California's $3 billion stem cell
research effort today garnered a handsome dollop of favorable
national news coverage– a lengthy piece in Fortune magazine that
spoke of looming stem cell cures and the leading role of the state
stem cell agency.

“The citizens of California have
spoken. If my grandmother and I had the power to get the rest of the
country to follow, we would.”

“To be clear, the earliest stem cell
therapies are almost certainly years from distribution. But so much
progress has been made at venerable research institutions that it now
seems possible to honestly discuss the possibility of a new medical
paradigm emerging within a generation. Working primarily with rodents
in preclinical trials, MDs and Ph.D.s are making the paralyzed walk
and the impotent virile. A stem cell therapy for two types of macular
degeneration recently restored the vision of two women. Once they
were blind. Now they see!

“Some experts assert that AMD could
be eradicated within a decade. Other scientists are heralding a
drug-free fix for HIV/AIDS. Various forms of cancer, Parkinson's,
diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and ALS have already been eradicated
in mice. If such work translates to humans, it will represent the
type of platform advancement that comes along in medicine only once
in a lifetime or two. The effect on the economy would be substantial.
Champions of stem cell research say it would be on the order of the
Internet or even the transistor.”

“The obstacles along the road from
lab rat to human patients are many, of course, but the biggest by far
is money. With the dramatic events in the lab, you might think that a
gold rush would be under way. That's far from true. Long time
horizons, regulatory hurdles, huge R&D costs, public sentiment,
and political headwinds have all scared financiers. Wall Street isn't
interested in financing this particular dream. Most stem cell
companies that have dared go public are trading down 90% or more from
their IPOs. Sand Hill Road is AWOL. The National Venture Capital
Association doesn't even have a category to track stem cell
investments.”

“The $1.7 billion awarded so far has made one obvious mark on the state: a dozen gleaming research institutions. CIRM has proved adept at getting billionaires to donate funds to the cause.”

“Goodness, you're talking to the
wrong guy. Our donation had nothing to do with business.”

“For close to two hours, Grove argues
passionately about how the FDA is enabling predatory offshore
industries by impeding progress and the many reasons financiers want
no part of stem cells. "VCs aren't interested because it's a
shitty business," he says. Big Pharma? Forget it. CIRM? "There
are gleaming fucking buildings everywhere. That wasn't necessary."
When I press him to be constructive, he wearily offers one possible
solution. Rather than courting billionaires to put their names on
buildings, we need a system of targeted philanthropy in which the 99%
can sponsor the individual stem cell lines that matter to them.”

“It was clear during our talk that
Grove wants an economic model for stem cell research and development
to emerge, even if he's not willing to bet money on its happening.
And that puts him in good company.”

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The location of the October meeting of
the governing board of the California stem cell agency has been
changed from Irvine to Burlingame, near San Francisco International
Airport, in an effort to save travel costs.  

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The Sacramento Bee today published an article that reported that $1.5 billion, more than 90 percent of the amount dispensed by the California stem cell agency, has gone to institutions linked to past and present directors of the agency.

The piece was carried on the front page of the newspaper's Sunday Forum section and was written by David Jensen, publisher-editor of the California Stem Cell Report.

The text of the Forum article is below. The Bee also carried a chart listing the top 10 recipient institution. The full text of the comments from Alan Trounson, president of the California stem cell agency,  and two other persons quoted in the article can be found here.

Stem cell cash mostly aids directors' interests

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

One of the lesser known activities of
the California stem cell agency is webinars that put researchers
together with the folks who make the federal decisions about whether
stem cell research will be turned into therapies.

“The FDA very graciously donates
their time to speak on these webinars because they too have pledged
to maintain an active dialogue with the industry and provide
education on their regulatory expectations for product development in
the regenerative medicine field. CIRM science officer Kevin
Whittlesey recently
wrote a paper with Celia Witten of the FDA about the role of the
FDA in reaching out to regenerative medicine community, including
webinars such as these. 

“In that paper they point out that
the communication goes both ways:

“'Appropriate regulation requires a
strong understanding of the latest scientific developments to meet
current and future regulatory needs and challenges.'

“So the FDA benefits by learning from
the other speakers in the webinar – what is the current state of
the technology, what are investigator’s current thoughts on best
practices and the latest research findings, etc. They also learn what
the industry is facing by listening to the questions asked and the
discussion of the challenges during the Q&A sessions. A group of
FDA employees attend each of these CIRM sponsored webinars, and the
wide variety of other workshops and meetings that CIRM hosts
throughout the year.”  

(Editor's note: An earlier version of this item incorrectly identified Cynthia Schaffer as Cynthia Adams.)

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Here is the full text of comments made
by the California stem cell agency, Joe Mathews, co-author of
“California Crack-Up” and Bob Stern, former president of the
Center for Governmental Studies and co-author of the California
Political Reform Act, in connection with the Sept. 23, 2012, article
in The Sacramento Bee headlined “Stem Cell Cash Mostly Aids Directors' Interests.” The comments were abbreviated for
publication in The Bee because of newspaper space constraints.

“To make sure we do the best job of
managing taxpayer's money it's natural that we turn to people who
know most about stem cells and stem cell research. In fact, as the
state's own Little Hoover Commission reported in its analysis of
CIRM: “The fact that CIRM funding has gone largely to prestigious
California universities and research institutes is hardly surprising
and should be expected, given the goals of Proposition 71 and the
considerable expertise resident in these research centers.” But in
recruiting the best minds, we also adopt best practices to ensure
that there is no conflict of interest. Every board member has to
recuse themselves from voting on, or even being part of a discussion
on anything to do with their own institution, or to an institution or
company that they have any connections to. All this is done in
meetings that are open to the public. CIRM’s conflict of interest
rules have been subject to multiple reviews – by the Bureau of
State Audits, the Little Hoover Commission and the Controller – and
there is no evidence that any of CIRM’s funding decisions have been
driven by conflicts of interest. Indeed, CIRM rigorously enforces its
conflict of interest rules at each stage of the funding process to
ensure that all decisions are made on the merits of the proposal for
funding and not as a result of any conflicts of interest. 

“In addition all funding applications
are reviewed by an independent panel of scientists on our Grants
Working Groups, all of whom are out-of-state and meet strict conflict
of interest requirements, and it is their recommendations that help
guide the ICOC (CIRM governing board) on what to fund.”

“California ballot initiatives are a
terrible way to make public policy. And they are even worse as a
method for making scientific policy. 

“It's not merely that
this initiative was drafted in such a way as to benefit the
enterprises of its directors. It's that, under this initiative's own
provisions and the California constitution, it's so hard to change
Proposition 71 and fix what ails CIRM. Effectively, these provisions are
baked in, and nothing short of another vote of people can really make
the change. (Yes, there are provisions, as you know, that permit the
legislature by super-majority to do things, but supermajorities are
effectively out of reach in California). 

“Sadly, initiatives
like Proposition 71 are not uncommon. Many measures are drafted to benefit
the people who would support the measure, or oversee the program
established. This has been very common with bonds. Essentially, to
win the support of various groups whose money and backing is
important to passage of a bond, a sponsor of an initiative bond will
set up rules and include money specifically intended for each group.
This is a form of pay-to-play. Agree to back the initiative and
you're in. And it happens because there's no rule against it and
because passing initiatives in California require difficult,
expensive campaigns. 

“And this sort of thing will continue
to happen. There is no serious push to do anything about this.
Indeed, good government groups and reformers in California have
opposed changes to the initiative process -- because they want to use
the process for their own schemes.”

“It would have been better had
institutions receiving grants not to have had their representatives
on the board awarding grants. On the other hand, we want to have the
most knowledgeable people on the board overseeing this very important
program. The question: Were these people the only qualified ones to
sit on the board?”

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The California stem cell agency faces
no easy task in trying to translate basic research findings into
something that can be used to treat patients and be sold commercially.

Elizabeth Iorns Science Exchange Photo

“One goal of scientific publication
is to share results in enough detail to allow other research teams to
reproduce them and build on them. However, many recent reports have
raised the alarm that a shocking amount of the published literature
in fields ranging from cancer biology to psychology is not
reproducible.”

“First, I think it is important to
accept that there is a crisis affecting preclinical research. Recent
studies estimate that 70% of preclinical research cannot be
reproduced. This is the research that should form the foundation upon
which new discoveries can be made to enhance health, lengthen life,
and reduce the burdens of illness and disability. The
irreproducibility of preclinical research is a significant impediment
to the achievement of these goals. To solve this problem requires
immediate and concrete action. It is not enough to make
recommendations and issue guidelines to researchers. Funders must act
to ensure they fund researchers to produce high quality reproducible
research. One such way to do so, is to reward, or require,
independent validation of results. The reproducibility initiative
provides a mechanism for independent validation, allowing the
identification of high quality reproducible research. It is vital
that funders act now to address this problem, to prevent the wasted
time and money that is currently spent funding non-reproducible
research and to prevent the erosion of public trust and support for
research.”

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

StemCells, Inc., said yesterday that it
will come up with the $40 million needed to match loans from the California
stem cell agency through “existing infrastructure and overhead”
and will not be issuing stocks or warrants to the agency.

“We have incurred significant
operating losses since inception. We expect to incur additional
operating losses over the foreseeable future. We have very limited
liquidity and capital resources and must obtain significant
additional capital and other resources in order to provide funding
for our product development efforts....”

Martin McGlynn StemCells, Inc., Photo

“To be clear, we do not interpret the
diligence requirement as an obligation to raise a specific amount of
money in a particular period of time, and we wish to correct the
misstatements made by some uninformed third parties that the ICOC is
requiring us to raise $20 million in matching funds. In
point of fact, we expect that a substantial amount of our
contribution towards these projects will come from existing
infrastructure and overhead, salaries for our existing personnel, and
other contributions in kind. Furthermore, we will soon be
reviewing the budgets for both projects in detail with CIRM
staff. Because each disease team budget was prepared on a
stand-alone basis, we expect to see significant economies and
efficiencies now that the company has in fact been awarded funding
for both.”

"Under this particular CIRM
program (RFA 10-05), funding for companies will be in the form of
unsecured, non-recourse, interest-bearing, term loans, which will be
forgivable in the event the funded research fails to result in a
commercialized product. On the other hand, should the product be
successfully commercialized, CIRM would earn milestone payments
depending on how successful the product becomes. Because CIRM
shares the downside risk, and could participate handsomely on the
upside, the structure makes the loan about as close to 'equity' as one could, without having to dilute existing shareholders in order
to gain access to significant amounts of capital.  The company
will not issue stock, warrants or other equity to CIRM in connection
with these awards. 

"Of course, we realize that CIRM
prefers that applicants from industry provide evidence of their
ability to secure whatever additional funds may be needed to complete
any CIRM-funded project, in this case the filing of an IND for each
indication. This is stated in the text of RFA 10-05 itself and
was repeated in various comments by CIRM staff during the application
process. When making the second award on September 5, the
ICOC naturally recognized the sizeable commitment it was making
to StemCells, so it instructed CIRM staff to satisfy themselves
of the company's ability to access the capital needed to fund the
project, namely the Alzheimer's program through to the filing of the
IND.”

"Finally, I can confirm that in
June of this year the Company applied for up to $10
million under CIRM's Strategic Partnership I program
(RFA 12-05). Unlike the disease team awards under RFA
10-05, if companies are approved for funding under RFA 12-05, they
may elect to take such funding in the form of a grant, not a
loan. Our application under RFA 12-05 is for a controlled Phase
II clinical trial of HuCNS-SC cells in Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease
(PMD), a rare myelination disorder. StemCells completed a Phase
I study in PMD in February 2012 and in April announced that
all of the patients from that study showed evidence of cell-derived
myelination and three of the four patients in the study showed
measurable gains in motor and/or cognitive function.”

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Looking for a good job at an
enterprise that is on the cutting edge of biotechnology?

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

During the last few months, the $3 billion California stem cell
agency, which is approaching its eight-year anniversary, has chalked up a
number of important firsts.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Fresh from winning $40 million from the
California stem cell agency, StemCells, Inc., is shooting for
another, $10 million award from the state research effort.

“Already looking ahead, StemCells has
set its sights on one more CIRM initiative designed to fund early
stage clinical trials over a four-year period. StemCells has applied
for that grant, worth up to $10 million, to fund a Phase II trial in
PMD(Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease).”

"We're the only company that has
programs going on in all three regions of the central nervous system:
the brain, the spinal cord and the eye."

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Frustrated with politicking,
“arm-twisting,” lobbying and “emotionally charged
presentations,” the governing board of the $3 billion California
stem cell agency today approved short-term changes in its grant
appeal process and ordered up a study to prepare long-term reforms.

"I don't think we can run a board
this way. If we do, it would be chaos." 

“On big money grants, people will be
calling their friends.”

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Directors of the California stem cell agency today approved about $38 million for research into basic biology, including two appeals by researchers on applications initially rejected by reviewers.

The governing board turned down five appeals in the round, which attracted 357 applications in its "pre-app" process, 64 of which were invited to apply. Reviewers approved 25 applications.

The following appeals in the biology round were approved:

• $1.3 million, Deborah Lieu of UC Davis. (Review summary here, appeal here.) 764
• $1.4 million, Yanhong Shi  of the City of Hope. (See review summary here and appeal here.)

The board also approved another application that was rejected by reviewers based on a recommendation by CIRM President Alan Trounson.  It is very unusual for the board to approve rejected applications based on staff recommendations following a review. Trounson described the grant addressed a major bottleneck in stem cell science.

 The California stem cell agency is expected to post a press release shortly with the names of all recipients. The agency usually withholds names of applicants until the the board formally acts.
(An earlier version of this item reported that the board approved $37 million in grants.)

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Dennis Steindler UF Photo

The governing board of the California stem cell agency this morning approved a $6.7 million grant to recruit Dennis Steindler of the University of Florida to the Parkinson's Institute in Sunnyvale, Ca.

The grant was approved immediately following a 45-minute executive session with no further debate. (For more on this, see here, here and here.)

Steindler later told the California Stem Cell Report he would begin work in California as soon as possible.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

"In summary, this is an
application from an established leader in NSC biology to pursue
research focused on disease mechanisms in PD. Strengths of the
proposal include the quality of the PI, the focus of the project on
an interesting hypothesis, and the leadership in basic science that
the candidate would bring to the applicant institution. Weaknesses
included deficiencies in the research plan, the limited track-record
of the PI in PD research and an institutional environment lacking
adequate support for basic science investigations."

"During programmatic discussion some GWG (grant review group) members cited a need to broaden stem cell leadership not only at the
large universities but also at the smaller institutions as well. They
felt that the candidate's recruitment would strengthen the applicant
institution and provide leadership and strength in basic research.
The need for increased research focused on Parkinson's Disease was
also cited by some reviewers. A motion to recommend the application
for funding carried with a majority vote. Because more than 35% of
GWG members opposed the motion, opponents have exercised their right
to have that position reported to the ICOC. The consensus statement
from this group is as follows: 'Despite the facts that the
applicant has many excellent attributes, that Parkinson's disease is
a key area of interest, and that the applicant institution may
deserve additional consideration, our opinion is that the application
clearly falls short in several critical scientific areas that
outweigh the programmatic concerns and do not justify a
recommendation for funding. We believe that the people of California
depend upon us to make recommendations based on our scientific
expertise, for outcomes that are most likely to impact medicine and
the health and treatment of their citizens. We believe that their
money can be better spent.'"

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The governing board of the California stem cell agency has just concluded a 45 minute executive session on a $6.7 million grant to recruit a Florida scientist to the Parkinson's Institute in Sunnyvale, Ca.

It was the longest executive session ever on a recruitment grant, which are usually approved routinely with little serious discussion.

The board is now resuming discussion of the matter(see here and here.)

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The board of the California stem cell agency is discussing a proposal to award $6.7 million to recruit a Florida scientist to the Parkinson's Institute in Sunnyvale, Ca.

The scientist is Dennis Steindler of the University of Florida. The recruitment award received a score of 57, although the scores ranged from 30 to 75.  Jeff Sheehy, a member of the grant review group and CIRM board member, said the score reflected two extremely divergent positions by two reviewers.

The board has awarded four grants in its recruitment round over the past couple of years, but this is the first extended discussion of an award recommended by reviewers. It is also the first to have a representative of the applicant institution speaking publicly for the grant.

CIRM directors have now moved into executive session to discuss matters they prefer to air in private.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The governing board of the California stem cell agency last night rejected appeals by two applicants -- OncoMed Pharmaceuticals of Redwood City and Albert Wong of Stanford -- in the $200 million disease team round.

Both petitions generated little discussion. You can find more on their petitions here and here.

The board also approved changes in its intellectual property and grant administration rules. Both proposals will now enter the state's official administrative law process for more comment and possible change.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

StemCells, Inc., was quick this morning
with a press release about winning a $20 million award last night from the
California stem cell agency.

 "CIRM's approval of two
awards to StemCells illustrates the tremendous promise of
our neural stem cell technology and the high degree of confidence in
the world class team of scientists and clinicians who will be working
to translate this technology into potential treatments and cures for
these devastating diseases." 

 "With the recent spate of late-stage clinical
failures in Alzheimer's disease, it is clear that the field could
benefit from alternative approaches to lessen the huge burden on
families, caregivers and our healthcare system.

"Our recently reported preclinical
data, which showed that our neural stem cells restored memory and
enhanced synaptic function in two animal models relevant to
Alzheimer's disease, shows our approach has promise. We greatly
appreciate the support from CIRM, which should help us accelerate our
efforts to test our HuCNS-SC cells in Alzheimer's disease."

 “We are reiterating our strong
speculative buy with a price target of $4.50 as StemCells Inc.
continues to distinguishing themselves as one of the most advanced
players in the stem cell space.”

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Following a second impassioned pitch by its former chairman, Robert Klein, the governing board of the California stem cell agency approved a $20 million award to a financially strapped biotech firm, StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca.

Approval came on a 7-5 vote with the condition that the company demonstrate it has access to $20 million in matching funds prior to funding.  It is the second $20 million award that the company has received in the disease team round, which now totals $214 million. Another disease team application has been tabled and will not be considered until October.

The current CIRM chairman, J.T. Thomas, a Los Angeles bond financier, asked for the financial proof because he said some concerns were expressed during an executive session that CIRM would now "account for such a large part of the assets of the company." Martin McGlynn, CEO of StemCells, Inc., also told the board that the company might have to drop its Alzheimer's research if it did not receive the CIRM award.

The StemCells, Inc., application was rejected twice by reviewers. The original rejection came before the July meeting at which Klein first appeared (see here and here). The proposal was then sent back for re-review, during which it was rejected again.

However, the 29-member board narrowly approved the application following discussion tonight and following its rejection of another Alzheimer's research proposal from USC. Both applicants produced a number of witnesses, including patients, on behalf of their appeals.

“The reviewers did not feel there was compelling data for neuron migration in the submitted manuscript. This is the manuscript specifically referenced at the ICOC (CIRM governing board) meeting (in July) that prompted the call for additional analysis. The manuscript is not yet accepted, it is 'potentially acceptable' but requires 'major revisions' according to the journal editor note. In addition, however, the studies in this manuscript used mouse NSCs, not the human NSCs proposed for the disease team award....”

A footnote: The CIRM staff said that as a result of two StemCells application, a proposal is being prepared to limit applications to one per entity in later rounds.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The chairs are shifting a tad on the
governing board of the $3 billion California stem cell agency as a
French immigrant is added, a Latino leaves and a veteran patient
advocate is reappointed.

Anne-Marie Duliege Affymax Photo

State Controller John Chiang appointed
Duliege to the CIRM post, saying, 

“Dr. Duliege brings
first-hand knowledge of what is required to take a drug from research
phase through FDA approval.”

David Serrano Sewell CIRM Photo

Serrano Sewell, who has also served on
the CIRM board since its inception, is apparently resigning to accept
an appointment to the board that regulates
California physicians. Apparently – because the stem cell agency
has not confirmed that he is leaving, although this morning it placed a resolution honoring him on the agenda for next week's meeting.  That almost invariably means a board member is departing.

Jeff Sheehy CIRM Photo

Sheehy was reappointed recently by
state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg. Sheehy is a
communications manager at UC San Francisco and a nationally known
HIV/AIDS advocate. He is co-chairman of CIRM's Science Subcommittee
and vice chairman of the grants review group. Sheehy leads the
discussion of grant applications when they come before the full board
in public session.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss