Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat Bayi - diiktiraf di seluruh Dunia!

Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat Bayi - diiktiraf di seluruh Dunia!

Assalamualaikum WBK,

Salam Sejahtera kepada rakan-rakan saya sekelian, ibu-bapa, bakal ibu-bapa, pengunjung/pembaca blog ini.

Beberapa hari kebelakangan ini kami telah mengambil bahagian dalam program-program ceramah topik Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat dan kegunaanya dalam menangani masaalah Leukemia dan Talasemia di beberapa lokasi yang telah dianjurkan oleh beberapa organisasi berwawasan sempena Hari Ibu yang diraikan beramai-ramai bulan ini.

Organisasi termasuk Bank Negara, Pusat Perubatan MUIP dan Sekolah Sri Ayesha. Ketiga-tiga telah mengundang kami sebagai Pakar Sel Stem kerana ingin mendapatkan penjelasan yang terkini. Para hadirin ketiga-tiga program ingin penjelasan mengenai pengiktirafan dan status perkhidmatan Sel Stem darah Tali Pusat. Bersama-sama kami di Bank Negara adalah Ratu Jazz Sheila Majid yang telah turut serta di majlis ini kerana beliau juga telah menyimpan Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat anaknya Khalifah tahun lepas dan ingin mengumumkan kepada peminat beliau mengapa beliau telah memilih untuk menyimpan sel stem darah tali pusat anaknya.

Sudah tentu ramai di antara anda telahpun membaca dalam akhbar-akhbar tempatan tentang penggunaan Sel Stem Binatang untuk mengubati penyakit-penyakit yang sering dihidap zaman ini. Saya berpendapat jika adanya Sel Stem sendiri ataupun yang diderma oleh saudara lain, kita tidak perlu menggunakkan Sel Stem Binatang. Sudah tentu ia tidak menjadi pilihan saya. Kita sering mendengar tentang penyakit ’Bird Flu’, ’Jangkitan Nipah Virus’, ’JE’, dan ’Mad Cow Disease’ yang mungkin menjangkiti manusia dan ada yang telah membunuh ramai - adakah mungkin selamat penggunaan sel stem binatang? Saya masih was-was dan menasihati semua supaya berwaspada. Jika betul ada kajian yang membuktikan keselamatan, kesahihan, dan keberkesanan sel stem binatang digguna bagi manusia dan jika betul ia diiktiraf negara Eropah seperti UK, di USA atau di Australia barulah saya akan menimbangkan penggunaanya. Ini juga jika sudah betul kesesakan dan betul tiada pilihan lain dan juga jika tidak melanggar hukum syarak. Teknologi terkini amat canggih dan mampu memberikan pelbagai pilihan semulajadi seperti sel stem sendiri, buat masa ini dan juga di masa hadapan.


Sel Stem darah tali pusat dan sum-sum tulang yang diderma oleh sahabat kita atau disimpan masa bayi dilahirkan yang sering diggunakan oleh pakar-pakar perubatan telah pun mendapat perhatian dan penerimaan oleh pihak Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi Hal Ehwal Agama Islam.

Penggunaan Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat juga telah diterima oleh Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia. Semenjak tahun 2002 lagi kerajaan telahpun mengiktiraf kepentingan sel stem darah tali pusat apabila Pusat Darah Negara telah memulakan perkhidmatan bank sel stem darah tali pusatnya di Pusat Darah Negara di Jalan Tun Razak Kuala Lumpur. PDN telah berganding bahu dengan Hospital Besar Kuala Lumpur dimana ibu-ibu yang bersalin di Hospital Besar KL boleh menderma darah tali pusat mereka kepada PDN.


Pada lewat tahun 2007, Menteri Kesihatan pada masa itu telah pun mengumumkan untuk meningkatkan lagi mutu perkhidmatan dan menambahkan saiz simpanan Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat Kerajaan di Pusat Darah Negara dan juga membina bank sel stem darah tali pusat di Sg Petani, kedah. Menteri Kesihatan juga telah berjanji untuk meningkatkan perkhidmatan transplantasi sel stem di hospital-hospital Kerajaan tertentu. Pihak KKM juga telah mengiktiraf kewujudan Bank Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat Swasta apabila telah melesenkan perkhidmatan StemLife Berhad di bawah Akta Perkhidmatan dan Fasiliti Perubatan Swasta 1998.

Terapi sel stem, transplantasi sel stem ataupun pemindahan sel stem telah mula diamalkan di Malaysia lebih dari 15 tahun yang lepas. Pusat perubatan Universiti-Universiti tempatan dan Hospital Kerajaan seperti Hospital Besar Kuala Lumpur sudah lama dan sering mengamalkan prosedur ini. Ianya masih belum kerap dilakukan atau diumumkan pihak media kerana masih ramai gagal mendapat bekalan sel stem.

Perangkaan dari NDMP-USA(Program Pendermaan Sum-Sum Tulang Nasional–USA) bagi tahun 2007 adalah lebih 6,000 pesakit mencari sel stem di bank-bank darah kerajaan USA setiap hari tetapi hanya 648 berjaya mendapatkan sel stem untuk menyelamatkan nyawa mereka. Setiap tahun sekurang-kurangnya 40,000 hingga 50,000 pesakit diseluruh dunia berjaya mendapatkan perkhidmatan pemindahan sel stem bagi penyakit-penyakit barah darah seperti Leukemia dan kepincangan sistem darah seperti Talasemia.

Kini, beberapa Kerajaan Negeri di Negeri-Negeri di bawah Negara USA telah pun menyarankan supaya doktor-doktor menasihati ibu-ibu tentang keggunaan sel stem darah tali pusat dan peluang sekali seumur hidup mereka. Peluang ibu-ibu untuk membuat pilihan samada menderma kepada bank darah Kerajaan untuk keggunaan umum atupun menyimpan di bank darah swasta untuk keggunaan keluarga sendiri.

20 tahun lepas, sel stem darah tali pusat hanya diggunakkan untuk menyelamatkan pesakit-pesakit bagi Satu penyakit. 10 tahun lepas, bilangan penyakit telah meningkat ke lebih kurang 10 penyakit. Kini, anggaran oleh Prof. Dr. Colin McGuckin dari Newcastle University adalah 85 penyakit dan jumlah penyakit akan makin meningkat.

Jadi, terapi sel stem darah tali pusat bayi bukanlah suatu prosedur amalan alternatif tetapi adalah prosedur biasa diamalkan dan diiktiraf pakar-pakar dan kerajaan-kerajaan di seluruh dunia.

Sekian buat masa ini......Wslm..WBK.

Launch of NOVUSSANGUIS

Today marks the launch of a new international research consortium called Novussanguis for cord blood and adult stem cells. Its founding members, Professor Colin McGuckin and the Jerome LeJeune Foundation plan to bring together key researchers to discuss and collaborate on the development of stem cells for clinical application.


The launch is held in Paris today and I'll provide some insights about it later on. Here's a snapshot of the launch program.

UK-Singapore Stem Cell Symposium I

Just to remind the world that the UK isn't behind in science (vis-a-vis the US), the British High Commission probably decided that this exhibition panel was important to remind everyone of the UK's key scientific achievements.

So, if you didn't already know or can't read the words in the picture, here's three that you might have confused as a US invention...

UK GREATS
1953: Discovery of structure of DNA
1978: Birth of first test-tube baby
1985: Discovery of hole in Ozone layer
1990: Invention of World Wide Web (bet you all thought this was from the US!)

Anyway, I mentioned in my last post that I'd tell you a bit about what I learned in the symposium. My apologies for the delayed write up.

The first lecture after lunch was by Professor Tariq Enver, Professor of Stem Cell Biology at Oxford and Director of Stem Cell Research at the MRC's Molecular Haematology Unit in the Weatherall Institute for Molecular Medicine.

Prof. Enver's talk was of interest to me for 2 reasons - inspiring content AND all the key ingredients of a good presentation:

1. Clinical relevance (patient's photos to inspire the right emotional context)
2. Clear introductory statistics for the uninitiated
3. Direct genetic implications of the research
4. A happy conclusion (very important)


WHAT IT WAS ABOUT

The story begins with the introduction of stem cells and their existence in babies' blood. The first question he posed to the audience was whether anyone knew what a "Guthrie card" was (when a baby is born, a small heel prick is performed to obtain the baby's blood, which is stained on a filter paper- known as a Guthrie card- and used to test for inborn metabolic diseases). Prof. Enver suggests that Guthrie cards can be kept for extended periods of time so that if a child is later found to develop certain types of leukemia, it would be possible to identify whether the indications of leukemia were there at birth.


WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

The reason why it is useful to know whether the leukemic cells are present at birth, is because if the cells are present at birth, doctors may choose to treat the patient with different medications as leukemic cells (which behave like stem cells) have different chemo-sensitivities in children. Leukemic cells from birth may require more specific and less intensive drugs than adult patients.


At this point, I feel that it is important to point out the difference between "stem cells" and what is popularly termed "cancer stem cells".

Stem cells are cells which exist in the body and are responsible for continuous maintenance of the body and a controlled replacement of our cells and tissues. The stem cells are known to be "relatively immortal" (ie they live a far longer lifespan than our normal cells, which may die after 7-90days) and are key to our existence and survival of our blood and immune systems etc.

Cancer stem cells however, are like other cancers -cells gone wrong- except that the cell that has gone wrong is the stem cell. Hence, the cancer stem cell does not make other tissues and does not replace cells like it should. It merely makes more of itself, which isn't useful under the normal circumstances.

So, a pertinent question to ask is how do you know a stem cell from a cancer stem cell? Well, Prof Enver believes that there is a lot of talk about "markers" for stem cells, but there is no doubt that these markers have a long way to go in being defined and that the best way to know is to conduct functional studies (ie, to see how the cells really work in real life).


REAL LIFE SCENARIO

A pair of very beautiful twin girls from Bromley a city in Kent, were the subjects of the study. According to the news story, which was reported in January this year, Olivia Murphy developed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) when she was 2 years old, while her twin sister Isabella remained healthy. I'm not exactly sure how the case came to Prof. Enver's attention at the MRC (I wanted to ask him but didn't get a chance) but he and his group ended up researching why one of the twins developed the disease while the other remained healthy. Prof. Enver's team elucidated that both twins carried a gene that pre-disposes them to developing the ALL, but while Isabella only had one hit to her gene, Olivia had two hits which resulted in cancer development (cancer usually results from several mutations to certain genes which allow the cells to grow uncontrollably).

They proved to be the perfect research subjects to understand if genetics had a pivotal role in the stem cells, which could already be susceptible to chance changes after birth. The aim of the research, was to discover where the point of change was that resulted in the cancer, and whether it would be possible to design a method to protect the susceptible genes (prevention) or necessary drugs which would target the cancer cells.

There was a more detailed write up which describes how the twin's parents brought Olivia in for fever which the doctors had then thought was tonisilitis. The parents insisted on a blood test and were given the ALL diagnosis. Fortunately, Olivia's cancer responded well to the chemotherapy and was a success, but not without side effects.

The chemotherapy was so strong that her immune system was damaged and she suffered six attacks of shingles (chicken pox relative) which infected her eye and blinded it. In the course of research, Prof. Enver's team took regular samples of both the girls' blood and the doctors will screen Isabella regularly to monitor any signs of the 'second hit'.


OPTIMISM FOR TARGETING PRE-CANCER CELLS

According to Prof. Enver, as the total cancer relies on less than one per cent of the cancer generating cells to maintain the disease, this offers a unique opportunity to develop better drugs to kill off this one per cent of cells. He was quoted saying that there could be a day where the prevention of leukemia would be possible as the pre-leukemia cells could be eliminated at the source, potentially curing 90% of the cases detected.

However, no medical procedure is risk free and the strong chemotherapy may result in the death of 1-2% of cases treated. And for those couples with identical twins, you might like to know that nine out of ten children who have an identical twin with leukemia do not develop the disease.

That means that Isabella's chances of staying cancer free remains pretty high. :)

StemLife Berhad Pakar Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat dalam Program NONA TV3

Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat, Sel Stem Sum-Sum Tulang, Sel Stem Embrio, Transplantasi Sel Stem, Transplantasi Sum-Sum Tulang, Leukemia, Talasemia, Limfoma, Simpanan Krio, Bank Sel Stem Darah Tali Pusat – Apakah maknanya semua ini?, Apakah kepentingnya? Apakah perbezaan diantara kesemuanya?

Assalamualaikum WBK,

Salam Sejahtera kepada rakan-rakan saya sekelian, ibu-bapa, bakal ibu-bapa, pengunjung/pembaca blog ini.

Pelbagai atikel, rencana, dan pendapat telah dan sentiasa diterbitkan dalam akhbar-akhbar serta majalah-majalah tempatan, antarabangsa serta laman web-laman web seluruh dunia. Jumlahnya memang tidak terkira. Ramai pembaca akan mengalami perasaan buta huruf dan kadang-kadang tersesat dalam kegelapan kerana terlalu banyak pencapaian yang dihebohkan, pendapat yang berbeza, serta kontroversi yang tidak dijelaskan. Banyak atikel-atikel ini juga agak teknikal dan saintifik tanpa mengesyorkan bagaimana teknologi ini dapat memberi manfaat kepada kami di Malaysia buat masa ini mahupun masa hadapan.

Saya akan cuba untuk memberi pendapat saya dari seorang pengamal sains dan akan cuba menterjemahkan atikel-atikel serta isu-isu yang tidak begitu rumit tetapi sentiasa lebih rumit dari yang sebenarnya.

Atikel-atikel yang telah diterbitkan di akhbar-akhbar tempatan serta seluruh dunia akan diteliti. Saya juga akan cuba menterjemahkan mesej-mesej dalam laman web-laman web antarabangsa seperti parentsguide.com dan banyak lagi.

Sebagai permulaan blog ini, saya ingin menjemput anda untuk menonton program NONA dari TV3 pada 23hb Mac 2008:



Nona TV3



Saya harap program ini dapat memberi anda sedikit latarbelakang tentang topik ini dan akan membolehkan Saya meneliti topik-topik yang lebih teknikal pada masa yang akan datang.



Sekian buat masa ini.. Wslm.

Blogging Live from Singapore at the UK-Singapore Stem Cell Symposium

Its been a long time since I sat in a room full of developmental biologists discussing the intricate biochemical pathways -some discovered and debated heatedly- and listened to the fundamental scientific research performed in the UK.

Organized by A*STAR’s Singapore Stem Cell Consortium and the British High Commission at Singapore’s Biopolis, it was another event which made evident Singapore’s financial commitment to establishing a scientific research base through educating its PhD students and motivating local researchers to aspire to international knowledge standards. Since I did spend a few years in a research position in Singapore, it is only right that I promote their efforts in scientific education.

15 scientists (of which 7 were Professors and researchers from their respective departments) from the Universities of Cardiff, Cambridge, UCL, Sheffield and Edinburgh presented a thirty-five minute summary of their work involving stem cell pathways derived from embryonic cell lines and cancer cells.

All the presentations were very technical (as they should be) and involved the investigation of signaling pathways in the cell.

For those who are less scientifically inclined, signaling pathway research, in plain language is finding out how a cell talks to another cell, and how each of the cells respond in body language according to what is said. Imagine that a cell is itself made up of many components (kind of like organs within your body) and these components need to synchronize in order to regulate and make the cell what it is, or what it is to become. In this case, the researchers were trying to find out which factors affect the embryonic stem cells and make them change or “differentiate” into a specialized cell type.

As always in basic scientific research, as long as governments don’t run dry on funding, scientists will always have work to do because we are still a long way off understanding how our cells talk to each other, and most importantly how to control unnecessary conversations which may spark off a chain of unwanted reactions.

You can find the list of speakers and topics here, and for the sake of brevity and also without having to go into too much basic cell biology, I’m going to give you an outline of a few of the talks which I find easier to explain and are relevant to the faithful readers of this blog. I've chosen 4 presentations (Prof. Tariq Enver, Dr. Phil Jones, Dr. James Hui and Prof. Pete Coffey) to share with you and you'll find them in the ensuing entries.

Viacell chose SEPAX

Well, it wouldn't be fair that other automated systems aren't discussed on this blog.

A burning question you must all have is:

What systems are all the other cord blood stem cell companies using?

Well, last year, Viacell announced in a short brief that they were integrating automation into its existing closed processing system using the SEPAX system, designed and manufactured by BioSafe, a Swiss rival of Thermogenesis.

The announcement stated that:

"SEPAX is the only FDA cleared cord blood processing system. Biosafe received FDA clearance in January 2007 and European CE mark approval in 2001."


THE SEPAX MACHINE: WHAT IS IT?

The SEPAX automated processing system is an all-in-one machine which is achieves a similar outcome of stem cell separation through an in-built centrifugal technology. It is approximately 14 Kg in weight (2 year old baby) and reminds me somewhat of a large square automated rice cooker (the newer Sanyo versions, that is).

The separation of stem cells from other blood components is achieved in a central core which spins the blood at high speed and through an optical reader, squeezes the separated components into the various compartments until the process is complete (watch the Quicktime animated demo). SEPAX kits are single use (just like AXP) and come with an option of storage bags, although it is rumoured that the kits will soon only come with a single compartment bag as Thermogenesis is revoking permission for the dual compartment design use (business as usual for public banks but potential consumer's angst in private banks).


THE PROS AND THE CONS

Let's start with the Pros.

1) The machine does away entirely with a centrifuge (no Beckmann or Sorvall)
2) One unit processed at a time
3) Portable
4) Closed system
5) Single disposable kit
6) No requirement for clean room
7) Used and endorsed by major european cord blood banks affiliated with Netcord*

The Cons.

1) Each unit takes approx 40 mins to process
2) One machine processes one unit at one time
(i.e. if you have 1 machines and 10 units, it will take you approx 5+ hours to complete the lot, more machines = more costs)
3) Possible breakdown of light detector (replacement downtime?)
4) Limitation of single compartmented storage systems
5) Technical oversight to ensure that the initial connections are placed correctly
6) Price (the euro has been incredibly expensive since last year)
7) Service when things go wrong (specialized engineer required from Switzerland)

CONSIDERATIONS FROM THE USER'S PERSPECTIVE

Both the AXP and the SEPAX have their pros and cons, and as a potential user, I'm interested in knowing the breakdown rates and other problems banks have in using the system. These are usually not disclosed and the user takes on the risk to find out. Unlike public banks which can afford to discard units which don't turn out right, private stem cell facilities have zero tolerance for error as every single one hurts both the client and the company's balance sheet. Additionally, if the system does not work out for the company for whatever reason, the expensive asset has to be written off (may cost millions) which would be an extremely painful decision to make.However, unlike the AXP system, the SEPAX system has been in use for a while and has not released any public recalls of their product. Hence, the only reason that I can think of for its slow uptake in the rest of the world is that unlike Europe, which promotes public banking largely for blood cancer use, America and the rest of the world is promoting cord blood stem cells for regenerative use- hence the need for a multi-compartmented bag- which is a different concept entirely.


PROFIT & LOSS

Certainly all companies selling the automated systems would stand to profit greatly from entering the cord blood stem cell market. Cord blood stem cell banks can still use generic products on the market, making it relatively affordable to bank as long as the team is technically competent. Now, automated systems will increase general standards of quality for those with less well trained staff (its a matter of practice and the total experience) but it also pushes prices up for the consumer or makes it less profitable for smaller operators. Public banks will also need to campaign for more funds in order to buy new systems and costs of processing will need to be revised from previous proposals.

For now, the small number of options in automated systems commands a forced loyalty as each system only accepts their own product. Many of the stem cell banking services that face the consumer directly will await the day that there is a generic design of standard quality which can be used with any machine, which will be more open to price transparency. Of course, that day may still be far away until either governments have budget surpluses to devote to a huge volume of public banking (when it takes precedence in funding over other healthcare priorities) or legislate to provide a conducive environment for the public to exercise their choice to bank privately should they wish to.

KNOW WHAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR

There is no doubt in my mind that automation is inevitable at some point but let's not forget that this is still version 1 with potential to move to version 2. In the meantime, I'd like to see who and how the AXP system and SEPAX system is used in private hands, and whether it is used according to manufacturer's recommendation** to achieve the desired result.


*Prof. Eliane Gluckman's - the first cord blood stem cell transplanter- facility Eurocord uses the SEPAX system, in direct rivalry with AXP whose public endorser is the New York Cord Blood Bank led by Dr. Pablo Rubenstein who developed cord blood storage procedures in the US.

**Manufacturers recommend certain minimum volumes and maximum volumes to be used with their system. Any deviation of this will not result in the promised outcomes, hence clients who are paying more for the promise of this system but don't meet the criteria will still ultimately be getting manual processing (which works well in a competent facility but not in one where the practice is limited).

The point of these systems is also to provide a "functionally closed" system of processing and there certainly wouldn't be any point in using the automated system if you had to transfer the cells from the final bag into a different storage method (e.g. vials) at the end, which would break it into a "functionally open" one instead.

US Recall News: AXP AutoXpress Cord Blood and Sick Cow Meat

In this week alone, I've received two articles from friends and colleagues informing me on the latest in a string of bad news from the US.

The first article was about Thermogenesis recalling 7,000 of its latest disposable bags custom designed to be used with the automated AXP device, used to process cord blood for stem cell separation.


WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

Thermogenesis apparently failed to perform a quality control procedure on every shipment of the Auto-Xpress units from the time that the product first went on the market in 2006 up until now. The CEO, Willaim Osgood, who joined after the product went on the market, launched the recall after an internal audit found the flaw which was against the federal laws.

The flaw was the failure to perform quality control test for pyrogens (substances which cause fever, including bacterial toxins), which was omitted from the company's operating procedures.

This is one of my concerns in using any new products, as mentioned in my previous blog entry. It's always a real worry when products have problems and the service provider has to explain it to the clients. This is one of the reasons why we're evaluating if moving from a time trusted method to technology 1.0 is something that our clients would accept. Admittedly, cord blood stem cell clients need to be made aware of these concerns too.


WHAT'S BEING DONE ABOUT IT?

The CEO has admitted that "it was a mistake" on Thermogenesis's part and is now working with customers to retroactively test the Auto-XPress units, while the US FDA recommends that any cord blood units already stored be labeled as such so that they will be able to trace any problems if the unit is required for transplant.


According to the article:
There is currently no way to test whether a frozen cord blood sample is contaminated, according to the FDA recall notice. ThermoGenesis is in the process of validating a way to test for contaminants after a sample has been thawed.


While the AutoXpress sales accounts for 25% of Thermogenesis's USD 5.5 million revenue (making it the fastest growing product in the 22 year old company's history), its not the first problem with the bags due to the false-negative results in the first round which delayed shipments. This has depressed the company's share price (NASDAQ:KOOL) down by 6% to USD 1.53.

The AutoXpress bags are manufactured at an outsourced facility in Pennsylvania and the bags are tested at another outsourced facility.

GE Healthcare's Amersham division in Sweden signed an exclusive 15-year distribution deal with Thermogenesis to supply the AutoXpress system worldwide last October.

THE THERMOGENESIS REVENUE STREAM

The bulk of Thermogenesis's AutoXpress sales is currently from Cord Blood Registry (CBR) which collects and processes the majority of cord blood units in the US, though financial arrangements between them and Thermogenesis are not disclosed. The New York Cord Blood Bank also utilizes Thermogenesis's AutoXpress and I wonder how many units were used in public collections since June last year.

Thermogenesis predicts that first year revenue should be about USD 4 million with USD 50 million in total. Based on this number, between CBR, NYCBB and a smattering of other users around the world, approximately 35,000 to 40,000 AutoXpress units would have already been used for cord blood stem cell storage.


WHAT PROMPTED THE 143 MILLION KG BEEF RECALL?

The second news article was the US Beef recall that was sent to me via email... if you havent' already seen the nasty video and would like to see what prompted the recall, you can watch it here.

Bioengineering like the movies: Stem Cell Capturing Gadget

I'd hate to sound as if I was brought up on an entertainment diet of Hollywood movies, but back in the 1970's to 80's there was a real revolution in cinematic production and audience interest that led to a cult following of the science fiction genre.

Film directors often take what's probable in science and stretch them to the limits of our imagination, engaging us to just reflect on not only how far we've come but also how much further we can aspire. This next entry is a tribute to the 1987 movie "Inner Space"*.




In a recent announcement, MIT's bioengineers have designed an implantable device that is capable of capturing pure samples of stem cells from the circulating blood. The device is described as "a length of plastic tubing coated with proteins" which has been experimentally implanted into the bloodstream of rats.

The more accurate medical description of this plastic tubing is known as a "shunt" and the method of implantation would most likely involve the severance and reconnection of a small but high through-flow blood vessel. The proteins -known as selectins- attract and trap specific cells with the right signals on the surface (imagine a sticky mat). The cell capture devices are developed by chemical engineers led by Associate Professor Michael King from the Biomedical Engineering department at the University of Rochester. The technical details will be described in the March edition of the British Journal of Hematology.

(personal note: Mr. B.C. this is for you.)


WHY IS THIS DEVICE IMPORTANT?


The medical impact of this device could weigh in for cancer patients who may need to use autologous (one's own) stem cells for their treatment. These cancer patients are treated with chemotherapy to reduce and eliminate as many of the malignant circulating cancer cells as possible from the bloodstream and bone marrow. The treating doctor will collect the patient's own stem cells during this period of remission when the cancer load is at its lowest.

The patient's own stem cells are stimulated using GCSF (read about it here) and the stem cells are harvested and stored in anticipation of the possibility that the cancer cells will multiply again, requiring another round of chemotherapy which may damage the existing healthy marrow further. The collected stem cells will be infused back to the patient to ensure that the patient has sufficient stem cells to repopulate and replenish the marrow, thereby restoring normal cell levels to the bloodstream.

To address the concern that perhaps cancer cells from the patient might also be collected in the same fraction as the healthy stem cells (impossible to distinguish during harvesting) this device could lend a hand to filter out the cancer cells inside or out of the patient's body, i.e. the cancer cells would travel around the bloodstream until they reach the shunt, where they would then be immobilized.

Note though, that the inventors have conceded that this device will not be able to collect enough stem cells for a transplant, therefore the customary stem cell collection procedures will still need to be performed.


SOME INTERESTING STATISTICS


According the A/Prof. King, the shunt placed in an non-GCSF induced rat in a 2 hour period enabled the capture of 3-4 times the number of usual stem cells obtained in normal circulating bloodstream (approx 1%). Hence the device is thought to attract and specifically retain a significantly higher number of stem cells.

This stem cell number could be significantly higher in patients who have been mobilized.


WHAT ELSE CAN IT DO?


Well, it is a concept device which will be as good as its selectin coating. A/Prof. King has already forecasted the use of the device in trapping specific cancer cells in the body to prevent metastatic spread and layering in proteins which could help steer cell development processes by differentiating them while passing through the shunt. (analogy: think sticky mats for dust, sticky mats for cockroaches, sticky mats for cat fur...all requiring different levels of stickiness for its target)



WHEN CAN I BUY IT?


The entrepreneurial A/Prof. King has already started a company by the name of CellTraffix and the anti-metastasis implants are set for animal trials later this year in collaboration with bioengineers Professor Jeffrey Karp and Robert Langer at Harvard and MIT who will develop stable selectin coatings that will last over months than days. Meanwhile, the CEO of CellTraffix, Tom Fitzgerald has already announced that the company's first product for researchers to capture stem cells or cancer cells for lab experimentation will be marketed by early 2009, with clinical testing of the anti-cancer coatings in 2010.


Read how a chance encounter between a bioengineer and a haematology clinician gave rise to this work and watch the cells being captured here (note that you will need a high speed broadband connection as the video files are rather large).


*Why does this remind me of the movie Inner Space I hear you ask... well the term cell capturing device often conjurs up the image of a little machine (like the exploration submersible the protaganist uses) to grab and hold onto cells in circulation :)

Your OWN or your FAMILY's are always the BEST!

Use your OWN or a SIBLING’S cord blood stem cells and achieve CURE or REMISSION!

Data from a retrospective review of blood disorder patients treated with stem cells from their own cord blood (autologous transplant) or from the cord blood of a sibling (allogeneic-related transplant), presented at the American Society for Blood and Marrow Treatment (ASBMT) annual meeting showed that the majority of the patients were cured or achieved remission from their disease. Moreover, low risk of transplant-related complications with genetically-Related cord blood stem cells was seen.

Dr. Jennifer Willert, senior attending transplant physician and clinical professor at Rady Children's Hospital, University of California - San Diego, and lead author of this study said that “we now have important insights into the ability of transplant physicians to achieve successful outcomes using an individual's own cord blood to treat an environmentally-triggered blood disease or cord blood from a family member to treat certain genetic blood disorders and inherited bone marrow failure syndromes (IBMFs). Furthermore, the use of genetically-related cord blood may reduce the rate of mortality as well as the risk of treatment-related complications".

The analysis examined transplant recipient data from 16 cases of nonmalignant blood disorders. Four of the patients were infused with their own cord blood stem cells to treat aplastic anemia, an acquired condition. Twelve patients were transplanted with cord blood stem cells of a sibling for a range of inherited conditions including, thalassemia, sickle cell anemia, Fanconi anemia and Hurler syndrome. The review showed that two-thirds of the patients (10) are either cured or in remission, including half of the patients treated with their own cord blood. Three patients died of complications unrelated to their cord blood transplant; one patient experienced a relapse; and the outcomes status of two patients is not known. All 16 cord blood collections were processed and cryo-preserved at Cord Blood Registry and were viable for transplant when requested. The average storage time prior to use was about 27 months; however, one child's collection was stored for nine and half years and used to successfully cure that child's aplastic anemia (autologous use)!

Advantages of Genetically-Related Cord Blood Use in Transplantation

According to previously published data, transplantation of genetically-related umbilical cord blood has demonstrated clinical advantages over bone marrow, peripheral blood and unrelated umbilical cord blood. Since cord blood stem cells are immunologically younger than other "adult" stem cell sources, they demonstrate more versatility and flexibility when used in transplantation. Stem cell transplants from genetically-related sources (those from an immediate family member) result in better treatment outcomes than transplants from an unrelated donor and are associated with less frequent and less severe graft-vs.-host disease, a complication that occurs when the donor cells attack different parts of the body. Cord blood is rapidly becoming a preferred stem cell source in transplant therapy (a standard treatment in children's BMT already), with more than 10,000 cord blood transplants performed worldwide to-date.

Dr Willert said: "This study is relevant to any expectant parent considering whether or not to privately bank cord blood stem cells, Individuals who have access to their own cord blood stem cells, as well as a sibling's, have the best chance of treating a blood disorder that develops."

It is really not much to talk about here; the study really speaks for itself! The final comments of one of the authors say it all. Little miracles are hidden in our OWN veins!

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF)

The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) gets into the game of stem cells, ADULT Stem Cells, together with Plureon Corporation, a biotechnology company based in Winston-Salem, N.C. that focuses on developing therapeutic applications of stem cells. The project plans to use Plureon’s technology platform to isolate adult stem cells from a type 1 diabetes patient and re-program them to generate fully functional pancreatic beta-cells. The objective is to return the re-programmed insulin-producing cells back into the patient in an autologous manner, i.e., without the need for immunosuppressive agents normally required for organ transplantation – in this manner, the patient’s own transplanted cells will be capable of glucose-dependent insulin secretion and the restoration of normal blood sugar levels.

Those of you that come here regularly you may remember a previous post about "A unique human blood-derived cell population displaying high potential for producing insulin", meaning that Plureon will be looking closer on to those cells, isolating them and eventually giving them back to the same patient (autologous) to cure the dreaded disease. If JDRF puts half a million dollars over 2 years on this then something is in the making. In the meanwhile, keeping and storing your own PBSC at a young age is probably the way to go in order to fully exploit this new technique when it comes! As an Endocrinologist and a Diabetes specialist I feel that exciting times are about to unfold in front of us. The future is here!