California Stem Cell Agency Okays Major, Publicly Financed Conference During Ballot Campaign for $5.5 Billion More

OAKLAND, Ca. -- California's financially strapped stem cell agency this morning approved a $250,000, two-day public conference on the state of stem cell research that would be held in the midst of a ballot campaign to provide the agency with an additional $5.5 billion from taxpayers.

The proposal was approved on a unanimous vote after a brief discussion. 

The conference is expected to be held prior to the Nov. 3 election involving the proposed, $5.5 billion measure. Details and location are yet to be worked out.

Known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), the agency was created by voters in 2004 who provided it with $3 billion in bond funding. It is now down to its last $27 million for awards. The agency has additional cash to continue its administrative operations this year and wind down later if the proposed ballot initiative fails to win approval.

CIRM has held a number of large, public events over its 15-year life to bring together scientists and the public as part of its public information efforts to report on its activities and encourage collaboration among researchers. The conference approved today falls in that category, the agency says. 

The meeting, however, is likely to be targeted, sooner or later, by opponents of the agency as an improper use of public funds. The state has legal restrictions on use of public funds during ballot campaigns that involve many gray areas. But normal public information efforts are permitted. 

No member of the public spoke today against the conference, which was available live online and at a number of public teleconference locations throughout the state.  

The agency told the California Stem Cell Report earlier this week, 

"CIRM has conducted four grantee meetings since the agency’s inception.  These meetings are opportunities for grantees to share information about their progress, discuss bottlenecks in the field, and identify potential partnership opportunities.  This grantee meeting will be no different.  The meeting will comply with state laws governing the use of public funds in connection with ballot measure campaigns and will not include any advocacy for or against the ballot measure."

The CIRM conference proposal said that the public, CIRM grantees, interested funding organizations, patient advocates and stakeholders would be invited to the two-day session. An estimated 300-400 participants are expected. CIRM said the goals of the meeting are to:

• "Provide a public forum to learn about the most recent advances in stem cell research in California.
• "Encourage the sharing of information and data among CIRM grantees to foster collaboration and learning. 
• "Timely presentations to address and overcome key bottlenecks and challenges in the field to help advance existing projects. 
• "Showcase promising stem cell-based projects for partnership opportunities with investors, funders, or companies."

James Harrison, former general counsel to the agency and a well-known expert on campaign law, briefed the CIRM board last fall on the complex restrictions that surface during campaigns. He said, 

"Communications about a ballot measure should be delivered through CIRM’s ordinary communication methods, like its website, blog, newsletter, emails to interested persons, and public meetings, in the style CIRM normally uses to communicate other information. CIRM should avoid passionate or inflammatory language and modes of communication that it does not regularly employ, and should not encourage voters to vote in a particular manner." 

Harrison drafted portions of the 2004 initiative that created the agency. He was also heavily involved in drafting the current proposed initiative. 

California Stem Cell Agency Approves $1.8 million to Speed Promising Research

OAKLAND, Ca. -- The California stem cell agency today approved the use of $1.8 million in newly recovered  funds to help researchers move promising basic research into products that would be available to the general public.

The action targeted acceleration of work from what the agency calls its Quest program. The agency said it had eight possibilities for awards in the pipeline. 

The money for the awards comes from $2.8 million that has been recovered from other CIRM-funded research that has not met its milestones. 

The agency expects to report on the status of any additional recovered funds in May. 

$5.5 Billion California Stem Cell Initiative Moving Quickly to Qualify for November Ballot

The effort to place a $5.5 billion stem cell research initiative on the November ballot hit a key milestone this week, chalking up at least 25 percent of the signatures needed. 

In an interview yesterday with the California Stem Cell Report, Robert Klein, chairman and founder of Americans for Cures, said that he expects to have about one million signatures in hand by the end of April. 

To be be placed before voters, the initiative must have valid signatures from 623,212 voters.  To achieve that number, many more signatures are gathered because a number of them are disqualified by elections officials. The deadline for signatures for the measure is June 15.

Klein sounded optimistic about the pace of the signature-gathering effort. He said it was running slightly ahead of 2004 when he led the effort for the ballot measure that created the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the stem cell agency is formally known. 

"We're gaining momentum actually," Klein said in a phone interview. 

CIRM needs a major cash infusion this year because it is running out of money. The agency was provided with $3 billion in bond funding by voters 15 years ago. It is now down to $27 million for research awards. 

Klein sent a letter Feb. 1 to the California secretary of state, the state's top election official, declaring that the effort had acquired at least 25 percent of the signatures needed. The milestone triggers legislative hearings on the initiative. 

The hearing or hearings must be held no later than 131 days before the Nov. 3 election. The legislature cannot alter the proposal, but it can offer its own version. Supporters of a proposed measure can also withdraw it. 

"This means the legislature can offer alternative legislation as a compromise in an effort to convince petitioners to withdraw certified initiatives," according to Ballotpedia. 

Klein declined to discuss specific costs of the signature gathering effort. However, it is largely done in California through firms that are paid by a measure's supporters. In 2018, the average cost of a signature was about $6.00 and ran as high as about $9.00, according to Ballotpedia.  The average total cost in 2018 was $2.6 million for qualifying an initiative. 

Klein is a real estate developer based in Palo Alto. He directed the writing of both the original initiative and the latest one and was the agency's first chairman. Americans for Cures is the stem cell advocacy group that he founded. 

(The information on costs of signature gathering was not contained in an earlier version of this item.)

California's Stem Cell Agency Considers Mounting Major Public Forum During Upcoming Ballot Campaign for $5.5 Billion in Refinancing

California's stem cell agency has recovered $2.3 million from unsuccessful research awards and today proposed to split the amount between more research and a public forum later this year to discuss progress in the field.

The forum would be held after a proposed ballot initiative to refinance the agency with $5.5 billion is likely to have qualified for the November ballot. The proposal for the two-day event is the sort of conference that opponents of the agency are likely to raise questions about. 

Legal restrictions exist in California exist concerning how public funds may be used during a ballot campaign. In response to a question, a spokeswoman for the agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), said this morning that the grantee conference would comply with state law and would not involve advocacy for the ballot initiative. 

The proposal, if approved by voters, would save CIRM from financial extinction. The agency is running out of money and needs more billions to continue its work. CIRM was created in 2004 by voters who provided $3 billion in state bond funding. It is now down to $27 million for awards. 

At its meeting on Thursday, the CIRM governing board is scheduled to be asked to allocate $1.8 million of the recovered funds for "progression" awards to help advance more basic level research into possible clinical use. A CIRM document said that two applications have already been received and another six appear to be in the pipeline.

Another $250,000 would be allocated for a public conference in the latter part of the year "to discuss advances and progress in the field of stem cell research in California." 

The event would occur after the proposed initiative qualifies for the ballot. Efforts to gather more than 600,000 signatures of registered voters are already underway. The deadline for qualification falls in June. 

State law bars agencies from spending public funds for activities that are strictly for ballot campaigns. However, the agencies are permitted to continue their regular public information practices.  

James Harrison, former general counsel to the agency and a well-known expert on campaign law, briefed the CIRM governing board last fall on the complex restrictions and gray areas. He said, 

"Communications about a ballot measure should be delivered through CIRM’s ordinary communication methods, like its website, blog, newsletter, emails to interested persons, and public meetings, in the style CIRM normally uses to communicate other information. CIRM should avoid passionate or inflammatory language and modes of communication that it does not regularly employ, and should not encourage voters to vote in a particular manner." 

Harrison drafted portions of the 2004 initiative that created the agency. He was also heavily involved in drafting the current proposed initiative. 

In response to a query from the California Stem Cell Report, Maria Bonneville, a spokeswoman for the agency, said,

"CIRM has conducted four grantee meetings since the agency’s inception.  These meetings are opportunities for grantees to share information about their progress, discuss bottlenecks in the field, and identify potential partnership opportunities.  This grantee meeting will be no different.  The meeting will comply with state laws governing the use of public funds in connection with ballot measure campaigns and will not include any advocacy for or against the ballot measure."

The CIRM conference proposal said that the public, CIRM grantees, interested funding organizations, patient advocates and stakeholders would be invited to the two-day session. An estimated 300-400 participants are expected. CIRM said the goals of the meeting are to:

• "Provide a public forum to learn about the most recent advances in stem cell research in California.
• "Encourage the sharing of information and data among CIRM grantees to foster collaboration and learning. 
• "Timely presentations to address and overcome key bottlenecks and challenges in the field to help advance existing projects. 
• "Showcase promising stem cell-based projects for partnership opportunities with investors, funders, or companies"

California's New Stem Cell Initiative and Its $7.8 Billion Cost, Including Interest

The price tag for refinancing California's unique and ambitious stem cell research program could run to close to $7.8 billion, give or take a few hundred million dollars or more. 

So says the state's legislative analyst in a financial analysis of a proposed ballot initiative that is likely to be on next November's ballot. The measure would provide $5.5 billion more for research awards to California scientists by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the state stem cell agency is formally known. 

The increase in the price tag is caused by the fact that the $5.5 billion would be borrowed money -- bonds that would be issued by the state. The legislative analyst estimated that the interest costs could total $2.3 billion, bringing the actual expense to taxpayers to $7.8 billion. 

Significant caveats exist, however. The legislative analyst, who prepares these sorts of analyses for all ballot measures, cautioned that the $7.8 billion estimate could rise or fall depending on how interest rates rise or fall. Another unknown involves the length of the payback period. 

What the legislative analyst has to say is a significant matter for the proposed initiative, whose success will determine the financial survival of the agency. CIRM is running out of cash. It was funded by voters 15 years ago with $3 billion. If the proposed initiative fails, CIRM will wither away over the next two to three years. 

Should the initiative qualify for the ballot, the seven-page financial overview of the measure would be delivered, via the state's official voter's guide, to about 20 million California voters prior to the election. The overview would also serve as the basis for news stories in virtually all of the media, which is always looking for bottom line figures.

Beyond the interest costs, the analysis carried other financial bits of interest. It said that over an initial, five-year period the agency would use some the bond proceeds to pay the interest on the money it is borrowing. The analyst said, 

"Were the state to begin issuing bonds shortly after approval of the measure, CIRM would likely make interest payments totaling in the low hundreds of millions of dollars from bond proceeds by the end of 2025."

The proposed initiative also places a 6.5 percent cap on total funding for certain operational expenses including administration and grant oversight. Other changes would give more freedom to the agency, which originally had a 50-person cap on staff. That cap was later removed by state legislation. The new initiative would set the cap at 70 with a provision for more employees beyond that number, under certain conditions involving, among other things, compensating them with cash raised privately. 

The new initiative stipulates that the agency improve access to stem cell therapies, funding that effort with up to 1 percent of the $5.5 billion, a change from the current law involving CIRM.  Other changes from the current situation: 1.5 percent for starting "community care centers" for new clinical trial sites, $1.5 billion for research into brain and nervous system diseases and up to 0.5 percent for a shared lab program. 

Royalties from any therapies financed by CIRM research would go to the agency and not the state general fund, as currently is the case. So far, royalties have totaled only about $200,000. Larger amounts are likely to appear in the next decade as the therapies emerge from the research that was financed years ago. 

Regarding possible savings as the result of more cost-effective therapies, the analysis said, 

"To the extent the measure results in new treatments that are more cost-effective than existing treatments, state and local governments could experience savings in some programs such as Medi-Cal, the state’s subsidized health care program for low-income people. The magnitude of these and other indirect effects is unknown."

The stem cell agency, which was created by voters in 2004, has yet to finance research that has led to stem cell treatments that are approved for general public use. 

In 2004, the legislative analyst prepared an interest cost estimate of $3 billion on the original amount for awards, also $3 billion. However, the projections did not anticipate the recession of 2008, which resulted in a long-term drop in interest rates. Today, the interest on the original $3 billion is expected to be about $1 billion.

Here are links to more information on proposed initiative and related matters:

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 08, 2019

LA Times: $5.5 Billion Measure for California Stem Cell Agency Could Actually Be a 'Downfall'

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2019

$5.5 Billion Stem Cell Ballot Measure: Questions in California but Apparently No Foot-Dragging

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 04, 2019

California Stem Cell Agency Chalks Up its 60th Clinical Trial as Funds Dwindle

Federal Stem Cell Regulation Setback in California; Case Involves Treatments with Fat Cells

Dubious stem cell clinics in California were in the news again this week with a piece in the Los Angeles Times declaring that a federal judge had dealt a blow to regulators trying to crack down on the much-criticized enterprises. 

The column by Michael Hiltzik said,

"A Los Angeles federal judge has rejected a government motion that could have shut down a network of clinics offering customers allegedly unauthorized stem cell treatments.

"The ruling by Judge Jesus G. Bernal potentially deals a setback for the Food and Drug Administration’s campaign against treatments using stem cell preparations that the FDA has not approved. 

"In the ruling published late Monday, Bernal denied the government’s motion for summary judgment in its lawsuit against the Rancho Mirage-based California Stem Cell Treatment Center, the Cell Surgical Network, and the latter’s founders, Mark Berman and Elliott Lander. Bernal ruled that the case was suitable for trial."

UC Davis stem cell researcher Paul Knoepfler also wrote about the case on his blog.

"The reasons why Bernal said he rejected the summary judgment request are concerning and don’t fit with my view of the medical science here as a stem cell biologist. 

"Unfortunately, this all leaves the door potentially still open for hundreds of clinics to sell the unproven fat stem cell product at the heart of this case called 'stromal vascular fraction' or (SVF)."

This lawsuit was first filed in May 2018 and is likely to continue for some time, possibly involving lengthy appeals. 

The controversy over unregulated clinics is of concern to those who support refinancing California's stem cell agency with $5.5 billion via a hoped-for voter approval of a ballot measure in November. The fear is that the flap could create voter confusion and besmirch the entire field. 

The agency was created in 2004 by voters who provided it with $3 billion. It is now down to its last $27 million for research grants. That figure is likely to increase next week as agency directors hear a report on the amount of cash recovered from awards that did not meet benchmarks.

Calfornia's Stem Cell Pie for 2020: State Agency to Slice Up Nearly Final Millions Next Week

It ain't over yet -- at least that's the word from what could be deemed the financial center of stem cell research in California.

The governing board of the California stem cell agency is scheduled to meet Feb. 6 to allocate unspecified additional millions for stem cell research and peer down the road that awaits it beginning Nov. 4 of this year.

That is the day after California voters are expected to deliver their judgment on whether the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the agency is formally known, should continue and receive an additional $5.5 billion.

The agency is running out of money. Its initial $3 billion is now down to $27 million for awards. A ballot initiative to give the agency the additional billions is expected to be on the ballot this fall, Nov. 3 to be precise.

But in just 10 days, the CIRM board will reveal the amount of cash that has been recovered from research awards that failed to meet milestones during 2019. The board is scheduled to make decisions on how that money, which is likely to run into tens of millions, is to be allocated during the remainder of this year.

Also on the agenda is a three-word topic: "strategic plan themes."  This is likely to involve possible directions of the agency should it receive additional funding from the ballot initiative. That proposed measure substantially expands the scope of the agency and specifies it move into in certain new areas, including attempting to assure the affordability of agency-financed therapies whose costs could run upwards of $2 million.

The agenda includes an update on most major programs involving CIRM, information that will come widely into play as the next fall's election receives more attention.

The meeting will be based at CIRM's headquarters in Oakland. But it will also be available electronically at a number of other public locations throughout California and via the Internet. Members of the public will be able to comment and ask questions through the Internet. Details are available on the agenda. 

Tiny Poll Heartens Backers of California's Financially Beleaguered Stem Cell Agency

The first public opinion poll of 2020 is out concerning the financial fate of California's $3 billion stem cell agency, and the result is "upbeat." 

However, there is one caveat that is as consequential as the failure of a phase 1 clinical trial. That is the go, no-go stage at which the safety of a stem cell therapy is tested in humans. 

The poll covers only 83 people out of the roughly 20 million California voters. 

The testing of public sentiment was conducted in the past week or so by UC Davis stem cell scientist Paul Knoepfler, who well knows the weakness of the non-scientific sample. But he still thinks it is something of a promising sign. 

Writing on his blog, The Niche, Knoepler reported that 48 percent of his self-selected respondents, who filled in the poll on the blog, believe that the agency will be refinanced with $5.5 billion from California voters come November. 

Sixty-three percent of those polled also said it should be.  

The agency is now down to its last $27 million, which is only a relative drop in the stem cell research bucket. 

Knoepfler described the poll results as "upbeat." He said that he thought that the 63 percent figure was an especially good sign for the agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). Knoepfler wrote, 

"I actually thought this one might swing the other way since we have many readers here on The Niche who run stem cell clinics or are fans of the clinics, and seem to have a dislike or skepticism for organizations such as CIRM, ISSCR (an international group of stem cell researchers), etc."

Backers of the agency are currently in the process of gathering more than 600,000 voter signatures to qualify the $5.5 billion ballot measure for the fall ballot. 

The results of that signature drive, which is being handled by professional signature-gathering firms, may not be known until June. 

Global Growth in 2020 for Regenerative Medicine While California's Stem Cell Program Faces Extinction

ARM graphic

SAN FRANCISCO -- Leaders of the stem cell and regenerative medicine industry gathered yesterday at a sumptuous hotel here, and the talk was of billions of dollars in business, not to mention medical treatments that can cost millions. 

Just 11 miles away across the famed San Francisco Bay, however, was another sort of stem cell scene. It could be found in the not-so-posh, Oakland headquarters of the state stem cell program, known officially as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) . 

CIRM is going broke. Its original $3 billion has shrunk to $27 million over the last 15 years. 

On the other hand, global financing for therapies and treatments in the regenerative medicine field totaled nearly $10 billion in 2019, marking the second highest year ever, the leading U.S. industry group reported at the session at the Parc 55 hotel.

Janet Lambert, CEO of ARM -- ARM photo

"2019 (was) a year of significant growth in the regenerative medicine sector," said Janet Lambert, CEO of the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine (ARM), told a standing-room-only crowd of more than 500 gathered for its annual briefing. "We enter 2020 poised for continued expansion."

Lambert said,

"The pipeline is robust, with several next-gen technologies entering the clinic and an increase in clinical trials for indications with large patient populations."

Her comments came as CIRM faces a financing shortfall that could mean its virtual extinction. 

The agency, created in 2004 by state voters, is down to its last $27 million of uncommitted cash. CIRM has often spent close to $300 million a year. The agency is hoping voters next November will provide it with $5.5 billion more under the terms of a ballot initiative yet to qualify for the ballot. CIRM's only significant source of funding is bonds issued by the state. 

Lambert's organization has more than 350 members, including CIRM. The largest percentage of ARM's membership comes from cell and gene therapy companies. The global financing it reports is almost entirely private. 

ARM's 2019 survey tracked nearly 1,000 companies globally, including 534 in the United States. The second largest number, 237, includes Europe and Israel. Lambert said the fastest growing area is Asia, which has 180.

ARM counted 94 phase three clinical trials globally, the last stage before a therapy is approved for widespread use by the federal government. 

CIRM is helping to finance 60 clinical trials, including three that are still active in phase three. It has yet to back research that has led to a widely available product.

Here are links to CIRM's phase three trials: BrainStorm Cell Therapeutics,  $16 million, ALS, PI Ralph Kern; Humacyte, Inc., $10 million, kidney failure, PI Jeffrey Lawson; Medeor Therapeutics, $11 million, kidney failure, PI Karen Smith. 

Here is a link to Lambert's slides. In the near future, ARM expects to mount online a video of her presentation including two additional panel sessions that examine the current and future outlook for regenerative medicine.   

Gold-Plated Stem Cell Treatments, Multi-billion Dollar Benefits and Potential Industry Profits

One of the nation's leading regenerative medicine industry groups is touting multi-billion dollar savings that may be achieved with the type of stem cell and gene therapies that are being developed with cash from California's financially beleaguered stem cell program.

The industry group is the Washington, D.C.,-based Alliance for Regenerative Medicine (ARM). It is tackling one of the major issues facing development of commercial stem cell therapies -- sticker shock at their expected prices, running upwards of a $1 million or more.

Without a willingness from health care insurers to cover the costs and provide a pathway to profit, it is unlikely that the biotech industry will embrace production of the therapies.

In a study released last Friday, the group said,

"Advances in molecular biology and genetics are leading to new treatments for rare diseases that require new ways of assessing value. CGTs (cell and gene therapies) are directed at the underlying cause of a condition and offer durable, potentially curative, or near-curative benefits. These transformative therapies create challenges for current reimbursement frameworks as they (the therapies) require significant upfront costs but are expected to provide a lifetime of benefits. The recurring treatment costs of chronically-managed patients can be greatly reduced and even eliminated with a one-time administration or short course of these novel therapies. 

"As CGTs arrive on the market, payers need new models for assessing their value. These treatments could potentially end the patient’s burden of illness, resulting in cost offsets (eliminating or reducing the need for long-term treatment, hospitalizations, and other care) and productivity gains that span a lifetime. Manufacturers incur a high per-patient development cost for these therapies and payers who bear the cost of treatment may not realize the long-term financial benefits due to health plan switching."

The ARM study predicted cost savings of as much as $33.6 billion over about a decade in connection with three afflictions: sickle cell disease (SCD), multiple myeloma (MM) and hemophilia A (Hem A). 

California's stem cell agency was not mentioned in the study, but it has funded research in all three areas. The agency is a member of ARM.

The study, backed by ARM and performed by the Marwood Group, said,

"Access to CGTs for even a modest number of patients with MM, SCD, and Hem A each year can reduce overall disease costs by nearly 23% over a 10-year period. The savings from lowering healthcare costs and raising productivity are considerable, approaching $34 billion by 2029. Of the savings, $31 billion are from a reduction in healthcare costs and $3 billion are from productivity gains."

The model used by ARM assumed CGT prices as high as $2 million. The study said,

 "The model has tested more than 180 different prices across the three potential CGTs that ranged from a minimum test price of $150,000 and up to a maximum price test of $2,000,000. The prices entered into the model created 60 different cost savings curves for all three of drugs in this model. Prices were distributed with more than 50% of test prices in the $100,000-$600,000 price per administration range."

The discussion of the costs of stem cell therapies has special resonance in the Golden State where voters are likely to be asked next fall to give $5.5 billion more to its stem cell agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).

The agency, funded with $3 billion in 2004, is down to its last $27 million. A new, proposed ballot initiative is focusing hard on affordability of stem cell treatments. The initiative has no specific solutions but stipulates that a new version of CIRM  -- if the ballot measure is approved -- should devise some ways to come up with answers for insurers who are not likely to warm easily to $1 million therapies.

The 2020 Outlook for Regenerative Medicine: Major Industry Briefing Available Monday on Internet

One of more significant conferences of the year involving stem cells and regenerative medicine begins Monday in San Francisco with an overview of the industry and state of research. 

And there is an opportunity for those not on the scene to sample the presentations Monday morning via the Internet, including emerging therapies for cancer and next generation cell and gene therapies. 

The event is a state-of-the-industry presentation by the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine (ARM) in conjunction with the annual J.P. Morgan Health Care Conference.  

Something like 500 persons are expected to attend the ARM event. Below is the agenda for the Monday morning program. All times are PST. A live webcast will be available here, according to ARM.  Also available at the same Internet page location is a video from last year's presentation. 

Look for coverage also of the event next week right here on the California Stem Cell Report. 

8:00 – 8:20am | Introduction & Industry Update
Janet Lambert, CEO, Alliance for Regenerative Medicine

8:20am – 9:05am | Emerging Cell Therapies for Cancer
Claudia Mitchell, Senior VP, Production & Portfolio Strategy, Astellas (moderator)
Pascal Touchon, CEO, Atara Biotherapeutics
Matthew Kane, Co-Founder and CEO, Precision BioSciences
Samarth Kulkarni, CEO, CRISPR Therapeutics

9:05am – 9:50am | Next Generation Gene and Cell Technologies
Timothy Miller, Co-Founder, President, & Chief Scientific Officer, Abeona Therapeutics
Shelia Mikhail, CEO, AskBio
Laurence Cooper, CEO, Ziopharm
Emile Nuwaysir, President & CEO, BlueRock Therapeutics
Tim Lu, Co-Founder and CEO, Senti Bio

Doubters and Hard Choices: Challenges for California's Stem Cell Program

California's 15-year-old, $3 billion stem cell program received a modest smattering of attention during the holidays, first in an article in the Los Angeles Times and another in Bloomberg Law.

The Times, the state's largest circulation newspaper with 2 million readers on Sunday, called it one of eight, global science stories to watch in the coming year. Specifically, the brief item by Karen Kaplan referred to the proposed bond measure to refinance the agency, known formally as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). She wrote about the impact of the cash handed out by the agency and said, ,

"A CIRM-funded treatment developed at UCLA has led to a cure for dozens of children who were born without a functioning immune system.

"All of this was made possible by CIRM’s initial allocation of $3 billion. Now that money has been spent, and voters will be asked to renew their commitment to stem cell science by approving a $5.5-billion ballot initiative in November 2020."

At Bloomberg Law online, Joyce Cutler wrote that supporters of the agency are refining their pitch and this month will begin seeking more than 600,000 verified signatures of registered voters to place the proposed initiative on the  ballot.  She wrote,

"They will face doubters and lots of competition for voters’ attention and tax dollars. 

"'I think that a funding decision by popular vote that locks in a substantial income stream over a decade over a particular use is not good social policy. It’s not to say that the money isn’t being used for a good purpose,' said Ken Taymor, deputy director of the Forum for Collaborative Research at the University of California Berkeley School of Public Health. 

"The question, said Taymor, is 'can we afford to spend it on what CIRM is doing as opposed to other public health needs?'"

Cutler covers more ground than does the piece in the Times. She has comments from Jeff Sheehy, a CIRM board member since 2004; Arnold Kriegstein, a CIRM grant recipient and director of UC San Francisco’s Developmental and Stem Cell Biology Program, and Zev Yaroslavsky, a specialist in state politics and government and director of the Los Angeles Initiative at UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs, and Jeanne Loring, a CIRM grant recipient and chief scientific officer of Aspen Neuroscience.

Two samples:

Sheehy said he would give the agency an A plus for advancing science. He continued,

"We supported the field, we’ve grown biomedical research and biotech in California tremendously. I think if you look at returns to the state, you might say B minus. And that speaks to one of my frustrations as we try to move forward, as we talk about moving forward, that we really haven’t grappled with the mechanics of ensuring that the state gets a real return on its investment."

Yaroslavsky said,

"They’re (voters) are going to have to make a decision whether roads are more important than stem cell research, is education more important than water infrastructure."

California Stem Cell Report Taking Break

The California Stem Cell Report is on holiday until Jan. 6. Look for a fresh posting then. Happy New Year to all.

Possible Parkinson's Stem Cell Treatment in San Diego, $6.5 Million and Loads of Media Coverage

KPBS 2018 video

A San Diego firm that has $22 million worth of financial roots in the California stem cell agency this month snagged a bonus -- a ton of favorable attention for its efforts to treat Parkinson's disease. 

The fledgling business is Aspen Neuroscience, Inc., which was co-founded by Jeanne Loring, professor emeritus at the Scripps Research Institute, and Andres Bratt-Leal, also formerly of Scripps. 

Earlier this month, Aspen received $6.5 million in seed funding from Domain Associates and Axon Ventures. The announcement of the cash infusion triggered a spate of news articles.

In a piece on the Biocentury web site, writer Elizabeth Eaton quoted Kim Kamdar, a partner at Domain, as saying, 

"Aspen is the only company taking an autologous approach to cell therapy for Parkinson's disease." 

The approach can avoid the immunosuppression necessary for allogeneic therapies. Eaton continued,  

"Such (immunosuppression) treatment, which can last for a year or more to ensure a patient's immune system doesn't react to the transplant, can make patients more susceptible to viral diseases and cancer.

"While companies like BlueRock Therapeutics L.P. are exploring allogeneic treatments, Aspen was able to break into the autologous space thanks to its genomic tools, co-founder and CSO Jeanne Loring told BioCentury.

"Aspen is built on Loring's research at the Scripps Research Institute and the PluriTest, an assay she developed after discovering that pluripotent cells have a distinct genetic signature. The patented test shows whether a cell has achieved pluripotency, which allows researchers to avoid conducting more time-consuming confirmatory tests."

Loring has received nearly $22 milllion from the state stem cell agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), including $4.5 million as a co-PI. She told the California Stem Cell Report, 

"All of my CIRM awards contributed to this project. We used those funds to develop our genomics tools and databases and to develop improved methods for handling the cells.  The only specific CIRM grants supporting this project were DISC2-09073 and the progress award DISC2P-11595."

Loring also credited Summit for Stem Cell Foundation of San Diego for supporting and financing her work as far back as 2011. Joining Domain in the $6.5 million in funding were Alexandria Venture Investments, Arch Venture Partners, OrbiMed Advisors and Section 32.

Here are links to additional stories on Aspen and the $6.5 million in funding: San Diego Union-Tribune, San Diego Business Journal, Endpoints News, FierceBiotech, Xconomy, BioWorld, Parkinson's News Today and BioSpace. 

Aspen Neurosciences video

Latina Cancer Advocate Ysabel Duron Named to California Stem Cell Board

Ysabel Duron

The governing board of the $3 billion state stem cell program has a new member, Ysabel Duron, an award-winning Latina journalist and president of the Latino Cancer Institute.

Her appointment comes as Sherry Lansing, who was the first woman to head a major Hollywood studio, has left the board. Lansing is president of the foundation bearing her name, which is involved deeply in cancer research, and is a member of the University of California board of regents. 

On its blog, the stem cell agency said,

"Ms. Duron was a journalist and TV news anchor for more than 43 years winning numerous awards, including two EMMYS. She has been inducted into the Hall of Fame of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and given the Living Legacy Award by the Chicana/Latina Foundation.

"As a journalist she covered her own battle against Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, using her reporting to help raise awareness about the disease and the health disparities involved in treating it in communities of color."

The agency quoted Duron as saying,

"Usually I am looking for the best return for the public health! This appointment gives me a new learning opportunity to understand a very complex issue, and, make it bite size so the public, patients and advocates will understand how these scientific revelations will impact lives in the short term and the long run. As a steward of taxpayer dollars, I also want to make sure there is equity for communities across California, and that the research serves all of us."

Lansing served on the agency's 29-member board since its inception in 2004. In her letter of resignation, she said,

"This is just the beginning for stem cell research, and yet we are at a critical inflection point in the life of this organization - with funds coming to an end and promising research that must wait for the next CIRM(the stem cell agency). It is for this reason that I am stepping down now, so that I can dedicate more time to getting the next initiative on the ballot."

State Controller Betty Yee appointed Duron. The agency's board currently has two vacancies.

'Natural Killer' Cancer Cell Treatment Advances; State Stem Cell Agency Pleased

The California stem cell agency this week touted a possible "off-the-shelf cancer killer" that the state enterprise is helping to develop with $4 million.

The company involved in the treatment is Fate Therapeutics, Inc., of San Diego, a publicly traded firm working on induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) that have been genetically engineered to enhance their anti-tumor activity. The product is called FT516.

Writing this week on the agency's blog, Kevin McCormack, senior director of communications at the agency, said,

"Fate Therapeutics has developed an off-the-shelf therapy (thanks to (agency funding) that could, theoretically, be stored at hospitals and clinics around the country and used whenever it’s needed for anyone who needs it."

McCormack said that a CAR-T approach uses a patient's own "re-engineered" cells to kill cancer tumors. He wrote, 

"But the thing that makes it so appealing – using the patient’s own cells – also makes it really complicated and expensive. Creating a custom-made therapy from each patient’s own cells takes time and costs a lot of money. But now (the Fate Therapeutics) approach could change that."

Fate uses NK (natural killer cells). Maxx Chatsko of the Motley Fool financial web site reported,

"It's the first cell product of any kind derived from a clonal master iPSC line to be evaluated in a clinical trial in the United States. The 'clonal master iPSC line' part essentially means it can be manufactured more easily than immunotherapies requiring cells to be extracted from patients. That's why it's called 'off the shelf.'"

McCormack continued, 

"At this year’s meeting of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) Fate announced that the first patient treated with this new approach seems to be doing very well. The patient had acute myeloid leukemia and wasn’t responding to conventional treatments. However, following treatment with Fate’s FT516 the patient responded quickly and...was able to leave the hospital and spend Thanksgiving with his family. 

"Equally impressive is that 42 days after being treated with FT516, the man showed no signs of leukemia in either his bone marrow or blood."

The product is being licensed exclusively to Fate by the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Fate Therapeutics' stock closed today at $18.79, down 13 cents. Its 52-week high was $22.82. The 52-week low was $11.00. Last September it raised $173 million in a stock offering.

LA Times: $5.5 Billion Measure for California Stem Cell Agency Could Actually Be a 'Downfall'

The Los Angeles Times, California's largest circulation newspaper, carried a piece today that called for withdrawal of the proposed, $5.5 billion ballot initiative that would save the financial life of the state's stem cell agency.

The article by Pulitzer Prize-winning business columnist Michael Hiltzik said the measure would perpetuate many of the flaws in the ballot proposition in 2004 that created the agency, officially known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). 

In fact, Hiltzik said, the new measure "makes some of them worse."

"That’s dangerous," Hiltzik continued, "because although the measure could fuel the stem cell program for years to come, it might also prompt a repudiation by voters sensitive to its many imperfections. Such an outcome would be tragic for California and the advanced science already supported by CIRM."

Hiltzik's opinion piece was the first extended look at the proposed stem cell initiative by a major media outlet in California. It appeared on the front page of today's business section of the Times. On the paper's web site, the article was featured as a "weekend read" at the time of this writing. 

The Times says it has about 2 million readers on Sunday. It is a go-to source for other journalists when they are researching stories and trying to understand major issues facing the state. 

Hiltzik has followed the $3 billion agency since its inception and has been highly critical. Last spring, however, he wrote that the agency had "proved its value." In today's piece, he had a lot to say about the good work of the agency. 

In his first two paragraphs, Hiltzik declared that CIRM "has made great strides in advancing what’s known as regenerative medicine and placing California at the center of the developing science." Hiltzik also said that CIRM has financed state-of-the-art laboratories, attracted preeminent scientists and "brought scores of promising treatments for severe chronic diseases to the point of clinical trials."

But he also noted that the agency has "has so far failed to yield a single marketable clinical product." He continued, 

"That’s despite the sales pitch for Proposition 71 in 2004 -- that all that stood in the way of 'cures' for Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, spinal cord injuries and other maladies was money."

The greatest flaw of the agency, however, has more to do with public policy than science, Hiltzik wrote. And that is the exemption of the agency from the usual oversight by the legislature and the governor, an exemption contained in the measure that created the agency.

Voters provided CIRM with $3 billion in bond funding 15 years ago. 
Today that money has all but run out. Robert Klein, a real estate developer, first chairman of the agency and who sponsored Proposition 71, is now once again sponsoring the latest initiative to give it billions more. 

Hiltzik concluded,

"(Klein) should withdraw his measure, and CIRM’s leadership should write a new one or work with Gov. Newsom and the Legislature to map out the program’s next act. 

"CIRM’s leadership needs to show the public that it’s capable of taking charge of the program’s destiny. If it’s not willing to make its own case for CIRM’s continued existence, how can it persuade voters to give it one cent more?"

San Diego Biotech Reporter Bradley J. Fikes Dies at 61

Bradley J. Fikes, journalist
San Diego U-T photo

When biotech reporter Bradley J. Fikes died last Wednesday at the age of 61, he was described in his newspaper as "part Dr. Dolittle, part Inspector Gadget."

The piece in the San Diego Union-Tribune was a tribute to Fikes, whose family said he died of natural causes at home. The paper said he was "an ever-on-the-move ball of energy" and beloved by his colleagues.

Fikes occupied a special position in California journalism. He was one of the few daily newspaper reporters who regularly covered the biotech industry and its research community. Fikes was also one of the few who delved into the affairs of California's 15-year-old, stem cell research agency. 

Last month Fikes penned a lengthy piece for the San Diego Union-Tribune that involved the agency, known officially as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). The story dealt with a blood cancer drug called fedratinib and the relentless, years-long journey before the research, which was partly funded by CIRM, came to fruition. 

Fikes began the story like this:

"Cancer patients hold onto hope the way some people hold onto the lap bars of roller coasters: As if their lives depend on it.

"And then they get ready for the ups and downs."

Kevin McCormack, the stem cell agency's senior director of communications, wrote on the agency's blog that Fikes' story captured the setbacks, twists and turns and the years that it took before the treatment ultimately emerged. 

McCormack said yesterday, 

"Everyone at CIRM was stunned and saddened by the news. Brad was a real character, and a real gentleman. His unique sense of fashion made him hard to miss, even at a crowded conference, but it was his curiosity and his clear love of science that really stood out. He didn’t just report on stem cell research as a job, it was something he loved and that came across in his writing. He had a tremendous gift for taking complex science and turning it into everyday English. He was also great fun to hang out with. He had a wonderful sense of humor and a wry way of seeing the world. I shall miss him. We all will."

One of Fikes' colleagues, Michelle Guerrero, a Union-Tribune illustrator and graphics reporter, said in Fikes' obituary, 

“He had the wonderment of a child, the complexity of a scientist and an artful way of coming up with the words to explain it all.”

Fikes cut a colorful figure as he divined the doings at Scripps and Salk and at the other hallowed halls of science.  The Union-Tribune's piece on Fikes said, 

"Fikes was impossible to miss. By his own admission, he was a walking fashion disaster. He wore odd-colored business shirts that clashed with his suspenders, and slacks that never made contact with an iron. At times, cellphone cables hung out of his pockets like limp licorice."

Fikes was a graduate of San Diego State University where he first began writing the news. The campus newspaper wrote its own account of the life and times of Bradley J. Fikes. The piece carried comments from his colleagues including Gary Robbins who sometimes teamed with Fikes on stories. Robbins praised not only Fikes' journalism but his humanity as well. Robbins said, 

"He had poise, he had professionalism, he was a gentleman.”