California Stem Cell Researchers Compete Next Week for $52 Million in Awards

Directors of the California stem cell agency will make yes-or-no decisions next week  on eight applications for $52 million to seek cures for afflictions ranging from Parkinson's to an incurable eye disease called retinitis pigmentosa.

All eight have been approved behind closed doors by the agency's grant reviewers, but it is yet to be determined whether the agency has enough cash to ratify that action.

Prior to voting on the applications, the 29-member board is scheduled to discuss how the agency's final funding will be parceled out. The agency expects to run out of cash for new awards at the end of the Oct. 31 meeting. However, also on its agenda are a few words promising a report on the status of its search for private donations. 

Below is a table on the applications. It includes links to the review summaries prepared by the agency, which is formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. Links to the review summary can be found on the application numbers.

Some of the applicants have filed additional letters with the board seeking to bolster their pitches. The letters can be found by clicking on the researcher's name. Some of the applicants are expected to address the board personally Oct. 31 in Oakland.

The agency has a non-embarrassment policy of not disclosing the names of applicants and their institutions until a vote by its board.  However, when they write the board, their names become a public record. The names of applicants who fail to win approval are never disclosed by the agency.

Look for more stories in the upcoming days from the California Stem Cell Report on the agency's Halloween meeting.

Application Number	Amount In millions	Institution	Principal  Investigator	Target
CLIN1-11591	$5.5	Stanford	Rosa Bacchetta	IPEX
CLIN1-11472	$6.6	Not disclosed	Not disclosed	Retinitis pigmentosa
CLIN2-11620	$10.5	Not disclosed	Not disclosed	Retinitis pigmentosa
CLIN2-11661	$8.0	Brain Neurotherapy Bio	Krystof S. Bankiewicz	Parkinson’s Disease
CLIN2-11650	$10.3	UCLA	Sophia Deng	Limbal stem cell deficiency
TRAN1-11536	$4.9	UCLA	Caroline Y. Kuo	Immune deficiency
TRAN1-11555	$3.2	UCLA	Yvonne Y. Chen	Myeloma
TRAN1-11544	$2.9	Not disclosed	Not disclosed	Ovarian cancer

Halloween Meeting Set for $3 Billion California Stem Cell Agency: Last Research Awards Expected to be Made

California's $3 billion stem cell agency next week is expected to give away the last of its funds for new research awards and hear a report on private donations that it may have received in the recent past or perhaps expects in the future. 

The donations report is something of a mystery, based on the agenda, but perhaps appropriate for the governing board's meeting, which comes on Halloween, Thursday Oct. 31. 

More details are likely to be posted online in the next week or so and reveal more clues about the direction -- over the next 12 months -- of the agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).

The agency expects to run out of money for new awards at the end of this month unless a there is a surprise announcement that a private fund-raising effort has produced significant results. CIRM was created in 2004 by voters, who allotted it $3 billion in state bonds. No other source of cash was provided by the ballot initiative. 

In addition to consideration of applications for clinical and translation stage awards, also on next week's agenda are:

• "Use of public funds in connection with ballot measure presentation"
• Last week's report on the economic impact of the agency 
• Changes in the "administrative funds donor agreement and disclosure of funds received from donors." (Those changes were not available on the agenda but are likely to be available in the next few days.)

The ballot measure discussion involves the appropriate and legal role of the agency in connection with the $5.5 billion, proposed ballot initiative to provide additional support for CIRM. The measure is now before state officials for certification prior to being circulated for the 600,000-plus signatures needed to qualify for the November 2020 ballot. 

State law prohibits the use of state funds to support ballot campaigns. The agency has been careful to adhere to the law. But it is always a touchy area. A number of gray areas exist involving the agency's additional legal requirements to respond to questions and inform the public about the conduct of the taxpayer's business.

The public can comment and recommend changes in the proposed initiative between now and Nov. 12.  Suggestions for changes will be relayed to the backers of the measure.

Regarding the currently cryptic Halloween agenda, look for more details on the California Stem Cell Report between now and Oct. 31. We will be filing fresh items as the information emerges.  

Next week's meeting will be held at CIRM's Oakland headquarters. The public can attend and also participate via the Internet. Remote telephonic locations that are open to the public can be found in La Jolla, San Diego, Fresno and San Francisco. Directions and instructions can be found on the agenda.

California Stem Cell Health Dividends: A Whopping $900 Billion? Maybe Only $175 Billion?

A team of University of Southern California researchers said today that work by California's stem cell agency could pay off with nearly $900 billion in "health dividends" by 2050 by treating or curing afflictions ranging from diabetes to heart disease.

The study, commissioned by the agency, acknowledged the difficulty in forecasting the benefits of research backed by the the state program, which is unprecedented in California history. But the report said,

"We find that nearly half of Californians aged 50 and older will develop diabetes during their lifetime. Furthermore, more than one-third will experience a stroke, and between 5 and 8 percent will develop either breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer.  

"Taking into account the high prevalence and the social and economic burden of these diseases, an intervention that reduces the incidence of these selected cancers, diabetes, and stroke by 50 percent would generate almost $900 billion in social value between 2018 and 2050.  

"A more modest 10 percent decline in incidence translates to $175 billion in social value during the same period. Put in this context, the CIRM investment would be worthwhile if it increased our chances of success even modestly. Against the billions of dollars in disease burden facing California, the relatively small initial investment is already paying dividends as researchers work to bring new therapies to patients."

The agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), was created by voters in 2004, who provided it with $3 billion. It has yet to fund a product that is widely available to the public. However, the agency is involved in 56 clinical trials, which are the last stage before a treatment is certified for widespread use.

CIRM expects to run out of cash for new awards by the end of this month. It hopes that a proposed initiative for the November 2020 ballot will provide it with an additional $5.5 billion. 

Today's report, titled "Future Health Dividends for California," and its companion study last week on the agency's economic impact are likely to be significant topics during the 2020 campaign. 

The 22-page study came up with a "social value" calculation using the Future Elderly Model -- "a microsimulation model of health and economic outcomes for older Americans." Basically it involves quality of life outcomes as well as more straight forward financial projections. The study also lays out its methodology and limitations including an acknowledgement that the projections are not guaranteed. 

Today's report and last week's economic study cost CIRM a total of $206,000. The work was performed at USC's Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics. The authors are Bryan Tysinger, Karen Mulligan, Henu Zhao, Alwyn Cassil  and Dana Goldman.

Here is a link to an item on the CIRM blog about the study.

Making Changes in a $5.5 Billion Stem Cell Matter: What California Law Permits

Screenshot from state Department of Justice "active measures" website

A  California ballot proposal to spend an additional $5.5 billion over another 10 years on stem cell research is not locked in concrete or in even locked in its dense, legal language.

It can actually be modified between now and Nov. 17 if its sponsors so desire. That may be a big if, but it is possible as a result of 2014 changes in state elections law.

Here is the way it works. Any member of public can comment or suggest changes in proposed ballot initiative between now and Nov. 12 on this state web site.  The Department of Justice will pass along the suggestions to the sponsor of the initiative. The sponsor can make changes in the initiative up to Nov. 17.

Whether changes actually occur depends on pressures brought to bear by various constituencies that have something at stake in this multibillion-dollar game. Those interests include most of the Golden State's major universities and research institutes, the biotech industry, the fledgling California stem cell industry, patient advocate groups ranging from diabetes to cancer and even national regenerative medicine groups, not to mention religious or other groups that may have ethical concerns.

Of course, suggestions do not have to be filed with the attorney general. They can go directly to Robert Klein, who filed the initiative. Klein is a Palo Alto real estate investment banker, who founded the stem cell advocacy group, Americans for Cures. He led the 2004 campaign to create the agency and served as its first chairman. Klein directed the writing of the 2004 initiative as well as the current proposal.

His group also has a scientific advisory board that includes a host of California stem cell luminaries ranging from Irv Weissman of Stanford and Larry Goldstein of UC San Diego to Leslie Thompson of UC Irvine and Arnold Kriegstein of UC San Francisco. Klein has said he consulted with them in drafting the latest ballot proposal. They may well be interested in hearing comments on what is now being offered.

The California Stem Cell Report has already heard murmurings about changes that backers of the agency would like along with similar thoughts from opponents. But the measure is quite fresh and 30 pages long. So it may take a little time for solid suggestions for changes to emerge. 

The governing board of the stem cell agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), has scheduled a meeting for Oct. 31, its first since the initiative was filed. It is expected to act on a number of awards, which are expected to be its last new awards until it receives additional funds. 

Asked last Friday whether board might make suggestions for changes in the initiative, Kevin McCormack, senior director for communications, replied via email, 

"Right now the CIRM board hasn’t taken a position on it. At some point in the future the board will discuss the initiative at a public meeting and take a position."

Here is the contact link for Klein's Americans for Cures and the email address for the stem cell agency: info@cirm.ca.gov 

Re the suggestion period and amendments to the initiative, here is the salient language from the California Secretary of State, the state's top elections official.

"Once a request for a circulating title and summary has been submitted, the Attorney General’s Office will post the text of the proposed initiative measure on their website and facilitate a 30- day public review process during which any member of the public may submit written public comments to the Attorney General’s Office via their website. The Attorney General’s Office will provide any written public comments received during the public review period to the proponent(s). (Elections Code § 9002(a).) During the public review period, amendments signed by all of the proponent(s) may be submitted to the Attorney General’s Office. Any amendments to the proposed initiative measure must be reasonably germane to the theme, purpose, or subject of the initiative measure as originally proposed. An amendment shall not be accepted more than five days after the public review period is concluded. (Elections Code § 9002(b).)"

It's Official: $5.5 Billion Ballot Measure Filed for California Stem Cell Agency

Backers of the financially stressed California stem cell agency yesterday filed their proposed ballot measure to refinance the agency with $5.5 billion if voters approve it in November 2020.

The complex, 30-page initiative would also restructure a number of aspects of the agency and provide for financial assistance for patients and their families who might be involved in clinical trials. The proposal was submitted by Robert Klein, the Palo Alto real estate investment banker who led the ballot campaign that created the agency in 2004. 

Klein was also the first chairman of the agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).  He is chairman of the stem cell advocacy group, Americans for Cures.

The $3 billion agency expects to run out of cash for new awards at the end of this month.

In addition to stem cell research, the proposed initiative would provide for awards for other "vital research" opportunities. 

Training for professionals would emphasized. The governing board of the agency would be increased from 29 to 35 persons. Representatives of the California state university system would have a greater official role in addition to representatives from the University of California. 

Additional changes are proposed in priorities along with alteration in conflict of interest rules and its public records provisions.

The measure, "Initiative No. 19-0022," will need 633,212 valid signatures to qualify for the ballot. The first step in the months long process is review of the measure by the attorney general's office, which will prepare the official summary.

The initiative said,

"Although California's stem cell research funding institute has made great gains, much work remains to be done. With new federal restrictions on important research, an anti-science agenda on the rise, and threats to reduce federal research and development funding, California once again must take the lead to ensure that this promising area of research continues and to advance projects from the research stage to the clinic. 

"Without additional funding, many of these promising research and development projects will be forced to stop work on potentially life-changing medical therapies. California's stem cell research institute needs additional funding to help bring promising discoveries through the development process, including clinical trials, with the goal of making treatments available to California patients with chronic diseases and injuries"

The public can file comments on the proposal at this page on the web site of the attorney general. 


(An earlier version of this article did not include the paragraphs beginning "Although California's..." and "Without additional...")

Critics Unmoved by Economic Report; Still Say No More Billions for California's Stem Cell Agency

This week's relatively rosy report on the economic impact of California's $3 billion stem cell research program has not convinced longtime critics to change their positions and support giving it an additional $5 billion.

In the eyes of some opponents, the stem cell agency is still a boondoggle, a waste of money and an inappropriate use of state bonds, the borrowed money that is the only significant source of cash for the program. Other critics recommended moving the program to the University of California and restricting it to "breakthrough medicine."

The agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), expects to run out of money for new awards this month. It is hoping that voters will see value in its efforts and approve -- in November 2020 -- a $5.5 billion ballot initiative that would refinance the agency.

The 2004 initiative that created CIRM was handily approved by 59 percent of the voters following a campaign that created expectations that nearly miraculous therapies were right around the corner. The agency has yet to back a treatment that is widely available to the public.

The California Stem Cell Report queried a smattering of CIRM's critics following the release of the economic study, which said the agency has provided a "handsome dividend" to the state. The report from USC said, among other things, that CIRM-generated benefits exceed $10 billion and have led to nearly 60,000 jobs.

That was not good enough for state Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa. He said,

"It was a boondoggle when it started and it still is. It's held up by emotional appeals, sustained by empty promises, and now rationalizing to extend its existence."

He continued,

"This study does not bring to light anything new. Doling out $3 billion to any entity or entities would generate the same economic metrics. The study is a shell."

"CIRM did not produce or sell anything of substance. It was not a stadium that created jobs around it, like restaurants, bars, and hotels."

Marc Joffe, a senior policy analyst at the Reason Foundation, said,

"I oppose the use of state general obligation bonding authority for any purpose other than building well-conceived civil infrastructure projects. The fact that spending bond proceeds generates economic activity is not surprising and not a reason to support a new bond in 2020. Similar studies have been released in support of the ill-conceived high-speed rail project: We might not get a usable system that takes many passengers out of their cars, but at least we created a lot of jobs in the Central Valley! This is not a persuasive argument for imposing more debt on our children, who already have the challenge of paying for Baby Boomer retirements."

Joe Rodota also responded. Rodato has worked for two Republican California governors. He and Bernard Munos, a senior fellow with FasterCures and the founder of the Innothink Center for Research in Biomedical Innovation,
have advocated a change in California's stem cell program that would restrict funding to businesses with a significant California presence and move the effort to the University of California.

Rodota said,

"Under our proposal, in exchange for providing funding to private companies engaged in developing stem-cell therapies, the University of California would receive shares, alongside any shares sold to private investors. Although the report categorizes equity sold to private investors as part of the 'economic stimulus created by CIRM funding,' that equity is held by private investors, not the University of California."

You can read the full text of the critics' remarks here. 

Full Text: Critics on Economic Impact Report on California Stem Cell Agency

Here is the full text of the email responses of stem cell agency critics to the report on the economic impact of the agency over the last 15 years.

State Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa, who responded directly to questions from the California Stem Cell Report (CSCR):

CSCR: "Does the USC study bring something to light that is new to you?"
Moorlach: This study does not bring to light anything new. Doling out $3 billion to any entity or entities would generate the same economic metrics. The study is a shell.
"CIRM did not produce or sell anything of substance. It was not a stadium that created jobs around it, like restaurants, bars, and hotels.
"CIRM spent $3 billion and it's costing the taxpayers that much, plus $800 million-plus in interest."
CSCR: "Does it lead you to modify your thinking about the California stem cell program?"
Moorlach: "The new report has not modified my thoughts on CIRM. It was a boondoggle when it started and it still is. It's held up by emotional appeals, sustained by empty promises, and now rationalizing to extend its existence."
CSCR: "What is your overall view of the agency at this point?"
Moorlach: "Stem cell research is important, but best left to the private sector. This was style drift and extremely expensive, including the necessity to raise taxes with Propositions 30 and 55."

From Marc Joffe, senior policy analyst with the Reason Foundation:

"I oppose the use of state general obligation bonding authority for any purpose other than building well-conceived civil infrastructure projects. The fact that spending bond proceeds generates economic activity is not surprising and not a reason to support a new bond in 2020. Similar studies have been released in support of the ill-conceived high-speed rail project: we might not get a usable system that takes many passengers out of their cars, but at least we created a lot of jobs in the Central Valley! This is not a persuasive argument for imposing more debt on our children, who already have the challenge of paying for Baby Boomer retirements."
"Also, for what it’s worth, I don’t oppose the existence of CIRM. If it can be financed privately, that would be wonderful. I just don’t think it should be imposing burdens of future taxpayers."

From Joe Rodota, who worked for Republican Gov. Pete Wilson and Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"This sentence (from the study) caught my attention 

"The estimates in the report are based on the economic stimulus created by CIRM funding and by the co-funding that researchers and companies were required to provide for clinical and late-stage preclinical projects. The estimates also include:
"Investments in CIRM-supported projects from private funders such as equity investments, public offerings and mergers and acquisitions, 

"Our (Rodota's) proposal, as outlined here, includes this language:
"In exchange for the funds they receive, companies would tender to the University of California shares of their common stock, with an estimated value as determined by the most recent outside valuation or price set by investors. These shares would become part of the UC endowment -- and the University of California be free to sell or leverage these shares, or acquire additional shares, as it sees fit.

"Under our proposal, in exchange for providing funding to private companies engaged in developing stem-cell therapies, the University of California would receive shares, alongside any shares sold to private investors. Although the report categorizes equity sold to private investors as part of the 'economic stimulus created by CIRM funding,' that equity is held by private investors, not the University of California."

'Handsome Dividend' -- California Stem Cell Agency and Its Economic Impact on the Golden State

This video was produced by Forty Seven, Inc., a firm in which California's stem cell agency has invested more than $15 million. 

California’s stem cell research program has had a “major impact” on the state’s economy, generating billions in sales revenue and creating tens of thousands of new jobs, according to a study released today.

Commissioned by the $3 billion state stem cell agency, the report comes as the program is hitting a difficult financial patch. Known officially as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), the agency expects to run out of money for new awards by end of this month. CIRM is hoping that voters will refinance it with $5.5 billion via a ballot initiative in November 2020.

The 84-page study is expected to serve as a rebuttal to critics who have called the nearly 15-year-old agency a boondoggle. The report said, 

“The state’s investment in (the agency) has paid handsome dividends in terms of output, employment and tax revenues for California."

Adam Rose, USC photo

Dan Wei, USC photo

The study and a yet-to-be released companion report were commissioned at a cost of $206,000 by the agency. The economic study was prepared by Dan Wei and Adam Rose of the Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California. 

Maria Millan, CEO and president of CIRM, said in a news release that the study reflects the agency's role in building a stem cell "ecosystem" in the Golden State. 

Beyond CIRM's medical and scientific work, she said that the agency is "promoting economic growth in California  by attracting scientific talent and additional capital, and by creating an environment that supports the development of businesses and commercial enterprises in the state."

The report summarized CIRM's economic impact in four points. 

• "$10.7 billion of additional gross output (sales revenue)
• "$641.3 million of additional state/local tax revenues
• "$726.6 million of additional federal tax revenues
• "56,549 additional full-time equivalent jobs, half of which offer salaries considerably higher than the state average."

CIRM's news release on the report characterized the study as "independent." CIRM said it showed that the agency's efforts had a "major impact" on the state's overall economy, which totalled $3 trillion in 2017. 

The agency cited the assistance it has provided to create companies that ultimately will make CIRM-financed therapies available to the public at large.

While the agency's spending has not yet led to a widely available therapy, it is backing 56 clinical trials, which is the last stage before a treatment can be approved for widespread use. About 86 percent of clinical trials fail to result in a product, according to 2018 figures.

As an example of a fruitful collaboration, the agency cited Orchard Therapeutics of the United Kingdom, which plans to seek to qualify soon for speedier federal approval of its treatment for a version of  "bubble boy syndrome," a fatal immune deficiency. CIRM has awarded the firm $8.5 million.

The treatment was developed by Donald Kohn at UCLA with the help of $52 million in CIRM cash.  During clinical trials, it has saved the lives of more than 50 babies. Kohn said in a statement,

"I think one of the greatest strengths of CIRM has been their focus on development of new stem cell therapies that can become real medicines."

Orchard has offices in the San Francisco Bay area and plans to build a 150,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in Fremont. 

Also cited as an example was a company called Forty Seven, Inc., of Menlo Park, Ca., which is developing cancer therapies. Mark Chao, founder of the firm, said CIRM's support was "instrumental to our early successes."

The economic study also explored the "deal flow" funding that has aided commercialization of research. The study said it is expected that 

"...CIRM's past and current funding will attract increasing amounts of industry investment and lead to additional spending injections into the California economic in the years to come."

The companion report to today's economic study involves "health dividends" provided by the agency. That report is expected to be released next week. 

The agency has commissioned other economic studies in the past including one in 2012 that also lauded the agency. The request for proposals to perform that 2012 study said it must execute "a vibrant and aggressive strategy to support the goals and initiatives of CIRM.” 

Queried by the California Stem Cell Report, Kevin McCormack, a spokesman for CIRM, said four enterprises were solicited to develop this year's study. Three declined. The contract for the latest study stipulated that USC had control of the content. The latest study also laid out the methodology in considerable detail, something missing from the 2012 report. 

Below is a May 31, 2019, 58-second video of the president of Orchard, Mark Rothera, discussing the company's work. More brief, 2019 videos of Rothera from same interview sequence can be found here, here, here and here. The videos were taken by the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine. 

California's $72 Million Diabetes Wager: ViaCyte Announces Major "Firsts" for Its Stem Cell Therapy

Vox Pop video/Viacyte

One of California's bigger stem cell bets -- $72 million -- turned up this morning with a strong positive report that included a couple of "firsts" in its search for a virtual cure for diabetes.

The announcement came from ViaCyte, Inc., of San Diego. The California stem cell agency has pumped $72 million into the company, making the firm the top for-profit recipient of state stem cell largess. 

The news comes as the agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), is running out of funds and hoping that voters will give it $5 billion more. A major research score would be a big plus for that ballot initiative effort. 

The agency's president, Maria Millan, described the ViaCyte announcement as important and encouraging. 

ViaCyte is developing a tiny device that is implanted in a person's body and that generates insulin as needed. It is aimed primarily at type one diabetes, which afflicts more than one million Americans 

ViaCyte issued a news release on the developments at major, national stem cell conference in Carlsbad, Ca. The headline on the release said, 

"First demonstration of insulin production in patients from a stem cell-derived islet replacement therapy"

The release said,

"Preliminary data show that implanted cells, when effectively engrafted, are capable of producing circulating C-peptide, a biomarker for insulin, in patients with type 1 diabetes."

Paul Laikind, CEO and president of the firm, declared,

“ViaCyte is the first and only company in human clinical trials with a stem cell-derived islet replacement therapy candidate, and we are now the first to demonstrate production of C-peptide in patients receiving implanted stem cell-derived islets. These data show that our PEC-01 cells are functioning as intended when appropriately engrafted. “While there is still more work to be done, this is an important milestone. We plan to present additional data in the near future.”

Laikind continued,

“ViaCyte has achieved a number of firsts in this field. Now with the first demonstration of insulin production in patients who have received PEC-Direct, we are confident we can be the first to deliver an effective stem cell-derived islet replacement therapy for type 1 diabetes.”

Asked for comment, CIRM's Millan said,

"This is encouraging news. We are very aware of the major biologic and technical challenges of an implantable cell therapy for Type 1 Diabetes, so this early biologic signal in patients is an important step for the ViaCyte program."

ViaCyte is scheduled to present its findings later today at the Cell & Gene Meeting on the Mesa. That session can be seen live on the Internet 1:45 p.m. PDT. 

(An earlier version of this item contained a slightly different quote from Millan. CIRM re-submitted the latest quote, which adds information.)

Measure to Add $5 Billion-plus to California Stem Cell Agency Yet to be Filed

The official kickoff for a proposal to refinance California's nearly 15-year-old stem program with $5.5 billion has been delayed for at least a few more weeks. 

Backers of the proposed bond initiative told the California Stem Cell Report last week that the ballot measure will not be filed with state election officials until later in October. Previously, they had said it would be filed by the end of this month. 

Melissa King, executive director of Americans for Cures, said there was no major reason for the delay in filing the measure. She said it was just a matter of "wanting to get everyone's views heard, etc."

To qualify for the November 2020 ballot, backers will need to gather more than 600,000 signatures of registered voters. 

Americans for Cures is a stem cell advocacy group controlled by Robert Klein, who ran the initiative campaign in 2004 that created the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the agency is formally known.
Klein was also the first chairman of CIRM. 

The agency expects to run out of cash for new awards this year and has no further source of major funding. 

Pluses and Minuses: The Cases For and Against $5.5 Billion More for California's Stem Cell Agency

BURLINGAME, Ca. -- It was a case of dueling op-ed arguments -- one describing the state's $3 billion stem cell agency as a waste of money and the other touting its success and its current and future impact on human lives.

The articles appeared online on the web site of the San Diego Union-Tribune on the eve of a daylong conference here to lay out possibilities for the agency over the next several years. 

The articles and the meeting come at a critical point for the agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). The nearly 15-year-old enterprise expects to run out of cash for new awards this year. It is hoping for a $5.5 billion infusion in November 2020 if California voters approve another bond measure for the agency.

The op-ed articles embodied many of the arguments -- pro and con -- that are likely to surface in the ballot measure campaign next year, a campaign that is expected to cost its supporters $50 million. 

In the San Diego newspaper, the case for giving the agency more billions was made by Larry Goldstein, a professor at UC San Diego; Aileen Anderson, a professor at UC Irvine, and Malin Burnham, chairman of the Burnham Foundation. The case against CIRM was made by state Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa.

Moorlach argued that the agency has "produced close to no results." He cited articles in the journal Nature and the San Francisco Chronicle as evidence. Moorlach called CIRM a "dry hole." He wrote.

"Not only was the $3 billion for the research a bust, but taxpayers will be paying interest on the principal until 2039. California Treasurer Fiona Ma’s office told me the cost of the interest on the $2.59 billion of principal already spent will be $836.6 million. Interest rates lower than anticipated in 2004 kept that below the original $3 billion estimate."

Goldstein and his co-authors argued that more than 50 children have had their lives "given back" as the result of clinical trials funded by CIRM. They said, 

"CIRM funding has established an impressive pipeline of new stem cell-based therapies being tested in 78 human trials directly funded by CIRM or based on CIRM-funded research. CIRM funding has also led to over 3000 published medical discoveries." 

They continued, 

"In 2020, Californians can continue their commitment to the best forms of stem cell research and therapy development. While there are no guarantees in medical research, if prior achievement is any indication, the next initiative will push many breakthrough therapies across the finish line. Considering the potential benefits to Californians and the opportunities to improve lives and alleviate suffering, there is little to lose, and an incredible amount to gain."

California's 15-year Stem Cell Journey: Where to After 1,000 Research Awards, 56 Clinical Trials, $904 Million for Basic Research?

BURLINGAME, Ca. -- California's $3 billion stem cell research agency this year is nearing only its 15th birthday, but tomorrow it will wrestle with the question of whether there is life after 2020.

The agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), is convening a passel of out-of-state scientists here to address the very real matter of what to do next year and thereafter. 

CIRM expects to run out of cash before the end of this year. It is hoping that California voters will approve a $5.5 billion bond measure in 2020 to continue its work. 

The scientists arriving for tomorrow's public meeting are non-California folks who have evaluated some of the more than 3,000 applications from California scientists for cash from CIRM.  The agency is barred by law from financing work outside the Golden State.

A presentation prepared by the agency for the session asks:

• "What should CIRM be thinking about now to prepare for a possible life beyond 2020?
• "How can CIRM deliver the greatest impact in the future?
• "What opportunities might CIRM seize to accelerate the field?• 
• "What challenges must be addressed?
• "What types of CIRM programs should be sustained or expanded?
• "What is missing, or needs more support?"

The day-long program also includes a 49-page, information package dealing with CIRM programs, ranging from basic research to clinical activities. It is the most comprehensive, recent, public look at CIRM's efforts that the agency has prepared.

Here are some of the highlights of the fresh data overview from CIRM: 

• 56 clinical trials
• More than 1,000 awards
• More than 1,200 patients in CIRM-initiated Alpha stem cell clinics
• $904 million for basic research
• Stimulation of $3.7 billion in outside investments
• 2,700 alumni from CIRM training programs 

The session begins at 8:30 a.m. PDT. It will be available also on online. Instructions for access can be found on the meeting agenda.

State Medical Regulators To Take Up Dubious Stem Cell Clinics in November: Adverse Events, More Education on Table

The next step in possible California state regulation of rogue stem cell clinics will come Nov. 7 at a meeting of the state's medical board. 

The news follows a meeting last week by a two-person task force of the medical board to deal with the growing use of unproven treatments. (See here and here.)

The California stem cell agency reported on its blog, in a piece by Yimy Villa, about possibilities the board is considering:

• "Guidance and education materials for medical practitioners
• "Sample informed consent documents designed to inform patients about the potential risks and benefits of stem cell treatments
• "Public education materials
• "An adverse event reporting system"

In response to a query by the California Stem Cell Report, Carlos Villatoro, a spokesman for the board, said it would hear an update at its meeting in November in San Diego.
He released a statement that said.

"The board’s Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Task Force will continue to work on this issue with the goal of providing recommendations on stem cell and regenerative therapies and developing some guidelines that California physicians and patients can follow. The task force would meet again to obtain input on any recommendations and/or guidelines."

The California stem cell agency has taken a "Three Rs" position on the rogue clinics: "Regulated, Reputable and Reliable."

No public meeting of the task force is scheduled at this time. Interested parties can send comments and suggestions to April.Alameda@mbc.ca.gov.

Peering into California's Stem Cell Future: Public Conclave Scheduled for Next Week

California's nearly 15-year-old stem cell research program, which expects to run out of cash this year, has called a meeting for next Thursday to explore its future if voters approve a proposed, $5.5 billion ballot measure next year. 

"The goal of the meeting is to gather feedback, suggestions and recommendations for how (the agency) might deliver the greatest impact in regenerative medicine should it have the opportunity to do so in the future," said Maria Bonneville, vice president of administration for the agency.

In response to a query yesterday, Bonneville said about 30 persons were expected to be involved in the session, including a number of the scientists who participate in the closed-door reviews of grant applications from other researchers. The grant reviewers are all from outside California and make the de facto decisions on awards.

The session is open to the public.   Bonneville said parts of the meeting will be audiocast on the Internet. She said the $3 billion agency expects to produce a report out of the meeting. 

Members of the public can submit written testimony to the agency in advance of the meeting and afterwards by emailing it to info@cirm.ca.gov.

Backers of the $5.5 billion initiative to be placed on the November 2020 ballot expect to formally file it with state election officials by the end of this month.

California Regulators and Dubious 'Stem Cell' Clinics: Possible New Rules Sometime Next Year

The California state Medical Board is expected to come up with new regulations to deal with rogue "stem cell" clinics sometime next year, the San Francisco Chronicle reported yesterday. 

The rules could require more patient education about the treatments and risks as well as providing more information to physicians about federally permissible treatments. The chairman of the state's $3 billion stem cell agency has described the unproven treatments as "snake oil."

The Chronicle story by Erin Allday emerged from a hearing yesterday by a small panel of the Medical Board. Any proposal for more regulation would have to go to the full board and run through the lengthy state administrative process before taking effect.

UC Davis stem cell scientist Paul Knoepfler, who also testified at the hearing, wrote about the session on his blog. He said that physician and patient education could be "helpful." He added,

"(B)ut I wonder whether the board will actually take more direct action on the few physicians who are arguably running the riskiest clinics here in our state. Such a step would do the most to rein in the problem."

Knoepfler, who has long studied the dubious clinics, described yesterday's hearing as a "positive development." He added, 

"I just don’t know how much concrete action will come out of it and when."

Chronicle reporter Allday wrote,

"The state has come under increasing pressure by stem cell experts to tamp down on the booming consumer industry in recent years, but almost no action has been taken. Wednesday’s meeting in Sacramento, attended by a few dozen scientists, patient advocates and stem cell providers, was largely informational, and medical board representatives repeatedly noted that they have limited authority over the industry.

"But they also acknowledged concerns that 'some providers are deceiving patients and placing them at risk,' said Dr. Randy Hawkins, co-chair of the stem cell task force organized by the California Medical Board."

Also testifying was the president of the state stem cell agency, Maria Millan. Here is a link to an item earlier this week on Millan's presentation.  

Here are links to a presentation by Mehrdad Abedi of UC Davis, a specialist in bone marrow transplantation,  on biologics regulation of stem cells and to a presentation by Charity Dean, assistant director of the State Department of Public Health.