Stem Cell 'Teething Problems' -- Pricing to Manufacturing, the European View

From Europe this morning comes a perspective on the "three obstacles" that are blocking cell therapy from the mainstream.

It is a subject, of course, that resonates in the United States and particularly in California, where the $3 billion state stem cell agency is running out of cash and needs a boost.

The article appeared on Labiotech, which bills itself as "leading digital media covering the European biotech industry." Written by Helen Albert, the piece actually lists more than a trio of "teething problems" for the stem cell industry. They are:

• "A reliable, consistent and scalable manufacturing system" 
• "Excessively high pricing"
• Safety, regulation and a knowledgeable workforce

Albert interviewed a number of industry executives in Europe. She also mentioned Orchard Therapeutics, which has a tie to California.  It has received an $8.5 million award from the state stem cell agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

The United States is ahead of the game on regulation, according to the folks in Europe. Albert wrote, 

"The US regulators are currently in the lead when it comes to keeping up with the research and being open to changing their processes, according to (Alan O’Connell, partner at Irish life sciences VC Seroba). Although he says Europe is not too far behind. 'Certainly, the EMA (European Medicines Agency) is responding, but from my perspective, the FDA is taking the lead, at least currently.'"

The Albert piece said, 

"With the first CAR T-cell therapies (technically a combination of gene and cell therapy) to treat blood cancers gaining US and European approval last year and global investment of over €6.7B in cell therapy in 2018, the question on everyone’s lips is ‘is cell therapy about to hit the big time?’"

Labiotech's answer? "2019 certainly appears to be the start, if not the end, of cell therapy’s move to the big time."

Waiting for Obama Chapter 4 -- Political Thorns and hESC

The No. 2 story this evening on the web site of the New York Times is not one that will necessarily please the most avid advocates of human embryonic stem cell research.

Written by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, the article said,

“President Obama intends to avoid the thorniest question in the debate: whether taxpayer dollars should be used to experiment on embryos themselves, two senior administration officials said Sunday.”

Stolberg wrote about a legal prohibition that is generally subsumed in mainstream media reports on hESC research. She said,

“The ban, known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment, first became law in 1996, and has been renewed by Congress every year since. It specifically bans the use of tax dollars to create human embryos — a practice that is routine in private fertility clinics — or for research in which embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury."

Stolberg continued,

“Mr. Obama has not taken a position on the ban and does not intend to, Melody C. Barnes, his chief domestic policy adviser, said Sunday. The president believes stem cell research 'should be done in compliance with federal law,' she said, adding that Mr. Obama recognizes the divisiveness of the issue.

“'We are committed to pursuing stem cell research quite responsibly but we recognize there are a range of beliefs on this,' Ms. Barnes said.”

Stolberg wrote,

“A senior House Democratic leadership aide, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the issue, said overturning the ban 'would be difficult, but not impossible,' adding, 'It’s not something that we would do right away, but it’s something that we would look at.”

Obama Watch Chapter 3: Funding Ban to be Lifted on Monday

The Washington Post reported this afternoon that President Obama on Monday will lift the restrictions on federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research.

According to reporter Rob Stein's story, the move will be announced at an event at 8 a.m. PDT. He cited an email sent out on Thursday from the White House concerning a ceremony at that time "on stem cells and restoring scientific integrity to the government process. At the event the president will sign an executive order related to stem cells."

No other significant details were disclosed.

CIRM Reviews the Business of Human Eggs

One week from today, the California stem cell agency is going to dig into the hot topic of human eggs – how many can scientists can get and their cost.

To its credit, the agency has posted background material on the subject well in advance of the July 25 meeting of its Standards Working Group in Los Angeles. Providing the material early is a refreshing change from CIRM's recent dilatory practices. The agency is to be commended.

The egg meeting comes in the wake of complaints earlier this year by researchers and CIRM President Alan Trounson that human eggs were not to be had in sufficient quantities for research. Kevin Eggan(pictured) of Harvard, a member of the Standards group, said that he and his colleagues had spent $100,000 advertising for human egg donors with little success.

The problem is that California and other states bar compensation for eggs for research. But handsome payments -- $15,000 and even more -- are made by IVF clinics for the same egg donation process. So most women take the cash.

Eggan made his comments last February. The ensuing discussion set in motion a review of CIRM policies dealing with compensation of donors. The issue also came up briefly last month at the meeting of the CIRM board of directors.

Trounson said scientists are having a "terrible time" securing eggs. He declared,

"It's all because there's no partnershipping arrangements or because they're using very few oocyte material. They're now trying to use cattle eggs, other species. They're floundering."

CIRM has prepared a draft briefing paper dealing with the egg issue. The agency has not completed all of its work on the subject, but it is surveying funding institutions, interviewing scientists and others and determining whether specific cell lines are not being used by CIRM grantees.

The briefing paper lists the following policy questions.

"Should CIRM funded researchers be able to use 'outside' hESC lines if they are derived from IVF-embryos created with paid gametes?

"Should CIRM funded researchers be able to utilize hESC lines derived from IVF-embryos created with paid gametes under an 'authorized authority'?

"Should CIRM funded researchers be be able to utilize IVF-embryos created with
paid gametes to derive new lines?"

Also prepared for next week's meeting is a briefing paper on uses of cell lines derived prior to CIRM regulations.