Here are some stem cell stories that caught our eye this past week. Some are groundbreaking science, others are of personal interest to us, and still others are just fun.
Tinkering
with stem cell genes safe. Research at the Salk Institute provides
some reassurance that using gene-editing techniques to correct
disease-causing mutations in stem cells is safe. This type of
intervention aims to give people a corrected version of a gene that can
produce a functional protein to replace the bad one they were born with,
such as the hemoglobin gene in sickle cell disease. The CIRM-funded
Salk team made gene corrections with both of the two most common
gene-editing techniques: using a virus to carry the correct gene into
the cell, and using an enzyme to cut and splice the genes. The fear, the
lead researcher said in Space Daily,
has been that this gene manipulation would cause unwanted mutations.
Instead the team found that the very small number of mutations in the
edited cells did not exceed the number in normal cells growing in the
lab for the same length of time.
This is great news
for CIRM, since eight of our Disease Teams—all of which have the goal of
moving therapies into the clinic—use gene modification techniques.
These include efforts to correct the genetic mutation that causes sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia.
Interview with Nobelist on stem cell potential. The Raw Story
ran an interview with Nobel Laureate Martin Evans about the field he
helped to create when he first isolated mouse embryonic stem cells in
1981. He won the Nobel in 2007 for later work in which he used embryonic
stem cells to create specific gene modifications in mice. He said we
are “just scraping the surface” in unlocking the potential of stem cells
to change medicine. He also addresses various aspects of reprogramming
cells to become different types of tissue and provides a bit of advice
to young scientists: “You should not believe in all that you read.”
Keep your blood stem cells acting young.
Blood stem cells, like most of the adult stem cells in our various
tissues, become less adept at doing their job of replenishing our
tissues as we age. A team at New York’s Mount Sinai has fingered the
decrease of a specific protein in older stem cells as the culprit. That
protein, SIRT1, was not a surprise as it has been implicated in other
aging research. When laboratory animals eat a severely calorie
restricted diet and live longer, SIRT1 is active at a higher than normal
level. So, it makes some sense that low levels of SIRT1 would be
associated with conditions of aging. The team now wants to see if
increasing SIRT1 levels can put the kick of youth back into older blood
stem cells. The web portal Hospital Newspaper ran a story on the research that the team published in Stem Cell Reports.
Or use a new way to create blood cells.
If you can’t get your own blood stem cells to behave like vigorous
youthful cells another option is to get some new one. The problem is
many folks cannot find a matching donor and previous attempts to grow
them from earlier stage stem cells have not worked. Using either
embryonic or reprogrammed iPS type stem cells to try to grow large
quantities of blood-forming stem cells has always resulted in immature
cells that cannot make all the blood cells and don’t readily take up
residence—engraft—in the patient. Researchers at Cornell Medical College
may have solved this problem by growing the stem cells in a more
natural environment. They grew them in a bed of cells like those that
would have surrounded them in blood vessels in a developing fetus. The
resulting cells engrafted in mice and produced nearly all the components
of blood. They had a few lingering problems with creating the immune
system’s T cells, but got much closer than previous work. Device Space picked up the medical school’s press release.
This
goal of creating fully functional blood stem cells is sufficiently
important but vexing to the research community that CIRM organized an
international workshop on the topic. You can read the resulting
whitepaper “Breaking the Bottleneck.”
Donors needed to power discovery. With federal support for research
shrinking many institutions are relying more and more on donors to fund
the research that leads to discoveries and eventually therapies. The
New York based web publication Capital Playbook
painted a picture of the deficit citing a 22 percent reduction in the
inflation-adjusted budget for the National Institutes of Health since
2003. It goes on to quote senior scientists fearing the loss of a
generation of scientists. A great comment came from my friend and former
colleague David Scadden, co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell
Institute. “They are seeing their senior mentors spending more and more
time writing grants and going hat in hand. That’s not a good way to
inspire the best and brightest.”
Don Gibbons
No comments:
Post a Comment