making it delicious will come later. Post has said he plans to add only salt and pepper before cooking it.

Related stories
3D printed meat: It’s what’s for dinner
Close the lid on this Hamilton Beach searing indoor grill

Originally, the engineered patty was scheduled to be cooked up last year, but the New York Times reports it could now happen within a few weeks.

The burger isn’t exactly vegetarian-friendly just yet. The cells are grown in fetal calf serum. A non-animal-source alternative will need to be found before the lab beef could be considered kill-free. It could be years before research and funding make cultured beef a viable alternative, and that’s not considering potential issues of consumer resistance to buying lab-grown meat.

Despite the time, effort, and money that has gone into creating Post’s burger-of-science, I imagine people are still going to want to know first and foremost, “How does it taste? Is it better than a veggie burger?”

Strips of meat grow in a lab.

Fortunately, the FDA is starting to crack down.
While it can’t control some companies that move outside the country to operate.
In the U.S., every medical treatment should be required to pass a ‘truth in advertising’ test.

Angelina Jolie courageously announced Tuesday that she underwent a preventative double mastectomy after genetic testing showed she had a high probability of developing breast and ovarian cancer, which she followed up with reconstructive surgery of her breasts. Not only does this highlight the promise of medical research and biotechnology, undoubtedly, Jolie’s willingness to publicize her decision will encourage other women who find themselves in similar circumstances.

But there is another aspect of biotechnology and cosmetic surgery that should not be readily promoted. Imagine hearing a crunching sound every time you opened your eye. Then, imagine how you would react if a doctor said that bone fragments had grown around it because of a botched procedure. This isn’t just a hypothetical scenario; it actually happened to a California woman.

In Scientific American, Ferris Jabr reports that a woman’s adult stem cells were removed during a liposuction procedure and re-injected around her eye. Because of the particular cocktail of chemicals the cosmeticians used, the stem cells turned into bones. Thus, instead of rejuvenation, her face became an example of a medical procedure gone wrong.

Unfortunately, this probably will not be the only time something tragic occurs. A stem cell transplant can help cure patients with acute myeloid leukemia, and research has shown incredible potential, from growing teeth to mending “unhealable” bone fractures. Still, stem cells are poorly understood. Despite this, as Jabr writes, many cosmeticians continue to claim that stem cells are a cure-all for “everything from wrinkles to joint pain to autism.”

Need better understanding

Until we understand them better, stem cells are the new snake oil peddled by 21st century charlatans. Thankfully, the Food and Drug Administration is cracking down.

Celltex Therapeutics Corp. was thrust into the limelight when Texas Gov. Rick Perry revealed that he was a client. The company collected and re-injected Perry’s own stem cells into his back as a therapy for pain. The Houston Chroniclereported that the FDA investigated Celltex and discovered it was unable to verify whether the banked stem cells were alive and uncontaminated — serious violations that could result in the company being shut down. So Celltex decided to move its operations to Mexico.

A company moving abroad to perform unproven, and sometimes dangerous, therapies is contributing to another problem: medical tourism. Americans who cannot legally receive treatment in the U.S. go to foreign countries where medical procedures are far less regulated.

Plethora of possibilities?

For instance, the Harvard Gazettereports: “Internet sites offer help for people suffering from a dizzying array of serious conditions, including: Alzheimer’s, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, atherosclerosis, autism, brain damage, cancer, cerebellar ataxia, cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Crohn’s, diabetes, diseases of the eye, genetic disorders, Huntington’s, kidney disease, lupus, muscular sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, Parkinson’s, rheumatoid arthritis, spinal cord injury, spinal muscular atrophy, stroke and Tay-Sachs disease.” But the only FDA-approved stem cell therapy on that list is for leukemia (cancer).

Yet, a pesky bioethical issue remains, one that the non-profit Genetic Literacy Project recently hit upon: Even if the treatments don’t work, do people have a right to use their own stem cells? There are two main objections. First, the FDA claims that manipulating stem cells allows them to be classified as a “drug” and subject to its jurisdiction. Second, there is a “truth in advertising” problem: Cosmeticians and other purveyors of stem cell therapies promise rejuvenation and good health, yet they don’t have the scientific evidence to back up those claims.

Is there a solution? Banning medical tourism is nearly impossible, but the U.S. can make things more difficult for charlatans at home. Every medical treatment should be required to pass a “truth in advertising” test. An independent laboratory should verify claims made about medical products and procedures before they are allowed to go to market. But this wouldn’t just ensnare cosmetic and stem cell companies; it would also certainly shut down many alternative medicine practitioners. And it could even catch some conventional antidepressant medications, some of which might not be better than placebo.

Certainly, more regulation has its drawbacks. The FDA is notoriously slow, and some critics believe that it stifles innovation. Despite its flaws, on balance the FDA probably does more good than harm.

Modern technology has outpaced regulators and laws. The Internet is causing us to re-think intellectual property rights, ‘Net neutrality and cyberwarfare. Similarly, as biotechnology advances, it will continue to present society with increasingly complex legal and moral gray areas. We would be wise to reignite a serious debate over these issues now.

Alex B. Berezow is editor of RealClearScience and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors. He holds a Ph.D. in microbiology and is co-author of Science Left Behind.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.

“We continue to be encouraged by the progress we see in our ongoing clinical investigations, though the results included in the article were confidential and not intended for publication at that time,” commented Gary Rabin, chairman and CEO of ACT. “Our plan is still to publish additional results from the clinical investigations when we have a significant aggregation of data.”

ACT is currently enrolling patients in three clinical trials in the U.S. and Europe for treatment of Stargardt’s macular dystrophy (SMD) and dry age-related macular degeneration (dry AMD) with hESC-derived RPE cells. These trials are prospective, open-label studies, designed to determine the safety and tolerability of hESC-derived RPE cells following sub-retinal transplantation into patients with dry AMD or SMD at 12 months, the study’s primary endpoint.

ACT cautions that the improvement in the patient’s vision reported in this press release may not be indicative of future results of clinical trials of the RPE cells derived from hESCs. The information included in this press release should be considered in the context of ACT’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including the risk factors included in our most recent annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly report on Form 10-Q.

About Advanced Cell Technology, Inc.
Advanced Cell Technology, Inc., is a biotechnology company applying cellular technology in the field of regenerative medicine. For more information, visit www.advancedcell.com.

The result is a harvest of human embryonic stem cells, the seemingly magic cells capable of morphing into any of the 200-plus kinds that make up a person.

The feat, reported on Wednesday in the journal Cell, could re-ignite the field of stem-cell medicine, which has been hobbled by technical challenges as well as ethical issues.

Until now, the most natural sources of human stem cells have been human embryos, whose use in research poses ethical quandaries. The technique announced on Wednesday, by scientists at Oregon Health & Science University and the Oregon National Primate Research Center, uses unfertilized human eggs.

Eliminating the need for human embryos could boost attempts to use stem cells and their progeny to replace cells damaged or destroyed in heart disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries and other devastating conditions.

But the achievement could also revive fears of reproductive cloning, or producing genetic copies of living (or dead) individuals.

Even before the study was published, a British watchdog group called Human Genetics Alert protested the research.

“Scientists have finally delivered the baby that would-be human cloners have been waiting for: a method for reliably creating cloned human embryos,” said Dr. David King, the group’s director. “This makes it imperative that we create an international legal ban on human cloning before any more research like this takes place. It is irresponsible in the extreme to have published this research.”

Among scientists, however, the accomplishment is being hailed as “a tour de force,” as stem cell biologist George Daley of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute put it. “This represents an unparalleled achievement. They succeeded where many other groups failed, including mine.”

The highest-profile failure was that of biologist Hwang Woo-suk of Seoul National University in South Korea. In 2005 he and his team made headlines across the globe when they claimed, in the journal Science, that they had created human embryonic stem cells via nuclear transfer, the same technique the Oregon scientists used. Hwang’s claim turned out to be a lie, making it one of the most infamous cases of scientific fraud in the last decade.

DOLLY THE SHEEP

If the Oregon achievement holds up and can be replicated by scientists in other labs, it would offer a third, and potentially superior, way of producing embryonic stem cells.

The field of stem cells took off in 1998, when scientists led by Jamie Thomson at the University of Wisconsin announced that they had harvested the cells from days-old human embryos, called blastocysts, obtained from fertility clinics.

The fact that the blastocysts are destroyed when their stem cells are removed ignited a furor from groups that believe life begins at conception. In 2001, President George W. Bush banned federal funding for research that would create more blastocysts, but stem cells already produced from them were fair game.

Those cell lines turned out to be fewer and of poorer quality than scientists had hoped. The next breakthrough came in 2007, when Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University produced human embryonic stem cells in a way that did not require eggs or embryos. He added four genes to adult cells, and the result was like turning back the calendar: The adult cells, which he called induced pluripotent (iPS) cells, showed all the properties of embryonic stem cells, an achievement for which Yamanaka shared last year’s Nobel prize in medicine.

“The whole scientific community jumped on the iPS bandwagon,” said Dr. Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of Advanced Cell Technology.

That turned attention away from a third technique for producing embryonic stem cells: the method that created Dolly the sheep in 1996. Scientists in Scotland had started with a sheep oocyte (egg), removed its DNA and replaced it with DNA from a sheep mammary gland cell. They zapped the egg with electricity to make it grow and divide like a fertilized embryo. No sperm were necessary.

This technique is called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). If the embryo is implanted inside a surrogate mother, as the Dolly team did, the result is reproductive cloning, which has also been done for mice, cows and other animals. But if embryonic development is halted after five days or so, the result is stem cells genetically identical to the donor’s – and thus custom-made for therapies to treat degenerative diseases without fear of rejection by the patient’s immune system.

The Oregon scientists, led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov, used a variation of the Dolly technique. They carefully inserted an adult skin cell into a donated human egg whose DNA had been removed. The unfertilized eggs, stimulated by electric pulses to start dividing, developed to about the 150-cell stage.

The cells were all true embryonic stem cells; they have the “ability to convert just like normal embryonic stem cells, into several different cell types, including nerve cells, liver cells and heart cells,” said Mitalipov. “While there is much work to be done in developing safe and effective stem cell treatments, we believe this is a significant step forward in developing the cells that could be used in regenerative medicine.”

ODD EGGS

In succeeding with humans, the Oregon team toppled the dogma that there is something odd about human eggs or embryos, said stem cell expert Rudolf Jaenisch of the Whitehead Institute and Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “Published data said there was a difference in principle between humans and the mice and other animals that had been cloned, a difference that presented an insurmountable barrier to human cloning” for either reproduction or stem cells.

The Oregon team figured out how to get the egg to act as if it had been fertilized. The secret was to keep the eggs in the phase of their growth cycle called “metaphase,” which is when DNA aligns in the middle of the cell before the cell divides. The scientists got the best results when they grew the eggs in a little of a substance that tends to be abundant in labs: caffeine.

When conducting the same experiment with monkeys, the Oregon scientists stopped at the production of stem cells and never implanted the ball of cells into a surrogate mother. Mitalipov said reproductive cloning is “not our focus, nor do we believe our findings might be used by others” to do it with humans.

“Reproductive cloning hasn’t been advanced by this new paper,” agreed MIT’s Jaenisch. “If you implanted these embryos, which would be illegal, I think you would get the same results as in mice: Most of them die at birth, and the others encounter big troubles as they age.”

STEM CELL FACE-OFF

Now the question is whether embryonic stem cells produced with the Dolly method would be superior to those created with the turn-back-the-calendar iPS method.

Scientists have already found that iPS cells tend to age prematurely and die. They are also created with cancer-causing genes, which could make them dangerous to use therapeutically.

Another possible advantage of the embryonic stem cells produced by the Dolly method: It takes just days, compared with weeks for iPS cells.

“If you have a patient who needs [stem-cell-derived tissue], that can be an important difference,” said Natalie DeWitt of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

On the other hand, the human eggs needed for the Dolly technique are in short supply and hard to obtain, notes MIT’s Jaenisch. (The Oregon team paid the women who donated eggs for their time and “discomfort.”) Although the Oregon team coaxed stem cells out of every egg they collected from one of the women, other labs might not be so efficient.

If the Dolly technique becomes a reliable source of embryonic stem cells, it might accelerate clinical trials of the cells, which have been slow to get going and disappointing.

In 2011, for instance, biotechnology firm Geron halted a clinical trial that used embryonic stem cells to repair spinal cord injuries and said it was leaving the field.

The most promising human study is ACT’s. It is two years into clinical trials using stem cells derived from human embryos to treat two forms of blindness, including macular degeneration, with encouraging results. One patient’s vision went from 20/400 to 20/40, said Lanza.

(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2013. Click For Restrictions – http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp

ALLENDALE, N.J. and WASHINGTON, May 13, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NeoStem, Inc. (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%) , a leader in the emerging cellular therapy industry, and its subsidiary, Progenitor Cell Therapy, LLC (“PCT”), an internationally recognized contract development and manufacturing organization, announced today that PCT has entered into a Cell Therapy Processing Customer Agreement with MedStar Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C. to provide autologous and allogeneic cellular therapy services for cellular products provided by MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (“MGUH”) and deliver resulting cellular therapy products to MGUH for patient care.
In April, Georgetown’sLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, part of MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, and the John Theurer Cancer Center, part of Hackensack University Medical Center (“HackensackUMC”) in Hackensack, N.J., announced the establishment of an oncology affiliation arrangement between them to enhance patient access to innovative clinical trials, and is a significant step towards developing a clinical, translational and basic science cancer research consortium.
In its agreement with PCT, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital will use the services of PCT for processing and storage of peripheral blood progenitor cells, donor leukocytes, bone marrow and cord blood, as well as requested assaying and storage of cellular therapy product, and retrieval and transportation logistics.
“Akin to our relationship with HackensackUMC, whose engagement of PCT began over thirteen years ago, we look forward to developing a strong association with Georgetown,” said Robert A. Preti, Ph.D., President and Chief Scientific Officer of PCT. “Our agreements with HackensackUMC and MedStar Georgetown University Hospital enable us to continue to play a vital part in patient care for cancers and other hematologic disorders, and to continue to provide cell products to our entire client base. Since its founding, PCT has provided cell therapy products for infusion into over 6,000 patients.”
Dr. Robin L. Smith, NeoStem’s (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%) Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, stated that, “NeoStem (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%) is committed to supporting and enabling the development of emerging cell therapy products. We, as well as our clients, are developing innovative therapies using the cells of our body to treat chronic diseases such as cancers, autoimmune conditions and cardiovascular disease. We are thrilled to be working with prestigious institutions such as MedStar Georgetown University Hospital and HackensackUMC to support their bone marrow transplant programs. PCT’s exceptional client retention rate validates the management’s commitment to Quality and Service as we look forward to future growth with our clients outside of the United States.”
The Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center at MedStar Georgetown University Hospital is the Washington, D.C. metropolitan region’s only comprehensive cancer center, a designation from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) demonstrating its scientific excellence and the capability to integrate multi-disciplinary, collaborative research approaches to focus on the problem of cancer.
The John Theurer Cancer Center at HackensackUMC is a nationally renowned, award-winning cancer center with a strong clinical program of excellence. HackensackUMC is ranked among the 50 best hospitals in the United States and the John Theurer Cancer Center is the highest ranked cancer center in New Jersey in the 2012-13 U.S. News & World Report Best Hospitals ranking.
About John Theurer Cancer Center at Hackensack University Medical Center
John Theurer Cancer Center at HackensackUMC is New Jersey’s largest and most comprehensive cancer center dedicated to the diagnosis, treatment, management, research, screenings, preventive care, as well as survivorship of patients with all types of cancer.
Each year, more people in the New Jersey/New York metropolitan area turn to the John Theurer Cancer Center for cancer care than to any other facility in New Jersey. The 14 specialized divisions feature a team of medical, research, nursing and support staff with specialized expertise that translates into more advanced and focused care for all patients. The John Theurer Cancer Center provides comprehensive multidisciplinary care, state of the art technology, access to clinical trials, compassionate care and medical expertise—all under one roof. Physicians at the John Theurer Cancer Center are members of Regional Cancer Care Associates, one of the nation’s largest professional hematology/oncology groups. For more information please visit jtcancercenter.org.
About NeoStem (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%)
NeoStem, Inc. (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%) (“NeoStem” or the “Company”) is a leader in the emerging cellular therapy industry. Our business model includes the development of novel proprietary cell therapy products as well as operating a contract development and manufacturing organization (“CDMO”) providing services to others in the regenerative medicine industry. The combination of a therapeutic development business and revenue generating service provider business provides the Company with unique capabilities for cost effective in-house product development and immediate revenue and cash flow generation. www.neostem.com
Forward-Looking Statements for NeoStem, Inc. (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%)
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements reflect management’s current expectations, as of the date of this press release, and involve certain risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include statements herein with respect to the successful execution of the Company’s business strategy, including with respect to the Company’s research and development and clinical evaluation efforts for cellular therapies, including with respect to AMR-001, the future of the regenerative medicine industry and the role of stem cells and cellular therapy in that industry and the Company’s ability to successfully grow its contract development and manufacturing business. The Company’s actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors. Factors that could cause future results to materially differ from the recent results or those projected in forward-looking statements include the “Risk Factors” described in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2013 and in the Company’s periodic filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company’s further development is highly dependent on future medical and research developments and market acceptance, which is outside its control.
CONTACT: NeoStem (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%)
Dr. Robin L. Smith
Chairman and CEO
Phone: +1-212-584-4174
Email: rsmith@neostem.com
Image: NeoStem Inc. (NBS:$0.56,00$0.0278,5.22%) Logo

Get more news on:SYMBOLS: NBSNEWS TYPE: SECTORS: Health Care, Health Care Providers and Services

Last summer, a Swedish ten-year old was given a lifesaving transplant. The little girl had a blockage in the vein that connects her intestines and spleen with her liver. This is a rare condition that can stunt development or can even be fatal. And her parents were presented with some very worrying options for their daughter.

First off: a vein implant to replace the blocked one. Doctors usually cut deep into patient’s leg or neck to remove a vein that can replace the defective one, putting the patient at risk of additional traumatic surgery. Another option is to use man-made replacement veins, but these are prone to dangerous clots and blockages and virtually guarantee that the patient will need a lifelong course of drugs to keep their immune system from attacking it. Hope was wavering.

There was a third option, but it would be the first time such an operation had taken place. After lengthy discussions, the parents opted for this pioneering technique. The surgeons undertook an incredibly tricky procedure. They implanted the girl with a vein that had been grown in the lab using her own cells.

Her parents had an agonising wait. First, doctors took about 3.5 inches of vein from the groin of a 30-year-old deceased donor and removed all of the donor’s cells, leaving just the protein scaffolding of the vein. They then took cells from the bone marrow of the girl and seeded the vein scaffolding with them. For two weeks they watched the cells grow before implanting it to replace the faulty vein.

Thankfully, a year after the transplant, the girl had grown nearly 2.5 inches taller, gained 11 pounds in weight and was throwing somersaults. Her body was showing no signs of rejecting the vein. According to Dr Adam Katz, a director of plastic surgery at the University of Florida, this was, “a validation of what we believe will be a revolution in medicine”.

Regenerative medicine can help heart disease, stroke and cancer

This remarkable transplant will soon become routine. By creating a vein made of the girl’s own cells, this procedure overcame the biggest problem with transplants – rejection by the immune system. Another major problem in transplants is the huge waiting lists. Some patients die before they ever reach the operation theatre.

This ten-year-old is only one example of the remarkable feats happening across the globe. In Baltimore, a team has managed to rebuild an ear for a cancer patient using her own tissue inside her own forearm.

Regenerative medicine will be able to help cure heart disease by successfully growing heart valves from human cells. This means heart valves will be repaired without the need to perform surgery. Researchers are also looking into helping stroke patients in the rehabilitation period, aiming to help patients regain motor and neural functions by using cells to rescue brain tissue at or near the site of the stroke.

During cancer treatments to rid the body of cancerous cells, the healthy cells must also be killed off. This leaves the body weak and in need of new cells. These cells must come from a compatible donor, and this is no easy task. What if you had your own stash of cells? Regenerative medicine can be used to try and help tissues lost to trauma, disease and wear and tear.

Their discovery shows the positive effects of drugs that may lead to effective new treatments for the neurodegenerative disease. iPS cells are made from patients’ skin cells, rather than from embryos, and they can become any type of cells, including brain cells, in the laboratory. The study appears online ahead of print in the journal Nature Communications.

People with A-T begin life with neurological deficits that become devastating through progressive loss of function in a part of the brain called the cerebellum, which leads to severe difficulty with movement and coordination. A-T patients also suffer frequent infections due to their weakened immune systems and have an increased risk for cancer. The disease is caused by lost function in a gene, ATM, that normally repairs damaged DNA in the cells and preserves normal function.

Developing a human neural cell model to understand A-T’s neurodegenerative process — and create a platform for testing new treatments — was critical because the disease presents differently in humans and laboratory animals. Scientists commonly use mouse models to study A-T, but mice with the disease do not experience the more debilitating effects that humans do. In mice with A-T, the cerebellum appears normal and they do not exhibit the obvious degeneration seen in the human brain.

Lee and colleagues used iPS cell–derived neural cells developed from skin cells of A-T patients with a specific type of genetic mutation to create a disease-in-a-dish model. In the laboratory, researchers were able to model the characteristics of A-T, such as the cell’s lack of ATM protein and its inability to repair DNA damage. The model also allowed the researchers to identify potential new therapeutic drugs, called small molecule read-through (SMRT) compounds, that increase ATM protein activity and improve the model cells’ ability to repair damaged DNA.

“A-T patients with no ATM activity have severe disease but patients with some ATM activity do much better,” Lee said. “This makes our discovery promising, because even a small increase in the ATM activity induced by the SMRT drug can potentially translate to positive effects for patients, slowing disease progression and hopefully improving their quality of life.”

These studies suggest that SMRT compounds may have positive effects on all other cell types in the body, potentially improving A-T patients’ immune function and decreasing their susceptibility to cancer.

Additionally, the patient-specific iPS cell–derived neural cells in this study combined with the SMRT compounds can be an invaluable tool for understanding the development and progression of A-T. This iPS cell–neural cell A-T disease model also can be a platform to identify more potent SMRT drugs. The SMRT drugs identified using this model can potentially be applied to most other genetic diseases with the same type of mutations.

This research was supported by training and research grants from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, the National Institutes of Health, APRAT, A-T Ease and Scott Richards Foundation.

The Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research: UCLA’s stem cell center was launched in 2005 with a UCLA commitment of $20 million over five years. A $20 million gift from the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation in 2007 resulted in the renaming of the center. With more than 200 members, the Broad Stem Cell Research Center is committed to a multidisciplinary, integrated collaboration among scientific, academic and medical disciplines for the purpose of understanding adult and human embryonic stem cells. The center supports innovation, excellence and the highest ethical standards focused on stem cell research with the intent of facilitating basic scientific inquiry directed toward future clinical applications to treat disease. The center is a collaboration of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, UCLA’s Jonsson Cancer Center, the UCLA Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science and the UCLA College of Letters and Science.

HAIFA, Israel, May 13, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Pluristem Therapeutics Inc. (PSTI:$2.98,00$-0.01,00-0.33%) , a leading developer of placenta-based cell therapies, announced today its PLacental eXpanded (PLX) cells tested in preclinical animal models of preeclampsia effectively improved several parameters of the disease. The study was conducted in collaboration with Brett Mitchel PhD, Associate Professor of Internal Medicine at the Cardiovascular Research Institute (CVRI) of the Texas A&M College of Medicine. Dr. Mitchel will present details of the study on May 30th at the Society for Gynecological Investigation Summit in Jerusalem.
Preeclampsia is the most common medical complication of pregnancy and a leading cause of premature births, stillbirths and early neonatal and maternal deaths. If left untreated, it can develop into eclampsia, the life-threatening occurrence of seizures during pregnancy. The only known treatment for eclampsia or preeclampsia is abortion or delivery. The disease occurs in previously healthy women after their 20th week of pregnancy and symptoms include high blood pressure and significant amounts of protein in the urine. According to the World Health Organization, preeclampsia occurs in approximately 6-8% of pregnancies worldwide. It is estimated that preeclampsia costs the global health care system $3 billion annually. May was recognized as National Preeclampsia Awareness Month by U.S. Congresswomen in an effort to improve outcomes for women and babies.
Since preeclampsia is a human pregnancy specific disease, defined as the occurrence of hypertension and significant proteinuria, Dr. Mitchell has established and published two preeclampsia rodent models that exhibits the fundamental features of preeclampsia; pregnancy dependent hypertension and proteinuria. PLX cells administered IM were tested against cell-free medium in these two preeclampsia animal models. Pregnant mice that developed gestational hypertension and proteinuria and received PLX cells demonstrated several positive physiologic, immunologic and histologic findings indicating that PLX cells could be effective in treating preeclampsia.
These findings included:
A progressive, significant (p<0.05) reduction of systolic blood pressure to the level of normal pregnant mice within 3 days of PLX cell administration. Additionally, PLX cells had no effect on blood pressure when given to normal pregnant mice.
Significant (p<0.05) reduction of urinary protein excretion to levels seen in normal pregnant mice within 4 days after PLX cell administration. Additionally, PLX cells had no effect on urinary protein excretion when given to normal pregnant mice.
Significant (p<0.05) increase in endothelial function (as measured by acetylcholine-induced relaxation) to levels seen in normal pregnant mice within 4 days following PLX cell administration.
Significant (p<0.05) reduction in the weight of the spleen to levels seen in normal pregnant mice within 4 days following PLX cell administration. Additionally, PLX cells did not increase the spleen size in pregnant mice demonstrating the lack of immunogenicity of these cells.
No significant differences in the number of pups per litter or fetal demise per litter was observed for all groups suggesting PLX cells do not harm the fetus.
Dr. Mitchell stated, “We were pleasantly surprised that a one-time treatment with PLX cells during pregnancy was able to safely and effectively normalize blood pressure and kidney function in mice with experimental preeclampsia. Our preliminary results suggest that the factors secreted by these cells were able to restore endothelial function while having no deleterious effects on the mother or the fetuses. Since there are currently no treatments for preeclampsia, we are hopeful that women with PE will soon benefit from this promising cell therapy.”
Zami Aberman, Chairman and CEO stated, “While specific mechanisms remain to be determined, this preliminary data demonstrating that Pluristem’s PLX cells are a potential novel therapeutic for the treatment of preeclampsia is very exciting. We look forward to continuing our research with a goal to enter the clinic as soon as possible for this common, potentially lethal disease that currently has no acceptable treatment.”
About Pluristem Therapeutics (PSTI:$2.98,00$-0.01,00-0.33%)
Pluristem Therapeutics Inc. (PSTI:$2.98,00$-0.01,00-0.33%) is a leading developer of placenta-based cell therapies. The Company’s patented PLX (PLacental eXpanded) cells are a drug delivery platform that releases a cocktail of therapeutic proteins in response to a host of local and systemic inflammatory and ischemic diseases. PLX cells are grown using the company’s proprietary 3D micro-environmental technology and are an “off-the-shelf” product that requires no tissue matching prior to administration.
Pluristem has a strong intellectual property position, company-owned GMP certified manufacturing and research facilities, strategic relationships with major research institutions and a seasoned management team. For more information visit www.pluristem.com, the content of which is not part of this press release.
The Pluristem Therapeutics Inc. (PSTI:$2.98,00$-0.01,00-0.33%) logo is available at http://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=6882
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and federal securities laws. For example, when we discuss how our PLX cells are a potential novel therapeutic for the treatment of preeclampsia, or that we look forward to continuing our research with a goal to enter the clinic as soon as possible for preeclampsia, we are using forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements and their implications are based on the current expectations of the management of Pluristem only, and are subject to a number of factors and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements: changes in technology and market requirements; we may encounter delays or obstacles in launching and/or successfully completing our clinical trials; our products may not be approved by regulatory agencies, our technology may not be validated as we progress further and our methods may not be accepted by the scientific community; we may be unable to retain or attract key employees whose knowledge is essential to the development of our products; unforeseen scientific difficulties may develop with our process; our products may wind up being more expensive than we anticipate; results in the laboratory may not translate to equally good results in real surgical settings; results of preclinical studies may not correlate with the results of human clinical trials; our patents may not be sufficient; our products may harm recipients; changes in legislation; inability to timely develop and introduce new technologies, products and applications; loss of market share and pressure on pricing resulting from competition, which could cause the actual results or performance of Pluristem to differ materially from those contemplated in such forward-looking statements. Except as otherwise required by law, Pluristem undertakes no obligation to publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. For a more detailed description of the risks and uncertainties affecting Pluristem, reference is made to Pluristem’s reports filed from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
CONTACT: Pluristem Therapeutics Inc. (PSTI:$2.98,00$-0.01,00-0.33%) :

William Prather R.Ph., M.D. Sr. VP Corporate Development
1-303-883-4954
William.PratherMD@pluristem.com

Daya Lettvin, Investor & Media Relations Director
+972-54-674-5580
daya@pluristem.com
Image: Pluristem Therapeutics Inc. (PSTI:$2.98,00$-0.01,00-0.33%) Logo

Get more news on:SYMBOLS: PSTINEWS TYPE: SECTORS: Health Care, Pharmaceuticals, Health Care Providers and Services