Reflection on the enactment and impact of safety laws for regenerative medicine in Japan.

Japan's Act on the Safety of Regenerative Medicine (ASRM) created an innovative regulatory framework intended to safely promote the clinical development of stem cell-based interventions (SCBIs) while subjecting commercialized unproven SCBIs to greater scrutiny and accountability. This article reviews ASRM's origins, explains its unprecedented scope, and assesses how it envisions the regulation of SCBIs. This analysis is used to highlight three key insights that are pertinent to the current revision of the ASRM: clarifying how the concept of safety should be defined and assessed in research and clinical care settings; revisiting risk criteria for review of SCBIs; and taking stronger measures to support the transition from unproven interventions to evidence-based therapies. Finally, the article reflects on lessons drawn from Japanese experiences in dealing with unproven SCBIs for international endeavors to regulate SCBIs.

[Ethics of stem cell therapy for heart failure]. / Terapia con células madre e insuficiencia cardiaca: aspectos éticos.

Heart failure is one of the first diseases in which stem cells were used for regenerative medicine. Since 2001, many publications have shown that stem cell therapy has the potential to mitigate heart diseases, but there is no solid scientific evidence to fully support its clinical application at present. The future of regenerative medicine requires validated clinical trials with standardized platforms and transdisciplinary efforts to enable the development of safe and effective regenerative therapies to protect patients and to promote the ethical application of this new and highly promising therapy. Doctors and scientists have a responsibility to discuss with patients the current reality of regenerative therapies. They also have a responsibility to discourage the indiscriminate and commercial use of these therapies, which are sometimes based on false hopes, since their inappropriate use can harm vulnerable patients as well as research efforts. Although regenerative medicine may be the medicine of the future and might bring the hope of cure for chronic diseases, it is not yet ready for its wide clinical application.

Terapia con células madre e insuficiencia cardiaca: aspectos éticos / Ethics of stem cell therapy for heart failure

Heart failure is one of the first diseases in which stem cells were used for regenerative medicine. Since 2001, many publications have shown that stem cell therapy has the potential to mitigate heart diseases, but there is no solid scientific evidence to fully support its clinical application at present. The future of regenerative medicine requires validated clinical trials with standardized platforms and transdisciplinary efforts to enable the development of safe and effective regenerative therapies to protect patients and to promote the ethical application of this new and highly promising therapy. Doctors and scientists have a responsibility to discuss with patients the current reality of regenerative therapies. They also have a responsibility to discourage the indiscriminate and commercial use of these therapies, which are sometimes based on false hopes, since their inappropriate use can harm vulnerable patients as well as research efforts. Although regenerative medicine may be the medicine of the future and might bring the hope of cure for chronic diseases, it is not yet ready for its wide clinical application.

Ethics in musculoskeletal regenerative medicine; guidance in choosing the appropriate comparator in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Regenerative Medicine (RM) techniques aimed at the musculoskeletal system are increasingly translated to clinical trials and patient care. This revolutionary era in science raises novel ethical challenges. One of these challenges concerns the appropriate choice of the comparator in (randomized controlled) trials, including the ethically contentious use of sham procedures. To date, only general guidelines regarding the choice of the comparator exist. OBJECTIVE: To provide specific guidelines for clinical trial comparator choice in musculoskeletal RM. METHODS: In this manuscript, we discuss the ethics of comparator selection in RM trials. First, we make a classification of RM interventions according to different health states from disease prevention, return to normal health, postponing RM treatment, supplementing RM treatment, substituting RM treatment, improving RM outcome, and slowing progression. Subsequently, per objective, the accompanying ethical points to consider are evaluated with support from the available literature. RESULTS: a sham procedure is demonstrated to be an ethically acceptable comparator in RM trials with certain objectives, but less appropriate for musculoskeletal RM interventions that aim at preventing disease or substituting a surgical treatment. The latter may be compared to 'standard of care'. CONCLUSION: From a scientific perspective, choosing the correct comparator based on ethical guidelines is a step forward in the success of musculoskeletal RM.

Direct-to-consumer marketing of stem cell interventions by Canadian businesses.

AIM: This study examines marketing claims of Canadian businesses engaged in direct-to-consumer advertising of putative stem cell treatments. METHODS: Internet searches were used to locate Canadian businesses selling stem cell interventions. Company websites were subjected to detailed analysis. RESULTS: In total, 30 Canadian businesses sell stem cell interventions provided at 43 clinics. Autologous stem cells are the most common types of products promoted by such businesses. Company websites minimize risks while making strong claims about benefits of stem cell interventions. DISCUSSION: Businesses' representations could result in patients making health-related decisions informed by marketing claims rather than best available scientific evidence. CONCLUSION: Although there is absent development of new regulations and guidance, the Canadian direct-to-consumer marketplace for stem cell interventions appears poised for expansion.

Regenerative Medicine in Orthopaedics and Trauma: Challenges, Regulation and Ethical Issues.

The ability of stem cells to self-renew and differentiate into cell types of different lineages forms the basis of regenerative medicine, which focuses on repairing or regenerating damaged or diseased tissues. This has a huge potential to revolutionize medicine. It is anticipated that in future, stem cell therapy will be able to restore function in all major organs. Intensive research has been on-going to bring stem cell therapy from bench to bedside as it holds promise of widespread applications in different areas of medicine. This is also applicable to orthopaedics, where stem cell transplantation could benefit complications like spinal cord injury, critical bone defects, cartilage repair or degenerative disc disorders. Stem cell therapy has a potential to change the field of orthopaedics from surgical replacements and reconstructions to a field of regeneration and prevention. This article summarizes advances in stem cell applications in orthopaedics as well as discussing regulation and ethical issues related to the use of stem cells.

Ethical and Safety Issues of Stem Cell-Based Therapy.

Results obtained from completed and on-going clinical studies indicate huge therapeutic potential of stem cell-based therapy in the treatment of degenerative, autoimmune and genetic disorders. However, clinical application of stem cells raises numerous ethical and safety concerns. In this review, we provide an overview of the most important ethical issues in stem cell therapy, as a contribution to the controversial debate about their clinical usage in regenerative and transplantation medicine. We describe ethical challenges regarding human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, emphasizing that ethical dilemma involving the destruction of a human embryo is a major factor that may have limited the development of hESC-based clinical therapies. With previous derivation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) this problem has been overcome, however current perspectives regarding clinical translation of iPSCs still remain. Unlimited differentiation potential of iPSCs which can be used in human reproductive cloning, as a risk for generation of genetically engineered human embryos and human-animal chimeras, is major ethical issue, while undesired differentiation and malignant transformation are major safety issues. Although clinical application of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) has shown beneficial effects in the therapy of autoimmune and chronic inflammatory diseases, the ability to promote tumor growth and metastasis and overestimated therapeutic potential of MSCs still provide concerns for the field of regenerative medicine. This review offers stem cell scientists, clinicians and patient's useful information and could be used as a starting point for more in-depth analysis of ethical and safety issues related to clinical application of stem cells.

Current and emerging global themes in the bioethics of regenerative medicine: the tangled web of stem cell translation.

Probably the most serious problem facing the field of regenerative medicine today is the challenge of effective translation and development of viable stem cell-based therapies. Particular concerns have been raised over the growing market in unproven cell therapies. In this article, I explore recent developments in the stem cell therapy landscape and argue that while the sale of unproven therapies undoubtedly poses ethical concerns, it must be understood as part of a larger problem at the interface between biomedicine, healthcare, publics, policy and the market. Addressing this will require a broader perspective incorporating the shifting relationships between different stakeholder groups, the global politics of research and innovation, and the evolving role of publics and patients with respect to science.

3D bioprint me: a socioethical view of bioprinting human organs and tissues.

In this article, we review the extant social science and ethical literature on three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting. 3D bioprinting has the potential to be a 'game-changer', printing human organs on demand, no longer necessitating the need for living or deceased human donation or animal transplantation. Although the technology is not yet at the level required to bioprint an entire organ, 3D bioprinting may have a variety of other mid-term and short-term benefits that also have positive ethical consequences, for example, creating alternatives to animal testing, filling a therapeutic need for minors and avoiding species boundary crossing. Despite a lack of current socioethical engagement with the consequences of the technology, we outline what we see as some preliminary practical, ethical and regulatory issues that need tackling. These relate to managing public expectations and the continuing reliance on technoscientific solutions to diseases that affect high-income countries. Avoiding prescribing a course of action for the way forward in terms of research agendas, we do briefly outline one possible ethical framework 'Responsible Research Innovation' as an oversight model should 3D bioprinting promises are ever realised. 3D bioprinting has a lot to offer in the course of time should it move beyond a conceptual therapy, but is an area that requires ethical oversight and regulation and debate, in the here and now. The purpose of this article is to begin that discussion.

Clinical potentials of human pluripotent stem cells.

Aging, injuries, and diseases can be considered as the result of malfunctioning or damaged cells. Regenerative medicine aims to restore tissue homeostasis by repairing or replacing cells, tissues, or damaged organs, by linking and combining different disciplines including engineering, technology, biology, and medicine. To pursue these goals, the discipline is taking advantage of pluripotent stem cells (PSCs), a peculiar type of cell possessing the ability to differentiate into every cell type of the body. Human PSCs can be isolated from the blastocysts and maintained in culture indefinitely, giving rise to the so-called embryonic stem cells (ESCs). However, since 2006, it is possible to restore in an adult cell a pluripotent ESC-like condition by forcing the expression of four transcription factors with the rejuvenating reprogramming technology invented by Yamanaka. Then the two types of PSC can be differentiated, using standardized protocols, towards the cell type necessary for the regeneration. Although the use of these derivatives for therapeutic transplantation is still in the preliminary phase of safety and efficacy studies, a lot of efforts are presently taking place to discover the biological mechanisms underlying genetic pathologies, by differentiating induced PSCs derived from patients, and new therapies by challenging PSC-derived cells in drug screening.

Unproven stem cell-based interventions and achieving a compromise policy among the multiple stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: In 2004, patient advocate groups were major players in helping pass and implement significant public policy and funding initiatives in stem cells and regenerative medicine. In the following years, advocates were also actively engaged in Washington DC, encouraging policy makers to broaden embryonic stem cell research funding, which was ultimately passed after President Barack Obama came into office. Many advocates did this because they were told stem cell research would lead to cures. After waiting more than 10 years, many of these same patients are now approaching clinics around the world offering experimental stem cell-based interventions instead of waiting for scientists in the US to complete clinical trials. How did the same groups who were once (and often still are) the strongest supporters of stem cell research become stem cell tourists? And how can scientists, clinicians, and regulators work to bring stem cell patients back home to the US and into the clinical trial process? DISCUSSION: In this paper, we argue that the continued marketing and use of experimental stem cell-based interventions is problematic and unsustainable. Central problems include the lack of patient protection, US liability standards, regulation of clinical sites, and clinician licensing. These interventions have insufficient evidence of safety and efficacy; patients may be wasting money and time, and they may be forgoing other opportunities for an intervention that has not been shown to be safe and effective. Current practices do not contribute to scientific progress because the data from the procedures are unsuitable for follow-up research to measure outcomes. In addition, there is no assurance for patients that they are receiving the interventions promised or of what dosage they are receiving. Furthermore, there is inconsistent or non-existent follow-up care. Public policy should be developed to correct the current situation. CONCLUSION: The current landscape of stem cell tourism should prompt a re-evaluation of current approaches to study cell-based interventions with respect to the design, initiation, and conduct of US clinical trials. Stakeholders, including scientists, clinicians, regulators and patient advocates, need to work together to find a compromise to keep patients in the US and within the clinical trial process. Using HIV/AIDS and breast cancer advocate cases as examples, we identify key priorities and goals for this policy effort.

Ethics and policy issues for stem cell research and pulmonary medicine.

Stem cell research and related initiatives in regenerative medicine, cell-based therapy, and tissue engineering have generated considerable scientific and public interest. Researchers are applying stem cell technologies to chest medicine in a variety of ways: using stem cells as models for drug discovery, testing stem cell-based therapies for conditions as diverse as COPD and cystic fibrosis, and producing functional lung and tracheal tissue for physiologic modeling and potential transplantation. Although significant scientific obstacles remain, it is likely that stem cell-based regenerative medicine will have a significant clinical impact in chest medicine. However, stem cell research has also generated substantial controversy, posing a variety of ethical and regulatory challenges for research and clinical practice. Some of the most prominent ethical questions related to the use of stem cell technologies in chest medicine include (1) implications for donors, (2) scientific prerequisites for clinical testing and use, (3) stem cell tourism, (4) innovation and clinical use of emerging stem cell-based interventions, (5) responsible translation of stem cell-based therapies to clinical use, and (6) appropriate and equitable access to emerging therapies. Having a sense of these issues should help to put emerging scientific advances into appropriate context and to ensure the responsible clinical translation of promising therapeutics.

The ethics of stem cells revisited.

Stem cells constitute one of the most promising tools for regenerative medicine. Thus, it seems morally compelling to explore all the sources that might provide us with them. However, some of these sources, such as somatic cell nuclear transfer, embryo destruction, or even induced pluripotency obtained by reprogramming have raised deep ethical issues. The aim of this paper is to reflect on the stem cell ethical debate at the current moment through an analysis of the academic literature. It will also provide an analysis of the ethical implications of the most relevant scientific advances that have happened in recent months or those which seem about to merge.

Creating human organs in chimaera pigs: an ethical source of immunocompatible organs?

New techniques in regenerative medicine may soon enable the creation of human organs inside animals using induced pluripotent stem cells. This technology has the potential to solve the organ scarcity problem by providing a limitless source of personalised organs for transplantation, but also raises several ethical issues, particularly concerning animal welfare, the 'human features' problem and human dignity.

Consensus of clinical neurorestorative progress in patients with complete chronic spinal cord injury.

Currently, there is a lack of effective therapeutic methods to restore neurological function for chronic complete spinal cord injury (SCI) by conventional treatment. Neurorestorative strategies with positive preclinical results have been translated to the clinic, and some patients have gotten benefits and their quality of life has improved. These strategies include cell therapy, neurostimulation or neuromodulation, neuroprosthesis, neurotization or nerve bridging, and neurorehabilitation. The aim of this consensus by 31 experts from 20 countries is to show the objective evidence of clinical neurorestoration for chronic complete SCI by the mentioned neurorestorative strategies. Complete chronic SCI patients are no longer told, "nothing can be done." The clinical translation of more effective preclinical neurorestorative strategies should be encouraged as fast as possible in order to benefit patients with incurable CNS diseases. This manuscript is published as part of the International Association of Neurorestoratology (IANR) special issue of Cell Transplantation.