46 2 Ning -spinal cord injury of C4-C5 (male, 26-year-old) - After stem cell treatment
Ning, a 26-year-old guy, happened to fall down from a high level in September, 2006, which led to his spinal cord injury of C4-C5 and remained quadriplegia, incontinence of urination and bowl...
By: Stem Cells
More here:
46 2 Ning -spinal cord injury of C4-C5 (male, 26-year-old) - After stem cell treatment - Video
An Australian-based biomedical company has been given approval from the AFL to use stem-cell therapy on players recovering from injury.
Sydney-based Regeneus has revealed it was recently given permission for its HiQCell treatment on players suffering from such issues as osteoarthritis and tendinopathy.
The treatment is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency if it is performance-enhancing but allowed if it is solely to treat injuries.
Regeneus commercial development director Steven Barberasaid the regenerative medicine company had sought approval from the AFL for what the company says is "innovative but not experimental" treatment.
Advertisement
"In 2013, Regeneus sought and received clearance from ASADA [Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority] for its proprietary HiQCell therapy for use with athletes who participate in sporting competitions subject to the WADA Anti-Doping Code. The AFL is one of many professional sports bodies which applies the WADA Anti-Doping Code within its regulations for players," he said.
"In March this year, the AFL introduced a Prohibited Treatments List as an additional level of scrutiny over and above the WADA code for player treatments. In light of this, Regeneus made a submission to the AFL to confirm that our specific treatment is not prohibited under that list. Subsequently, the chief medical officer of the AFL has recently communicated with our primary Melbourne-based HiQCell medical practitioner that the treatment is not prohibited and can be administered on a case-by-case basis to players.
"We anticipate documented confirmation of this outcome in the near future from the AFL.
"To our knowledge, the permission is specific to HiQCell and not necessarily to cell-based therapies in general."
The AFL confirmed it had given approval on a "case-by-case" basis.
Excerpt from:
AFL approves stem-cell treatment
Aug. 24, 2014, 2:09 a.m.
An Australian-based biomedical company has been given approval from AFL to use stem-cell therapy on players recovering from injury.
An Australian-based biomedical company has been given approval from the AFL to use stem-cell therapy on players recovering from injury.
Sydney-based Regeneus has revealed it was recently given permission for its HiQCell treatment on players suffering from such issues as osteoarthritis and tendinopathy.
The treatment is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency if it is performance-enhancing but allowed if it is solely to treat injuries.
Regeneus commercial development director Steven Barberasaid the regenerative medicine company had sought approval from the AFL for what the company says is "innovative but not experimental" treatment.
"In 2013, Regeneus sought and received clearance from ASADA [Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority] for its proprietary HiQCell therapy for use with athletes who participate in sporting competitions subject to the WADA Anti-Doping Code. The AFL is one of many professional sports bodies which applies the WADA Anti-Doping Code within its regulations for players," he said.
"In March this year, the AFL introduced a Prohibited Treatments List as an additional level of scrutiny over and above the WADA code for player treatments. In light of this, Regeneus made a submission to the AFL to confirm that our specific treatment is not prohibited under that list. Subsequently, the chief medical officer of the AFL has recently communicated with our primary Melbourne-based HiQCell medical practitioner that the treatment is not prohibited and can be administered on a case-by-case basis to players.
"We anticipate documented confirmation of this outcome in the near future from the AFL.
"To our knowledge, the permission is specific to HiQCell and not necessarily to cell-based therapies in general."
By David Fitzpatrick and Drew Griffin CNN Special Investigations Unit
SANTIAGO, Dominican Republic (CNN) -- This Caribbean city already known for cigars, furniture, chocolate and coffee may become a magnet for Americans seeking controversial stem cell therapy for life-threatening illnesses if a Florida cardiologist has his way.
Dr. Zannos Grekos, a Florida cardiologist, says he's had success with stem-cell therapy in the Dominican Republic.
The Food and Drug Administration has not approved this stem cell therapy in the United States because no clinical trials to prove its effectiveness have been done. But Dr. Zannos Grekos says his company, Regenocyte Therapeutic, has successfully used adult stem cells to treat patients with heart and lung disease.
Grekos said he and his associates draw blood from a patient in Florida and then send it to a laboratory in Israel that produces what his company calls "regenocytes." The company defines regenocyte as "a stem cell that has been activated to become a target organ."
"These procedures work," he told CNN, standing inside a hospital room at the Clinica Union Medica del Norte in Santiago. "And it's substantiated by objective data that we are collecting."
But Grekos' procedures have not been reviewed by other researchers, and leading scientists involved in U.S. stem cell research efforts say Grekos is simply wrong. Dr. Irving Weissman, president-elect of the International Society for Stem Cell Research, told CNN, "There is no such cell. There is nothing called a 'regenocyte.' "
"As a stem cell scientist who works in the field of regenerative stem cells, I am disappointed and shocked that somebody would prey on a family that has an untreatable disease with the promise of a therapy that has no scientific or medical basis," Weissman said.
Grekos has a busy practice in Bonita Springs, Florida, outside Naples, and runs a company that promotes and administers stem cell therapies in Santiago, a noisy, crowded industrial city in the central Dominican Republic.
He told CNN that in the past 18 months, about 100 patients have received adult stem cell therapy at a Dominican hospital. Most of them have been patients with severe heart disease, while the rest have suffered from chronic lung illnesses, he said.
Go here to see the original:
Experts dispute doctor's stem cell breakthrough claim ...
ADULT, amputat, clinical trial, CURE, DIABETES, fda, heal, heart, MS, multiple sclerosis, PALSY, RESEARCH, stem cell, stroke, therapy, TREATMENT
DO STEM CELL TREATMENTS WORK?
Do not take one step further in your plans for treatment or read one more word about stem cells anywhere else until you believe that we have answered this question, unequivocally and without a shadow of a doubt:
Ask most US doctors if repair stem cell treatments work and they will tell you NO! You may also get condescending retorts, misinformation and derisive abuse. But if you press them on the question, eventually they will give you the reason why they believe repair stem cells dont work. The top answer WHY STEM CELLS DONT WORK is (Survey Says!):
There have been no clinical trials to date that prove they do work.
When all is said and done, in the end, there is nothing that will convince a western doctor of the effectiveness of stem cell treatments besides clinical trials. So have there been any stem cell clinical trials? Is all of the evidence supporting the benefits of stem cell treatments anecdotal as virtually every western doctor says? NOT ON YOUR LIFE! Have there been clinical trials? The answer is a resounding YES!
According to the National Institutes of Health, there were and are ~2600 stem cell clinical trials around the world http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/
Lets look at (only) a few of those ~1300 clinical trials:
Other stroke articles:
Read the original here:
DO STEM CELL TREATMENTS WORK? | The Stem Cell Blog
Because life is precious and human dignity needs to be respected, of course now anti-choice groups are now coming down on the Ice Bucket Challenge.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to question the unlikely philanthropic viral sensation of the summer from its gimmicky premise to the way it overshadows our own governments slashing of medical research funding but its hard to argue with the more than $13 million raised for ALS so far, or the awareness the stunt has raised for the vicious and so far incurable degenerative disease. But the story has taken a new twist as religious groups are now beginning to discourage followers from participating because ALS research at times relies on embryonic stem cells.
This week, the Archdiocese of Cincinnati specifically asked Catholic school leaders at 113 schools to immediately cease any fundraising plans connected to the challenge, because the ALS Association funds at least one study using embryonic stem cells in direct conflict with Catholic teaching. Speaking to Religion News Service Tuesday, ALS Association representative Carrie Munk said, Currently, The Association is funding one study using embryonic stem cells (ESC), and the stem cell line was established many years ago under ethical guidelines set by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS); this research is funded by one specific donor, who is committed to this area of research. The project is in its final phase and will come to an end very soon. She added that donors can stipulate where their money goes and can ask that it not pay for embryonic stem cell research.
But thats still not acceptable to some. Archdiocese spokesman Dan Andriacco explained to Cincinnati.com Thursday that We appreciate the compassion that has caused so many people to engage in this, Andriacco said. But its a well established moral principle that a good end is not enough. The means to that ends must be morally licit. The Archdiocese suggests people who want to do the challenge contribute to the John Paul II Medical Research Institute, where the research is only conducted using adult stem cells. Similarly, Father Michael Duffy, in a post for Patheos, wrote earlier this month, While I cant donate to the ALS Association, I will certainly pray for those that suffer from this disease. Ill also be on the lookout for a charity that doesnt violate the Sanctity of Human Life. And LifeNews this week warned that If you give to the ALS Association your money may end up supporting clinical trials that use aborted fetal cells. The reference is likely to a four-year-old clinical trial involving eight-week-old fetal tissue taken from a single source of spinal cord cells: cells that were extracted from fetal tissue, which was donated. The provenance of the source has not been disclosed, but the results of the FDA approved trial were reported last year as extraordinary.Fetal tissue research has existed in the U.S. for decades.Early polio research included the use of embryonic tissue. Thechickenpox, rubella, hepatitis A,shingles and one rabies vaccine all derive from fetal embryo fibroblast cells cultivated in the 1960s and Catholic leadership has wrestled with the ethics of using those vaccines.
Not all religious leaders are opposed to the Ice Bucket Challenge. Don Clemmer of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has called the Cincinnati decision a local matter, and the National Catholics Bioethics Center plans to issue its own statement on the moral controversy that has arisen soon. And evangelical pastor Greg Laurieand Texas megachurch pastor T.D. Jakeshave jumped in, as has Catholic Paul Ryan.
Researchers investigating many other conditions, including Parkinsons, also have been known to use embryonic stem cells. The National Institutes of Health notes that embryonic stem cells are derived from donors and created in vitro and not derived from eggs fertilized in a womans body. And the ALS Association, while acknowledging that stem cell research raises a great deal of ethical questions also calls it a major medical breakthrough.
Medical research almost always inspires moral questions, and those questions need to be asked and debated. There are also plenty of reasons to opt out of the ice bucket challenge and choose to put ones time and money somewhere else; there are reasons to have conversations about embryonic stem cell research and fetal tissue research. But ignorance helps no one, and if youre going to take a stand on an issue, at least do your own soul searching and get the facts straight first.
Visit link:
The Ice Bucket Challenges stem cell controversy
Durham, NC (PRWEB) August 22, 2014
Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) have great potential in the field of regenerative medicine because they can be coaxed to turn into specific cells; however, the new cells dont always act as anticipated. They sometimes mutate, develop into tumors or produce other negative side effects. But in a new study recently published in STEM CELLS Translational Medicine, researchers appear to have found a way around this, simply by removing the material used to reprogram the stem cell after they have differentiated into the desired cells.
The study, by Ken Igawa, M.D., Ph.D., and his colleagues at Tokyo Medical and Dental University along with a team from Osaka University, could have significant implications both in the clinic and in the lab.
Scientists induce (differentiate) the stem cells to become the desired cells, such as those that make up heart muscle, in the laboratory using a reprogramming transgene that is, a gene taken from one organism and introduced into another using artificial techniques.
We generated hiPSC lines from normal human skin cells using reprogramming transgenes, then we removed the reprogramming material. When we compared the transgene-free cells with those that had residual transgenes, both appeared quite similar, Dr. Igawa explained. However, after the cells differentiation into skin cells, clear differences were observed.
Several types of analyses revealed that the keratinocytes cells that make up 90 percent of the outermost skin layer that emerged from the transgene-free hiPSC lines were more like normal human cells than those coming from the hiPSCs that still contained some reprogramming material.
These results suggest that transgene-free hiPSC lines should be chosen for therapeutic purposes, Dr. Igawa concluded.
Human induced pluripotent stem cell (hiPSC) lines have potential for therapeutics because of the customized cells and organs that can potentially be induced from such cells, Anthony Atala, M.D., editor of STEM CELLS Translational Medicine and director of the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine. This study illustrates a potentially powerful approach for creating hiPSCs for clinical use.
-#-
The full article, Removal of Reprogramming Transgenes Improves the Tissue Reconstitution Potential of Keratinocytes Generated From Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells, can be accessed at http://stemcellstm.alphamedpress.org/content/early/2014/07/14/sctm.2013-0179.abstract.
View original post here:
Removing Programming Material After Inducing Stem Cells Could Improve Their Regeneration Ability
Three-dimensional printing uses modified ink-jet printers to spray cells and biomaterials into shapes that mimic human organs, tissues and structures. These three-dimensional printers have been used to make a variety of implantable structures.
Last year, Oxford Performance Materials announced that they had successfully created a 3D-printed implant that could replace 75 percent of a patients skull. This OsteoFab Patient Specific Cranial Device was made of PEKK (Polyetherketoneketone) biomedical polymer and was printed by using CAD files that had been developed to personally fit each patients specific dimensions. PEKK is an ultra high performance polymer used in biomedical implants and other highly demanding applications. The PEKK polymer has the advantage of being biomechanically similar to bone. The Osteofab skull implant was approved by the FDA in February of 2013.
The success of OsteoFab laid the groundwork for the recent FDA approval of Oxfords OsteoFab Patient-Specific Facial Device, a customizable implant for facial reconstruction.
Implants like this are known as biocompatible implants, which behave mechanically, in this case, like real bone. The techniques developed by Oxford Performance Materialsallow engineers to fabricatepieces that match an individual patients specific facial dimensions and structure in a manner thatreduces the overall cost of the procedures required to surgically reconstruct a face after devastating injury. Due to these technical advances pioneered by Oxford Performance Materials, facialimplants can be fabricatedvery quickly, which allows the plastic surgeons to get the patient into surgery sooner rather than later.
With the clearance of our 3D printed facial device, we now have the ability to treat these extremely complex cases in a highly effective and economical way, printing patient-specific maxillofacial implants from individualized MRI or CT digital image files from the surgeon, said Scott DeFelice, CEO of Oxford Performance Materials, in a statement. This is a classic example of a paradigm shift in which technology advances to meet both the patients needs and the cost realities of the overall healthcare system.
Oxfords 3D-printed Osteofab cranial implants also have FDA approval and could potentially be combined with these facial implants into a single device for treating severe cases. Although these facial implants have not yet been used in the United States, Oxford said the implants are now available to doctors and hospitals.
From artificial fingertips to airway splints that help babies breathe, 3D printing has provided the means to address complexsurgicalrepairs. The good news is that skull caps and facial bones are just the beginning of what 3D printing technologies can achieve. We may soon see FDA approval for other bones, like knee caps, hips, and even small bones in the fingers and hands.
Its all a part of a growing wave that could make 3D printers just as common as MRI machines in the tool kits used by physicians to repair and heal injured people.
Read more:
A developmental biologist muses about stem cells and ...
Whats the difference between adult stem cell taken from body fat and from bone marrow
Whats the difference between adult stem cell taken from body fat and from bone marrow? In conversation with Dr Alok Sharma (MS, MCh.) Professor of Neurosurgery Head of Department, LTMG Hospital...
By: Neurogen Brain and Spine Institute
Read the original post:
Whats the difference between adult stem cell taken from body fat and from bone marrow - Video
Abstract
Stem cells represent natural units of embryonic development and tissue regeneration. Embryonic stem (ES) cells, in particular, possess a nearly unlimited self-renewal capacity and developmental potential to differentiate into virtually any cell type of an organism. Mouse ES cells, which are established as permanent cell lines from early embryos, can be regarded as a versatile biological system that has led to major advances in cell and developmental biology. Human ES cell lines, which have recently been derived, may additionally serve as an unlimited source of cells for regenerative medicine. Before therapeutic applications can be realized, important problems must be resolved. Ethical issues surround the derivation of human ES cells from in vitro fertilized blastocysts. Current techniques for directed differentiation into somatic cell populations remain inefficient and yield heterogeneous cell populations. Transplanted ES cell progeny may not function normally in organs, might retain tumorigenic potential, and could be rejected immunologically. The number of human ES cell lines available for research may also be insufficient to adequately determine their therapeutic potential. Recent molecular and cellular advances with mouse ES cells, however, portend the successful use of these cells in therapeutics. This review therefore focuses both on mouse and human ES cells with respect to in vitro propagation and differentiation as well as their use in basic cell and developmental biology and toxicology and presents prospects for human ES cells in tissue regeneration and transplantation.
Several seminal discoveries during the past 25 years can be regarded not only as major breakthroughs for cell and developmental biology, but also as pivotal events that have substantially influenced our view of life: 1) the establishment of embryonic stem (ES) cell lines derived from mouse (108, 221) and human (362) embryos, 2) the creation of genetic mouse models of disease through homologous recombination in ES cells (360), 3) the reprogramming of somatic cells after nuclear transfer into enucleated eggs (392), and 4) the demonstration of germ-line development of ES cells in vitro (136, 164, 365). Because of these breakthroughs, cell therapies based on an unlimited, renewable source of cells have become an attractive concept of regenerative medicine.
Many of these advances are based on developmental studies of mouse embryogenesis. The first entity of life, the fertilized egg, has the ability to generate an entire organism. This capacity, defined as totipotency, is retained by early progeny of the zygote up to the eight-cell stage of the morula. Subsequently, cell differentiation results in the formation of a blastocyst composed of outer trophoblast cells and undifferentiated inner cells, commonly referred to as the inner cell mass (ICM). Cells of the ICM are no longer totipotent but retain the ability to develop into all cell types of the embryo proper (pluripotency; Fig. 1). The embryonic origin of mouse and human ES cells is the major reason that research in this field is a topic of great scientific interest and vigorous public debate, influenced by both ethical and legal positions.
Stem cell hierarchy. Zygote and early cell division stages (blastomeres) to the morula stage are defined as totipotent, because they can generate a complex organism. At the blastocyst stage, only the cells of the inner cell mass (ICM) retain the capacity to build up all three primary germ layers, the endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm as well as the primordial germ cells (PGC), the founder cells of male and female gametes. In adult tissues, multipotent stem and progenitor cells exist in tissues and organs to replace lost or injured cells. At present, it is not known to what extent adult stem cells may also develop (transdifferentiate) into cells of other lineages or what factors could enhance their differentiation capability (dashed lines). Embryonic stem (ES) cells, derived from the ICM, have the developmental capacity to differentiate in vitro into cells of all somatic cell lineages as well as into male and female germ cells.
ES cell research dates back to the early 1970s, when embryonic carcinoma (EC) cells, the stem cells of germ line tumors called teratocarcinomas (344), were established as cell lines (135, 173, 180; see Fig. 2). After transplantation to extrauterine sites of appropriate mouse strains, these funny little tumors produced benign teratomas or malignant teratocarcinomas (107, 345). Clonally isolated EC cells retained the capacity for differentiation and could produce derivatives of all three primary germ layers: ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm. More importantly, EC cells demonstrated an ability to participate in embryonic development, when introduced into the ICM of early embryos to generate chimeric mice (232). EC cells, however, showed chromosomal aberrations (261), lost their ability to differentiate (29), or differentiated in vitro only under specialized conditions (248) and with chemical inducers (224). Maintenance of the undifferentiated state relied on cultivation with feeder cells (222), and after transfer into early blastocysts, EC cells only sporadically colonized the germ line (232). These data suggested that the EC cells did not retain the pluripotent capacities of early embryonic cells and had undergone cellular changes during the transient tumorigenic state in vivo (for review, see Ref. 7).
Developmental origin of pluripotent embryonic stem cell lines of the mouse. The scheme demonstrates the derivation of embryonic stem cells (ESC), embryonic carcinoma cells (ECC), and embryonic germ cells (EGC) from different embryonic stages of the mouse. ECC are derived from malignant teratocarcinomas that originate from embryos (blastocysts or egg cylinder stages) transplanted to extrauterine sites. EGC are cultured from primordial germ cells (PGC) isolated from the genital ridges between embryonic day 9 to 12.5. Bar = 100 m. [From Boheler et al. (40).]
To avoid potential alterations connected with the growth of teratocarcinomas, a logical step was the direct in vitro culture of embryonic cells of the mouse. In 1981, two groups succeeded in cultivating pluripotent cell lines from mouse blastocysts. Evans and Kaufman employed a feeder layer of mouse embryonic fibroblasts (108), while Martin used EC cell-conditioned medium (221). These cell lines, termed ES cells, originate from the ICM or epiblast and could be maintained in vitro (Fig. 2) without any apparent loss of differentiation potential. The pluripotency of these cells was demonstrated in vivo by the introduction of ES cells into blastocysts. The resulting mouse chimeras demonstrated that ES cells could contribute to all cell lineages including the germ line (46). In vitro, mouse ES cells showed the capacity to reproduce the various somatic cell types (98, 108, 396) and, only recently, were found to develop into cells of the germ line (136, 164, 365). The establishment of human ES cell lines from in vitro fertilized embryos (362) (Fig. 3) and the demonstration of their developmental potential in vitro (322, 362) have evoked widespread discussions concerning future applications of human ES cells in regenerative medicine.
Human pluripotent embryonic stem (ES) and embryonic germ (EG) cells have been derived from in vitro cultured ICM cells of blastocysts (after in vitro fertilization) and from primordial germ cells (PGC) isolated from aborted fetuses, respectively.
Primordial germ (PG) cells, which form normally within the developing genital ridges, represent a third embryonic cell type with pluripotent capabilities. Isolation and cultivation of mouse PG cells on feeder cells led to the establishment of mouse embryonic germ (EG) cell lines (198, 291, 347; Fig. 2). In most respects, these cells are indistinguishable from blastocyst-derived ES cells and are characterized by high proliferative and differentiation capacities in vitro (310), and the presence of stem cell markers typical of other embryonic stem cell lines (see sect. ii). Once transferred into blastocysts, EG cells can contribute to somatic and germ cell lineages in chimeric animals (197, 223, 347); however, EG cells, unlike ES cells, retain the capacity to erase gene imprints. The in vitro culture of PG cells from 5- to 7-wk-old human fetuses led to the establishment of human EG cell lines (326) (Fig. 3). These cell lines showed multilineage development in vitro but have a limited proliferation capacity, and currently can only be propagated as embryoid body (EB) derivatives (325). Following transplantation into an animal model for neurorepair, human EG cell derivatives, however, show some regenerative capacity, suggesting that these cells could be useful therapeutically (190). Although pluripotent EG and EC cells represent important in vitro models for cell and developmental biology, this review focuses mainly on fundamental properties and potential applications of mouse and human ES cells for stem cell research.
Read the rest here:
Embryonic Stem Cells: Prospects for Developmental Biology ...