‘Stem cells grew me a new heart’ says Gordon Foster after treatment … – Hull Daily Mail

An East Yorkshire dad who missed out on a heart transplant by just one per cent has become the first patient in Europe to undergo revolutionary treatment on compassionate grounds.

Gordon Foster suffered his first heart attack at 30 and went on to have two major and several smaller heart attacks which caused severe damage to his heart muscle.

Yet, despite his heart working at only 17 per cent of its normal function, he missed out on a heart transplant because it was just above the threshold of 16 per cent.

Now, Gordon has become the first patient to undergo stem cell treatment to regenerate part of his dead heart muscle through the new Compassionate Treatment Programme, the first of its kind in Europe, at the world-famous St Bartholomew's Hospital in London.

Read more: Migraines change Hull mum's accent into Scouse, Geordie and Irish

At his home in the hamlet of Thornholme near Bridlington, Gordon, 59, said: "I thought last year would be my last. Now, I have so much hope for the future.

"I have had the best care I could ever wish for from the NHS. I can't believe how lucky I've been. Someone up there must be looking out for me."

Gordon developed cancer when he was 22 and believes his illness may have been linked to his father's work for the RAF testing British nuclear weapons in Christmas Island in the 1950s. Around 21,000 British servicemen were exposed to explosions wearing no protective clothing and dressed in khaki desert fatigues.

He said: "I remember as a child, the radio used to crackle when my dad walked past and when he died, he was riddled with cancer."

Gordon underwent intensive radiotherapy which may have damaged his heart and suffered the major heart attack eight years later as he renovated his home for him and his bride-to-be Joanne. The couple brought forward their wedding day in case he did not survive.

However, they went on to have two children James, now 25, and Rebekah, 23, but Mr Foster's health declined over the years despite him throwing himself into his job as a welder fabricator for structural steel firm Severfield Reeve.

"I worked in heavy industry, handing upside down off beams welding, and I was putting in 110-hour weeks, often away from home for seven weeks at a time," he said.

More news: Nurses quit after 138m NHS contract is awarded to health care company

"I just got it into my heard that I had to prove to people that I wasn't on the scrap heap and threw myself into work. With hindsight, it was the wrong thing to do."

After experiencing more heart attacks and being told by a cardiology specialist he needed a heart transplant, Gordon went to Papworth Hospital in Cambridgeshire. Tests showed his heart function rate was 17 per cent, just one per cent too high for a heart transplant.

He said: "It was a very humbling experience. I thought I had it bad but when I saw some of the other patients, it was unbelievable how sick they were.

"I thought they were far more deserving than me and I would have felt guilty if they had put me on the transplant list."

So, Gordon soldiered on, his health deteriorating by the day. And he sank into a deep depression as his life became more restrictive. Despite his employers changing his role several times in an attempt to reduce his workload, he had to give up work on medical grounds about 10 years ago.

At home, a stair lift was fitted and his home was adapted because he ended up with terrible pains in his chest and on his knees by the time he reached the top of the stairs.

Five years ago, Gordon was invited to take part in a Stem Cell Research Trial, funded by the Heart Cells Foundation, to help patients with heart failure. However, he was selected at random as part of the group receiving a placebo so his condition did not improve.

More news: Government accused of smoke screen over 'health tourism' plan

However, in September, the Stem Cell Research Team invited him back down to St Bart's to see if he was suitable for treatment under its new Compassionate Treatment Programme and treatment began in November.

Jenifer Rosenberg, chairwoman of the Heart Cells Foundation, said the programme's aim was to treat patients with severe heart disease with stem cell therapy on compassionate grounds to give them back their lives.

For five days, Gordon had injections to stimulate the growth of his own stem cells and on the sixth day, the team extracted bone marrow from the bottom of his back.

His bone marrow was sent by express courier across London to a laboratory where scientists extracted stem cells which were then put straight into the dead section of Gordon's heart muscle in an attempt to regenerate it. And it worked.

More news: Tributes as Bobby Kamara and Carlos Delgado die in Hull flat

"When I got back home, I felt really good," he said. "I could walk up the stairs without getting the pain and it was so marvellous."

Although he still has a lung condition and is about to begin another trial at Castle Hill Hospital in Cottingham to help his breathing, his heart continues to repair itself thanks to the stem cell treatment.

He said: "I will forever be thankful to the Heart Cells Foundation and the team at St Bart's. Without them, I wouldn't be here today and I'm enjoying every moment I spend with my wife and my children.

"Not only has the stem cell treatment I received helped to improve my physical health, but it has also massively improved my mental health and I now live every day with hope for the future."

Consultant cardiologist Professor Anthony Mathur, a director of interventional cardiology at St Bart's, said: "The launch of the programme is a momentous milestone in our research and Gordon's story proves just how important it is to offer cell therapy to those who have no other medical choice.

"With more than one million people suffering with heart disease and failure in the UK, the need for treatment in this field has never been greater.

"We hope to lead the way to the treatment ultimately being available to thousands of other patients through the NHS so we can help people like Gordon to lead near normal lives again."

Visit here to donate to Heart Cells Foundation and the Compassionate Treatment Programme.

More news: Travellers pitch up outside historic Lord Line in Hull

Excerpt from:
'Stem cells grew me a new heart' says Gordon Foster after treatment ... - Hull Daily Mail

Stem cell treatment effective in anterior cruciate ligament tear – Daijiworld.com

New Delhi, Feb 6 (IANS): With stem cell treatment effective in several health conditions, including spinal problems, doctors say the medical procedure can also help in speedy recovery of anterior cruciate ligament tear - a common chronic sports injury.

The medical procedure has advantage over surgeries because they are less invasive and focus on regeneration and healing of the tissues and ligaments rather than to cut and replace it.

In a case study, 28-year-old Mohan Verma - - a footballer suffering from anterior cruciate ligament was cured through Stem Cell treatment also known as Human Embryonic Stem Cell (HESC) in just eight months time.

Initially he was told to undergo a surgery and was informed that the complete recovery would take at least a year.

According to the doctors, HESC is used in three phases for ACL, so that the stem cells could grow, repair and regenerate the ligaments, tissues in the knee.

"Each treatment phase lasts 4-6 weeks during which 0.05 ml human embryonic stem cells is injected. The physician continuously administers the HESC. No immune-suppressants are given to the patients. In addition to HESC therapy, the patient receives physiotherapy and occupational therapy," said Geeta Shroff, stem cells specialist at Delhi-based Nutech Mediworld Hospital.

Comparing it to the conventional treatment, Shroff said: "In surgical procedure the graft goes in at a steeper angle than the original ACL which causes compression of the cartilage and hence most of the young athletes undergoing surgery end up with arthritis by the age of 30."

"Moreover the position sense and the strength of the knee can never be restored," she added.

Read this article:
Stem cell treatment effective in anterior cruciate ligament tear - Daijiworld.com

From Down syndrome to ‘near normal’? New Delhi clinic makes stem cell claims that worry experts – National Post


National Post
From Down syndrome to 'near normal'? New Delhi clinic makes stem cell claims that worry experts
National Post
A New Delhi clinic that has claimed to help paralyzed Canadians walk again by injecting them with stem cells now says it can use the same treatment to make children with Down syndrome almost near normal. Nutech Mediworld says it has treated up to 16 ...

Read more:
From Down syndrome to 'near normal'? New Delhi clinic makes stem cell claims that worry experts - National Post

Experimental Stem Cell Therapy Stops Multiple Sclerosis In Its … – Vocativ

The prognosis for people affected by multiple sclerosis (MS), a degenerative autoimmune disorder that decimates the central nervous system, is a bleak one. The disease oftenbegins with a sudden burst of neurological symptoms like muscle spasms, vision problems, and trouble walking, then progresses differently, depending on which form of MS someone has. But eventually, nearly everyone with the disease comesto the point of being unable to move, breathe, or live independently. And sufferers on average live anywhere from five to ten years less than the general public.

Currently, the best medications we have available do little more than slow MS down, or tamp down peoples symptoms. But an experimental therapy continues to provide the first glimmers of something ground-breaking an actual way to stop one form of the disease in its tracks, and maybe even reverse some of the damage already done.

In this months Neurology, researchers detailed the final five-year-old results of a small clinical trial called HALT-MS. Twenty-four volunteers with MS who hadnt responded to conventional drugs were first given a powerful form of chemotherapy, high-dose immunosuppressive therapy (HDIT), that wiped out their immune system. Then they were given a transplant of their own stem cells taken out earlier, known as autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). These purified cells, the researchers theorized, would seed a new generation of uncorrupted white blood cells and reset the immune system, freezing MS in its place.

For the most part thats exactly what the combination HDIT/HCT therapy did. Nearly 70 percent of patients, five years in, have experienced no signs of the disease progressing. They havent had a relapse of symptoms, become more disabled, or had new brain lesions show up in imaging exams. Some have actually improved physically in the years since the treatment. And even those not in complete remission appear to be suffering less than before. Importantly, though the treatment isnt free of side-effects, there havent been severe ones. There were three deaths seen during the trial, all of whom experienced worsening MS, but none were attributed to the treatment.

The volunteers all had relapsing-remitting MS, the most common form, in which symptoms come and go with little rhyme or reason.

The evidence at this time is encouraging, but it isnt definitive, study author Dr. Linda Griffith, a researcher at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which sponsored the study, told Vocativ.

As Vocativ has previously reported, this isnt the first trial to find similar success rates for HDIT/HCT, though it does come with its own dangers. Patients can die from it, and like all kinds of chemotherapy, the deliberate weakening of the immune system often leads to more infections. It also doesnt seem to be as effective for more advanced types of MS, when the disease has stopped causing active inflammation, said Griffith. And while it could be promising for people in the earliest stages of MS, the research needed to promote it as a first-line treatment isnt there yet either, she added.

For now, the only trials of HDIT/HCT have been small and isolated. And though the effects of it when successful seem to extend as far out as 13 years later, its too early to call it a full-on cure. We still dont have a clear grasp of why MS happens in the first place, but its thought that multiple triggers like infections and unlucky genetics combine to increase peoples risk. So even if resetting someones immune system does treat MS completely, its plausible that some percentage of patients could fall victim to it again down the road, Griffith explained. We just dont know enough right now.

But Griffith is hopeful that larger, randomized studies will be underway within the next year or so. And if those prove to be as successful as the HALT-MS trial and others, the therapy could someday soon lead to a light at the end of tunnel for the millions of MS sufferers alive today.

View original post here:
Experimental Stem Cell Therapy Stops Multiple Sclerosis In Its ... - Vocativ

Stem Cell Therapy Offers Hope to Multiple Sclerosis Patients (VIDEO) – Newsy

ByEthan Weston February 2, 2017

Stem cell research is making medical breakthroughs, and now, it could offer hope to people who have multiple sclerosis.

A newNational Institutes of Healthstudy suggests one-time stem cell transplants might be more effective than long-term medicinal treatment at treating relapsing-remitting MS.

Multiple sclerosis is an autoimmune disease that causes a person's immune system to attack their central nervous system. Common symptoms are impaired motor function, weakness and chronic pain. Relapsing-remitting MS is the most common form of the disease.

Stem cells are cells that haven't decided what they want to be when they grow up. That means they can develop into different types of cells. Because of that, they can be used to heal older damaged cells, like those attacked by the immune system.

The study followed 24 people who weren't having success with the typical MS medications. The experimental treatment suppressed participants' immune systems with chemotherapy. Then, their own stem cells were transplanted back into their bodies to rebuild their immune systems.

Related StoryPart-Pig, Part-Human Embryos Could Give Us Replacement Human Organs

Five years after treatment, most participants' symptoms were in remission. Some of them even showed some improvements.

Larger studies will be needed to confirm these findings. But the head of the study said it's a good first step toward more effective treatment for an incredibly debilitating and deadly disease.

See the original post:
Stem Cell Therapy Offers Hope to Multiple Sclerosis Patients (VIDEO) - Newsy

California’s stem cell program ponders a future of new challenges and old promises – Los Angeles Times

Evangelina Padilla Vaccaro of Coronais the new face of stem cell science in California. Born with bubble baby disease that deprived her of a functioning immune system, she was cured with stem cell therapy developed in Donald Kohns lab at UCLA, which has received millions of dollars in grants from the California stem cell program.

Now shes a vivacious 4-year-old, depictedastride a hobby horse and clad in a pink sweatshirt bearing a lightning bolton the programs 2016 annual report under the legend CURED.

Thank you all for the amazing work you do, her father told the program board during its Dec. 13 meeting.

Evangelina represents the great potential of the $3-billion state program, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, or CIRM, but also its dilemma as it ponders its next chapter. Established in 2004 by a nearly 60-40 vote for Proposition 71, CIRM began issuing grants in 2006. Now, after 10 years, the program has committed $2.2 billion of its bond-funded war chest. Its expecting to spend the rest by the end of 2020.

So it wont be long before CIRM must confront the question of whether to fold up shop when its well runs dry, seek outside funding from foundations and industry, or appeal to voters for more public money. If it returns to the ballot, CIRM would have a chance to reconsider its administrative structure, the inflated expectations it gave voters in 2004, its embedded conflicts of interestand even whether it should be limited to funding research into stem cells. All these features of Proposition 71 have created complications during the programsfirst decade.

Robert Klein II, the real estate investor who was the driving force behind Proposition 71 and chaired the institutefor its first seven years, already has said that he intends to place a funding measure on the November 2018 ballot.

CIRM officials, wary of rules limiting how far public agencies can go in lobbying for ballot measures, arent yettaking an official stand on Kleins effort. Were leaving it to Bob, Chairman Jonathan Thomas says; he told the oversight board in December, We keep him updated on CIRMs progress so that his effort is fully informed.

Thomas added, however, that he and other officers have started discussions with philanthropists and medical foundations that could be potential sources of funds to keep CIRM going in the event Bobs measure is not successful.Klein didnt respond to a requestfor comment.

The success of any ballot initiativewill depend on two factors, says Henry T. Greely, director of the Center for Law and the Biosciences at Stanford University: The two big variables are whether any of their clinical trials pay off, and what the Trump administration does.

The public wants evidence that its heavy investment in CIRM has yieldedcures for diabetes, Alzheimers, Parkinsons, spinal cord injuries orother conditions that were touted as research targets by the Proposition 71 campaign. Evangelinas improvement notwithstanding, no CIRM-funded research has yet reached the marketing stage, although CIRM officials say some initiativesare getting close.

Greelys allusion to White House policy harks back to the very genesis of the stem cell program, President George W. Bushs 2001 ban on federal funding for research on stem cellsderived from humanembryos. The imposition of an essentially ideological test forscientific research was what spurred California voters to enactProposition 71 as a constitutional amendment three years later. The measure endowed CIRM with $3 billion in bond revenue to fund California stem cell laboratories and attract world-class researchers.

The program certainly has helped turn California into a global center of stem cell research. California is the place to be if you want to develop stem cell treatments, says Jeanne Loring of Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, a CIRM grantee who is researching possible treatments for Parkinsons.A lot of my colleagues in other states are envious.

President Obama lifted the Bush ban in 2009, but by then CIRMs role as a bulwarkof Californias research infrastructure was secure. Whether Trump might reimpose the ban is unknown.

Trump himself hasnt left a record of his views on embryonic stem cells, which typically are derived from unused embryos developed for in vitro fertilization and donated for research. ButVice President Mike Pence labeled suchresearch morally wrong in the pages of Christianity Today.

A new ballot campaign would present an opportunity to fix some of the stem cell programs flaws that were written into Proposition 71 and consequently embedded in the state Constitution.

The measure gave CIRM unique exemptions from most legislative oversight and state laws mandating public accountability and transparency. By dictating that seats on CIRMs 29-member oversight board would be filled almost exclusively by representatives of grant-eligible institutions or patient advocacy groups, it institutionalizedconflicts of interest and an atmosphere of cronyism.

The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences found in a 2012 report that this setup bedeviled the program with persistent questions about the integrity and independence of some of CIRMs decisions. Indeed, an analysis by David Jensen of the California Stem Cell Report found that about 90% of the $1.7 billion in CIRM grants by 2013 had gone to institutions with present or past representatives on the board.

Lasting damage to CIRMs mission also may have been done by the tenor of the Proposition 71 campaign, which used such high-profile victims of neurological conditions as Michael J. Fox and Christopher Reeve to give voters the impression that money was the sole obstacle to miraculous stem cell cures, and that successful treatments would yield immense profits for the state. Neither claim was realistic, but they set benchmarks for success that CIRM has been unable to meet.

A new funding campaign could give the program a much-needed reboot. The ballot measure could restructure CIRM as an ordinary agency of the state subject to legislative oversight, open meetings lawsand other good-government statutes, says Marcy Darnovsky, executive director of the Berkeley-based Center for Genetics and Society.

Especially in its early years during Kleins chairmanship, the program guarded its independence from oversight truculently. Since then, Darnovsky says, its been more accommodating: Theyve been much better than they have to be by the letter of the law, she says approvingly. But she says the program has never resolved the conflicts of interest inherent in who decides where the money goes and who gets it.

A new campaign could instill more public realismabout the potential of the research being funded. If they ask for money, it would be really important that they level with the people of California and educate them about how science really works, Darnovsky said.

CIRMs leadership knows that the publics inflated expectations threaten to obscurethe programs real accomplishments. With multiple clinical trials of CIRM-funded researchunderway, the first government approval of treatments isexpected in the not-too-distant future, C. Randal Mills, the programs president, said in an interview.

But he acknowledged that expectations need to be tempered with humility at the enormity of the task before us. We dont want to overpromise or overhype. CIRM is doing what it was set up to do, but it might be taking longer than people thought or hoped.

Still, the programs future may depend more on politics than science. If it looks like Washington is flipping off California, that could have political ramifications at the ballot box, Greely says. Some researchers arent optimistic about the prospects for independent, federally funded science under the Trump administration.

The only thing Ican predict, Loring says, is that it will be neutral or negative. It wont be positive.

Keep up to date with Michael Hiltzik. Follow@hiltzikmon Twitter, see hisFacebook page, or emailmichael.hiltzik@latimes.com.

Return to Michael Hiltzik's blog.

Read more:
California's stem cell program ponders a future of new challenges and old promises - Los Angeles Times

Stem Cell Day of Discovery introduces students to USC scientists – USC News

You can be anything you want just like a stem cell. That was a key lesson for the 500 middle and high school students at the USC Stem Cell Day of Discovery on USCs Health Sciences Campus.

It was a true joy to welcome the middle and high school students from our neighboring communities in Boyle Heights, El Sereno, Lincoln Heights, the San Gabriel Valley and throughout Los Angeles, said Rohit Varma, dean of the Keck School of Medicine of USC. This bright young generation brings tremendous potential to their future pursuits in biotechnology and beyond.

Hosted by USC Civic Engagement and USC Stem Cell, the Feb. 4 event introduced the students to stem cell scientists.

Dont be shy, said Andy McMahon, director of the Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at USC. Ask our scientists questions. Ask them about their science, but also ask them about their personal journeys that led to where they are.

The students followed McMahons advice as they engaged in fun activities and lively conversations. They visited labs to get hands-on experience with microscopes and pipettes. They competed as contestants in a stem cell edition of Family Feud, viewed colorful microscopy at a 3-D computer station and attended a research poster session and resource fair. They also toured the USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center and Keck Hospital of USC.

California currently has biotechnology as the biggest-growing sector, said junior Richard Coca of Reseda High School. Its really important that students are visiting labs and learning more about the industry so they can potentially see where theyre going with their lives and careers.

Stem cell technology

Earlier in the day, the students enjoyed hearing from Senta Georgia, a USC Stem Cell researcher with a lab at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, who is seeking stem cell-based treatments for diabetes. Ismael Fernndez-Hernndez, a postdoctoral fellow at USCs stem cell research center from Guadalajara, Mexico, also gave a talk about how stem cell technology could offer ways to counteract brain degeneration from disease, aging or injury.

Throughout the festivities, Felipe Osorno, associate administrator of performance management for Keck Medicine of USC, served as master of ceremonies.

The exposure to the Keck School of Medicine of USC is invaluable for the students, said Maria Elena Kennedy, a consultant to the Bassett Unified School District. Our students come from a Title I School District and they dont often have the opportunity to come to a campus like the [one for the] Keck School.

In addition to students, teachers and parents, the event welcomed leaders from the community, business and biotech sector, and local government.

Together with these partners, USC will continue to build the future of Los Angeles as an incubator for the biosciences and world leader in stem cell research.

As USC continues the important work of expanding our biomedical research, we will not walk this path alone, said Earl C. Paysinger, vice president of USC Civic Engagement. We will do so in collaboration and with the strong support of the people in our communities.

More stories about: Community Outreach, Stem Cells

USC event in East L.A. on careers in STEM science, technology, engineering and math features retired astronaut and leading physician, both of them Trojans.

The annual open house offers art, research and networking opportunities.

In honor of Stem Cell Awareness Day, USC Stem Cell is hosting a series of public events to celebrate and raise awareness of this promising field of medicine.

Adnan Chowdhury ventures into uncharted scientific territory.

Visit link:
Stem Cell Day of Discovery introduces students to USC scientists - USC News

Yes there’s hope, but treating spinal injuries with stem cells is not a reality yet – The Conversation AU

The 2017 Australian of the Year award went to Professor Alan Mackay-Sim for his significant career in stem cell science.

The prize was linked to barbeque-stopping headlines equating his achievements to the scientific equivalent of the moon landing and paving the road to recovery for people with spinal cord injuries.

Such claims in the media imply that there is now a scientifically proven stem cell treatment for spinal cord injury. This is not the case.

For now, any clinic or headline claiming miracle cures should be viewed with caution, as they are likely to be trading on peoples hope.

Put simply, injury to the spinal cord causes damage to the nerve cells that transmit information between the brain and the rest of the body.

Depending on which part of the spine is involved, the injury can affect the nerves that control the muscles in our legs and arms; those that control bowel and bladder function and how we regulate body temperature and blood pressure; and those that carry the sensation of being touched. This occurs in part because injury and subsequent scarring affect not just the nerves but also the insulation that surrounds and protects them. The insulation the myelin sheath is damaged and the body cannot usually completely replace or regenerate this covering.

Stem cells can self-reproduce and grow into hundreds of different cell types, including nerves and the cells that make myelin. So the blue-sky vision is that stem cells could restore some nerve function by replacing missing or faulty cells, or prevent further damage caused by scarring.

Studies in animals have applied stem cells derived from sources including brain tissue, the lining of the nasal cavity, tooth pulp, and embryos (known as embryonic stem cells).

Dramatic improvements have been shown on some occasions, such as rats and mice regaining bladder control or the ability to walk after injury. While striking, such improvement often represents only a partial recovery. It holds significant promise, but is not direct evidence that such an approach will work in people, particularly those with more complex injuries.

The translation of findings from basic laboratory stem cell research to effective and safe treatments in the clinic involves many steps and challenges. It needs a firm scientific basis from animal studies and then careful evaluation in humans.

Many clinical studies examining stem cells for spinal repair are currently underway. The approaches fit broadly into two categories:

using stem cells as a source of cells to replace those damaged as a result of injury

applying cells to act on the bodys own cells to accelerate repair or prevent further damage.

One study that has attracted significant interest involves the injection of myelin-producing cells made from human embryonic stem cells. Researchers hoped that these cells, once injected into the spinal cord, would mature and form a new coating on the nerve cells, restoring the ability of signals to cross the spinal cord injury site. Preliminary results seem to show that the cells are safe; studies are ongoing.

Other clinical trials use cells from patients own bone marrow or adipose tissue (fat), or from donated cord blood or nerves from fetal tissue. The scientific rationale is based on the possibility that when transplanted into the injured spinal cord, these cells may provide surrounding tissue with protective factors which help to re-establish some of the connections important for the network of nerves that carry information around the body.

The field as it stands combines years of research, and tens of millions of dollars of investment. However, the development of stem cell therapies for spinal cord injury remains a long way from translating laboratory promise into proven and effective bedside treatments.

Each case is unique in people with spinal cord injury: the level of paralysis, and loss of sensation and function relate to the type of injury and its location. Injuries as a result of stab wounds or infection may result in different outcomes from those incurred as a result of trauma from a car accident or serious fall. The previous health of those injured, the care received at the time of injury, and the type of rehabilitation they access can all impact on subsequent health and mobility.

Such variability means caution needs to accompany claims of man walking again particularly when reports relate to a single individual.

In the case that was linked to the Australian of the Year award, the actual 2013 study focused on whether it was safe to take the patients own nerves and other cells from the nose and place these into the damaged region of the spine. While the researchers themselves recommended caution in interpreting the results, accompanying media reports focused on the outcome from just one of the six participants.

While the outcome was significant for the gentleman involved, we simply do not know whether recovery may have occurred for this individual even without stem cells, given the type of injury (stab wounds), the level of injury, the accompanying rehabilitation that he received or a combination of these factors. It cannot be assumed a similar outcome would be the case for all people with spinal injury.

Finding a way to alleviate the suffering of those with spinal cord injury, and many other conditions, drives the work of thousands of researchers and doctors around the globe. But stem cells are not a silver bullet and should not be immune from careful evaluation in clinical trials.

Failure to proceed with caution could actually cause harm. For example, a paraplegic woman who was also treated with nasal stem cells showed no clinical improvement, and developed a large mucus-secreting tumour in her spine. This case highlights the need for further refinement and assessment in properly conducted clinical trials before nasal stem cells can become part of mainstream medicine.

Its also worth noting that for spinal cord injury, trials for recovery of function are not limited to the use of stem cells but include approaches focused on promoting health of surviving nerves (neuroprotection), surgery following injury, nerve transfers, electrical stimulation, external physical supports known as exoskeletons, nanotechnology and brain-machine interfaces.

Ultimately, determining which of these approaches will improve the lives of people with spinal injury can only be done through rigorous, ethical research.

Continued here:
Yes there's hope, but treating spinal injuries with stem cells is not a reality yet - The Conversation AU

Embryonic stem (ES) cells – eurostemcell.org

Therapeutic cloning is a term used to describe the creation of stem cells for use in a medical treatment for a particular individual. In fact, these cells are not used for treatments yet and would certainly not be put into a patient at present.

In practice, therapeutic cloning currently means creating an embryonic stem cell line by a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). In this process, the nucleus of an adult cell from an animal is transferred into an egg cell that has had its nucleus removed. The embryo can be allowed to grow to a very early stage of development, and then used as a source of stem cells. In the future this method could provide a source of cells for therapy.

Therapeutic cloning:Somatic cell nuclear transfer can be used to create new embyronic stem cell lines.

There is no consensus on the ethical implications of therapeutic cloning.

Arguments for allowing therapeutic cloning

Arguments against allowing therapeutic cloning

The potential for huge benefits to human kind in the future outweighs any wrong-doing.

Even if destroying embryos is classed as killing, sometimes society may justify killing to save the lives of others: eg if Hitler had been assassinated, millions of lifes would probably have been saved.

Embryonic stem cell lines could be created from the cells of patients suffering from rare, complex diseases, creating a vast resource that can be used by many scientists.

Misguided individuals could attempt to implant cloned human embryos in a womans uterus to create a cloned person (known as reproductive cloning). There are laws against this in many countries, but not all.

Commercial pressures and international competition could drive scientists to conduct more and more research on embryos, which would just become a resource for researchers.

The eggs used to create embryos in this way have to be donated by women, who could be exploited for their eggs, especially in poorer countries or places with fewer legal restrictions.

The rest is here:
Embryonic stem (ES) cells - eurostemcell.org

Cancer stem cell – Wikipedia

Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are cancer cells (found within tumors or hematological cancers) that possess characteristics associated with normal stem cells, specifically the ability to give rise to all cell types found in a particular cancer sample. CSCs are therefore tumorigenic (tumor-forming), perhaps in contrast to other non-tumorigenic cancer cells. CSCs may generate tumors through the stem cell processes of self-renewal and differentiation into multiple cell types. Such cells are hypothesized to persist in tumors as a distinct population and cause relapse and metastasis by giving rise to new tumors. Therefore, development of specific therapies targeted at CSCs holds hope for improvement of survival and quality of life of cancer patients, especially for patients with metastatic disease.

Existing cancer treatments have mostly been developed based on animal models, where therapies able to promote tumor shrinkage were deemed effective. However, animals do not provide a complete model of human disease. In particular, in mice, whose life spans do not exceed two years, tumor relapse is difficult to study.

The efficacy of cancer treatments is, in the initial stages of testing, often measured by the ablation fraction of tumor mass (fractional kill). As CSCs form a small proportion of the tumor, this may not necessarily select for drugs that act specifically on the stem cells. The theory suggests that conventional chemotherapies kill differentiated or differentiating cells, which form the bulk of the tumor but do not generate new cells. A population of CSCs, which gave rise to it, could remain untouched and cause relapse.

Cancer stem cells were first identified by John Dick in acute myeloid leukemia in the late 1990s. Since the early 2000s they have been an intense cancer research focus.[1]

In different tumor subtypes, cells within the tumor population exhibit functional heterogeneity and tumors are formed from cells with various proliferative and differentiation capacities.[2] This functional heterogeneity among cancer cells has led to the creation of multiple propagation models to account for heterogeneity and differences in tumor-regenerative capacity: the cancer stem cell (CSC) and stochastic model.

The Cancer Stem Cell Model, also known as the Hierarchical Model proposes that tumors are hierarchically organized (CSCs lying at the apex[3] (Fig. 3).) Within the cancer population of the tumors there are cancer stem cells (CSC) that are tumorigenic cells and are biologically distinct from other subpopulations[4] They have two defining features: their long-term ability to self-renew and their capacity to differentiate into progeny that is non-tumorigenic but still contributes to the growth of the tumor. This model suggests that only certain subpopulations of cancer stem cells have the ability to drive the progression of cancer, meaning that there are specific (intrinsic) characteristics that can be identified and then targeted to destroy a tumor long-term without the need to battle the whole tumor [5]

In order for a cell to become cancerous it must undergo a significant number of alterations to its DNA sequence. This cell model suggests these mutations could occur to any cell in the body resulting in a cancer. Essentially this theory proposes that all cells have the ability to be tumorigenic making all tumor cells equipotent with the ability to self-renew or differentiate, leading to tumor heterogeneity while others can differentiate into non-CSCs [4][6] The cell's potential can be influenced by unpredicted genetic or epigenetic factors, resulting in phenotypically diverse cells in both the tumorigenic and non-tumorigenic cells that compose the tumor.[7]

These mutations could progressively accumulate and enhance the resistance and fitness of cells that allow them to outcompete other tumor cells, better known as the somatic evolution model.[4] The clonal evolution model, which occurs in both the CSC model and stochastic model, postulates that mutant tumor cells with a growth advantage outproliferate others. Cells in the dominant population have a similar potential for initiating tumor growth[8] (Fig. 4).

[9] These two models are not mutually exclusive, as CSCs themselves undergo clonal evolution. Thus, the secondary more dominant CSCs may emerge, if a mutation confers more aggressive properties[10] (Fig. 5).

A study in 2014 argues the gap between these two controversial models can be bridged by providing an alternative explanation of tumor heterogeneity. They demonstrate a model that includes aspects of both the Stochastic and CSC models.[6] They examined cancer stem cell plasticity in which cancer stem cells can transition between non-cancer stem cells (Non-CSC) and CSC via in situ supporting a more Stochastic model.[6][11] But the existence of both biologically distinct non-CSC and CSC populations supports a more CSC model, proposing that both models may play a vital role in tumor heterogeneity.[6]

The existence of CSCs is under debate, because many studies found no cells with their specific characteristics.[12] Cancer cells must be capable of continuous proliferation and self-renewal to retain the many mutations required for carcinogenesis and to sustain the growth of a tumor, since differentiated cells (constrained by the Hayflick Limit[13]) cannot divide indefinitely. If most tumor cells are endowed with stem cell properties, targeting tumor size directly is a valid strategy. If they are a small minority, targeting them may be more effective. Another debate is over the origin of CSCs - whether from disregulation of normal stem cells or from a more specialized population that acquired the ability to self-renew (which is related to the issue of stem cell plasticity).

The first conclusive evidence for CSCs came in 1997. Bonnet and Dick isolated a subpopulation of leukemia cells that expressed surface marker CD34, but not CD38.[14] The authors established that the CD34+/CD38 subpopulation is capable of initiating tumors in NOD/SCID mice that were histologically similar to the donor. The first evidence of a solid tumor cancer stem-like cell followed in 2002 with the discovery of a clonogenic, sphere-forming cell isolated and characterized from human brain gliomas. Human cortical glial tumors contain neural stem-like cells expressing astroglial and neuronal markers in vitro.[15]

In cancer research experiments, tumor cells are sometimes injected into an experimental animal to establish a tumor. Disease progression is then followed in time and novel drugs can be tested for their efficacy. Tumor formation requires thousands or tens of thousands of cells to be introduced. Classically, this was explained by poor methodology (i.e., the tumor cells lose their viability during transfer) or the critical importance of the microenvironment, the particular biochemical surroundings of the injected cells. Supporters of the CSC paradigm argue that only a small fraction of the injected cells, the CSCs, have the potential to generate a tumor. In human acute myeloid leukemia the frequency of these cells is less than 1 in 10,000.[14]

Further evidence comes from histology. Many tumors are heterogeneous and contain multiple cell types native to the host organ. Heterogeneity is commonly retained by tumor metastases. This suggests that the cell that produced them had the capacity to generate multiple cell types, a classical hallmark of stem cells.[14]

The existence of leukemia stem cells prompted research into other cancers. CSCs have recently been identified in several solid tumors, including:

Once the pathways to cancer are hypothesized, it is possible to develop predictive mathematical models,[33] e.g., based on the cell compartment method. For instance, the growths of abnormal cells can be denoted with specific mutation probabilities. Such a model predicted that repeated insult to mature cells increases the formation of abnormal progeny and the risk of cancer.[34] The clinical efficacy of such models[35] remains unestablished.

The origin of CSCs is an active research area. The answer may depend on the tumor type and phenotype. So far the hypothesis that tumors originate from a single "cell of origin" has not been demonstrated using the cancer stem cell model. This is because cancer stem cells are not present in end-stage tumors.

Origin hypotheses include mutants in developing stem or progenitor cells, mutants in adult stem cells or adult progenitor cells and mutant, differentiated cells that acquire stem-like attributes. These theories often focus on a tumor's "cell of origin".

The "mutation in stem cell niche populations during development" hypothesis claims that these developing stem populations are mutated and then reproduce so that the mutation is shared by many descendants. These daughter cells are much closer to becoming tumors and their numbers increase the chance of a cancerous mutation.[36]

Another theory associates adult stem cells (ASC) with tumor formation. This is most often associated with tissues with a high rate of cell turnover (such as the skin or gut). In these tissues, ASCs are candidates because of their frequent cell divisions (compared to most ASCs) in conjunction with the long lifespan of ASCs. This combination creates the ideal set of circumstances for mutations to accumulate: mutation accumulation is the primary factor that drives cancer initiation. Evidence shows that the association represents an actual phenomenon, although specific cancers have been linked to a specific cause.[37][38]

De-differentiation of mutated cells may create stem cell-like characteristics, suggesting that any cell might become a cancer stem cell. In other words, a fully differentiated cell undergoes several mutations that drive it back to a stem-like state.

The concept of tumor hierarchy claims that a tumor is a heterogeneous population of mutant cells, all of which share some mutations, but vary in specific phenotype. A tumor hosts several types of stem cells, one optimal to the specific environment and other less successful lines. These secondary lines may be more successful in other environments, allowing the tumor to adapt, including adaptation to therapeutic intervention. If correct, this concept impacts cancer stem cell-specific treatment regimes.[39] Such a hierarchy would complicate attempts to pinpoint the origin.

CSCs, now reported in most human tumors, are commonly identified and enriched using strategies for identifying normal stem cells that are similar across studies.[40] These procedures include fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS), with antibodies directed at cell-surface markers and functional approaches including side population assay or Aldefluor assay.[41] The CSC-enriched result is then implanted, at various doses, in immune-deficient mice to assess its tumor development capacity. This in vivo assay is called a limiting dilution assay. The tumor cell subsets that can initiate tumor development at low cell numbers are further tested for self-renewal capacity in serial tumor studies.[42]

CSC can also be identified by efflux of incorporated Hoechst dyes via multidrug resistance (MDR) and ATP-binding cassette (ABC) Transporters.[41]

Another approach is sphere-forming assays. Many normal stem cells such as hematopoietics or stem cells from tissues, under special culture conditions, form three-dimensional spheres that can differentiate. As with normal stem cells, the CSCs isolated from brain or prostate tumors also have the ability to form anchor-independent spheres.[43]

CSCs have been identified in various solid tumors. Markers specific for normal stem cells are commonly used for isolating CSCs from solid and hematological tumors. Cell surface markers have proved useful for isolation of CSC-enriched populations including CD133 (also known as PROM1), CD44, CD24, EpCAM (epithelial cell adhesion molecule, also known as epithelial specific antigen, ESA), THY1, ATP-binding cassette B5 (ABCB5),[44] and CD200.

CD133 (prominin 1) is a five-transmembrane domain glycoprotein expressed on CD34+ stem and progenitor cells, in endothelial precursors and fetal neural stem cells. It has been detected using its glycosylated epitope known as AC133.

EpCAM (epithelial cell adhesion molecule, ESA, TROP1) is hemophilic Ca2+-independent cell adhesion molecule expressed on the basolateral surface of most epithelial cells.

CD90 (THY1) is a glycosylphosphatidylinositol glycoprotein anchored in the plasma membrane and involved in signal transduction. It may also mediate adhesion between thymocytes and thymic stroma.

CD44 (PGP1) is an adhesion molecule that has pleiotropic roles in cell signaling, migration and homing. It has multiple isoforms, including CD44H, which exhibits high affinity for hyaluronate and CD44V which has metastatic properties.

CD24 (HSA) is a glycosylated glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored adhesion molecule, which has co-stimulatory role in B and T cells.

CD200 (OX-2) is a type 1 membrane glycoprotein, which delivers an inhibitory signal to immune cells including T cells, natural killer cells and macrophages.

ALDH is a ubiquitous aldehyde dehydrogenase family of enzymes, which catalyzes the oxidation of aromatic aldehydes to carboxyl acids. For instance, it has a role in conversion of retinol to retinoic acid, which is essential for survival.[45][46]

The first solid malignancy from which CSCs were isolated and identified was breast cancer and they are the most intensely studied. Breast CSCs have been enriched in CD44+CD24/low,[44] SP[47] and ALDH+ subpopulations.[48][49] Breast CSCs are apparently phenotypically diverse. CSC marker expression in breast cancer cells is apparently heterogeneous and breast CSC populations vary across tumors.[50] Both CD44+CD24 and CD44+CD24+ cell populations are tumor initiating cells; however, CSC are most highly enriched using the marker profile CD44+CD49fhiCD133/2hi.[51]

CSCs have been reported in many brain tumors. Stem-like tumor cells have been identified using cell surface markers including CD133,[52] SSEA-1 (stage-specific embryonic antigen-1),[53]EGFR[54] and CD44.[55] The use of CD133 for identification of brain tumor stem-like cells may be problematic because tumorigenic cells are found in both CD133+ and CD133 cells in some gliomas and some CD133+ brain tumor cells may not possess tumor-initiating capacity.[54]

CSCs were reported in human colon cancer.[56] For their identification, cell surface markers such as CD133,[56] CD44[57] and ABCB5,[58] functional analysis including clonal analysis [59] and Aldefluor assay were used.[60] Using CD133 as a positive marker for colon CSCs generated conflicting results. The AC133 epitope, but not the CD133 protein, is specifically expressed in colon CSCs and its expression is lost upon differentiation.[61] In addition, CD44+ colon cancer cells and additional sub-fractionation of CD44+EpCAM+ cell population with CD166 enhance the success of tumor engraftments.[57]

Multiple CSCs have been reported in prostate,[62]lung and many other organs, including liver, pancreas, kidney or ovary.[45][63] In prostate cancer, the tumor-initiating cells have been identified in CD44+[64] cell subset as CD44+21+,[65] TRA-1-60+CD151+CD166+[66] or ALDH+[67] cell populations. Putative markers for lung CSCs have been reported, including CD133+,[68] ALDH+,[69] CD44+[70] and oncofetal protein 5T4+.[71]

Metastasis is the major cause of tumor lethality. However, not every tumor cell can metastasize. This potential depends on factors that determine growth, angiogenesis, invasion and other basic processes.

In epithelial tumors, the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is considered to be a crucial event.[72] EMT and the reverse transition from mesenchymal to an epithelial phenotype (MET) are involved in embryonic development, which involves disruption of epithelial cell homeostasis and the acquisition of a migratory mesenchymal phenotype.[73] EMT appears to be controlled by canonical pathways such as WNT and transforming growth factor .[74]

EMT's important feature is the loss of membrane E-cadherin in adherens junctions, where -catenin may play a significant role. Translocation of -catenin from adherens junctions to the nucleus may lead to a loss of E-cadherin and subsequently to EMT. Nuclear -catenin apparently can directly, transcriptionally activate EMT-associated target genes, such as the E-cadherin gene repressor SLUG (also known as SNAI2).[75] Mechanical properties of the tumor microenvironment, such as hypoxia, can contribute to CSC survival and metastatic potential through stabilization of hypoxia inducible factors through interactions with ROS (reactive oxygen species).[76][77]

Tumor cells undergoing an EMT may be precursors for metastatic cancer cells, or even metastatic CSCs.[78] In the invasive edge of pancreatic carcinoma, a subset of CD133+CXCR4+ (receptor for CXCL12 chemokine also known as a SDF1 ligand) cells was defined. These cells exhibited significantly stronger migratory activity than their counterpart CD133+CXCR4 cells, but both showed similar tumor development capacity.[79] Moreover, inhibition of the CXCR4 receptor reduced metastatic potential without altering tumorigenic capacity.[80]

In breast cancer CD44+CD24/low cells are detectable in metastatic pleural effusions.[44] By contrast, an increased number of CD24+ cells have been identified in distant metastases in breast cancer patients.[81] It is possible that CD44+CD24/low cells initially metastasize and in the new site change their phenotype and undergo limited differentiation.[82] The two-phase expression pattern hypothesis proposes two forms of cancer stem cells - stationary (SCS) and mobile (MCS). SCS are embedded in tissue and persist in differentiated areas throughout tumor progression. MCS are located at the tumor-host interface. These cells are apparently derived from SCS through the acquisition of transient EMT (Figure 7).[83]

CSCs have implications for cancer therapy, including for disease identification, selective drug targets, prevention of metastasis and intervention strategies.

Somatic stem cells are naturally resistant to chemotherapeutic agents. They produce various pumps (such as MDR[citation needed]) that pump out drugs and DNA repair proteins. They have a slow rate of cell turnover (chemotherapeutic agents naturally target rapidly replicating cells).[citation needed] CSCs that develop from normal stem cells may also produce these proteins, which could increase their resistance towards chemotherapy. The surviving CSCs then repopulate the tumor, causing a relapse.[84]

Selectively targeting CSCs may allow treatment of aggressive, non-resectable tumors, as well as prevent metastasis and relapse.[84] The hypothesis suggests that upon CSC elimination, cancer could regress due to differentiation and/or cell death.[citation needed] The fraction of tumor cells that are CSCs and therefore need to be eliminated is unclear.[85]

Studies looked for specific markers[17] and for proteomic and genomic tumor signatures that distinguish CSCs from others.[86] In 2009, scientists identified the compound salinomycin, which selectively reduces the proportion of breast CSCs in mice by more than 100-fold relative to Paclitaxel, a commonly used chemotherapeutic agent.[87] Some types of cancer cells can survive treatment with salinomycin through autophagy,[88] whereby cells use acidic organelles such as lysosomes to degrade and recycle certain types of proteins. The use of autophagy inhibitors can kill cancer stem cells that survive by autophagy.[89]

The cell surface receptor interleukin-3 receptor-alpha (CD123) is overexpressed on CD34+CD38- leukemic stem cells (LSCs) in acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) but not on normal CD34+CD38- bone marrow cells.[90] Treating AML-engrafted NOD/SCID mice with a CD123-specific monoclonal antibody impaired LSCs homing to the bone marrow and reduced overall AML cell repopulation including the proportion of LSCs in secondary mouse recipients.[91]

A 2015 study packaged nanoparticles with miR-34a and ammonium bicarbonate and delivered them to prostate CSCs in a mouse model. Then they irradiated the area with near-infrared laser light. This caused the nanoparticles to swell three times or more in size bursting the endosomes and dispersing the RNA in the cell. miR-34a can lower the levels of CD44.[92][93]

The design of new drugs for targeting CSCs requires understanding the cellular mechanisms that regulate cell proliferation. The first advances in this area were made with hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) and their transformed counterparts in leukemia, the disease for which the origin of CSCs is best understood. Stem cells of many organs share the same cellular pathways as leukemia-derived HSCs.

A normal stem cell may be transformed into a CSC through disregulation of the proliferation and differentiation pathways controlling it or by inducing oncoprotein activity.

The Polycomb group transcriptional repressor Bmi-1 was discovered as a common oncogene activated in lymphoma[94] and later shown to regulate HSCs.[95] The role of Bmi-1 has been illustrated in neural stem cells.[96] The pathway appears to be active in CSCs of pediatric brain tumors.[97]

The Notch pathway plays a role in controlling stem cell proliferation for several cell types including hematopoietic, neural and mammary[98] SCs. Components of this pathway have been proposed to act as oncogenes in mammary[99] and other tumors.

A branch of the Notch signaling pathway that involves the transcription factor Hes3 regulates a number of cultured cells with CSC characteristics obtained from glioblastoma patients.[100]

These developmental pathways are SC regulators.[101] Both Sonic hedgehog (SHH) and Wnt pathways are commonly hyperactivated in tumors and are necessary to sustain tumor growth. However, the Gli transcription factors that are regulated by SHH take their name from gliomas, where they are highly expressed. A degree of crosstalk exists between the two pathways and they are commonly activated together.[102] By contrast, in colon cancer hedgehog signalling appears to antagonise Wnt.[103]

Sonic hedgehog blockers are available, such as cyclopamine. A water-soluble cyclopamine may be more effective in cancer treatment. DMAPT, a water-soluble derivative of parthenolide, induces oxidative stress and inhibits NF-B signaling[104] for AML (leukemia) and possibly myeloma and prostate cancer. Telomerase is a study subject in CSC physiology.[105] GRN163L (Imetelstat) was recently started in trials to target myeloma stem cells.

Wnt signaling can become independent of regular stimuli, through mutations in downstream oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes that become permanently activated even though the normal receptor has not received a signal. -catenin binds to transcription factors such as the protein TCF4 and in combination the molecules activate the necessary genes. LF3 strongly inhibits this binding in vitro, in cell lines and reduced tumor growth in mouse models. It prevented replication and reduced their ability to migrate, all without affecting healthy cells. No cancer stem cells remained after treatment. The discovery was the product of "rational drug design", involving AlphaScreens and ELISA technologies.[106]

Here is the original post:
Cancer stem cell - Wikipedia