Biomedical engineering students at Johns Hopkins University have announced the successful testing of a practical method for delivering adult stem cells to a patient for the treatment of orthopedic and other types of injuries. Specifically, the undergraduate students have constructed and demonstrated a technique by which adult stem cells are embedded into the surgical thread of sutures that are routinely used in procedures to treat injuries such as ruptured tendons.

The team of students consisted of ten udergraduates who were sponsored by the Maryland-based medical technology company Bioactive Surgical Inc., and who consequently won first place for their design in the recent Design Day 2009 competition, conducted annually by the University’s Department of Biomedical Engineering. The sutures contain autologous adult stem cells, and the students have already conducted preclinical trials of the sutures in animal models, although the ultimate goal is translation of the new technology to human medical therapies.

As described on the University’s website, "In collaboration with orthopedic physicians, the students have begun testing the stem cell-bearing sutures in an animal model, paving the way for possible human trials within about five years."

According to Matt Rubashkin, the student team leader, "Using sutures that carry (autologous adult) stem cells to the injury site would not change the way surgeons repair injury, but we believe the stem cells will significantly speed up and improve the healing process. And because the stem cells will come from the patient, there should be no rejection problems."

The students’ corporate sponsor, Bioactive Surgical, developed the concept and then enlisted the student team to assemble and test the prototype during the year-long Design Team course, which is a requisite course in the Department of Biomedical Engineering. Bioactive Surgical will own the rights to the patent, which are currently pending, and a provisional patent application has also been filed which includes the improvements to the design that were made by the ten members of the Johns Hopkins undergraduate team.

In addition to demonstrating the conceptual validity of the prototype in preclinical animal testing with the assistance of orthopedic veterinarians who conducted the surgical procedures, the undergraduate team also performed a number of other related tasks which included preparing grant applications for additional funding of the technology.

Accordeing to Richard Spedden, CEO of Bioactive Surgical, "The students did a phenomenal job." Representatives of Bioactive Surgical envision a medical procedure for humans in which bone marrow would be withdrawn from the hip of a human patient under general anesthesia, from which mesenchymal stem cells would then be isolated and embedded into the novel suture through the patent-pending proprietary process, which would then be used to stitch together the ruptured tendon or other injured tissue.

In conducting their research, the students found that approximately 46,000 people every year in the U.S. alone undergo surgical repair of an Achilles tendon, which costs approximately $40,000 per surgery and can require a year or more of convalescence. As Matt Rubashkin explains, "After surgery, the recovery process can take up to a year. In about 20% of the cases, the surgery fails and another operation is needed. Anything we can do to speed up the healing and lower the failure rate and the additional medical costs could make a big difference."

According to Dr. Lew Schon, a leading foot and ankle surgeon in the greater Baltimore metroplex, one of the inventors of the technology, and an assistant professor of orthopedic surgery at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, "These students have demonstrated an amazing amount of initiative and leadership in all aspects of this project, including actually producing the suture and designing the ensuing mechanical, cell-based and animal trials." Additionally, he adds, "The students exceeded all expectations. They have probably cut at least a year off of the development time of this technology, and they are definitely advancing the science in this emerging area."

Grant proposals which the students prepared include further applications of the novel suture technology to other joint injuries such as rotator cuffs, and to non-orthopedic applications such as in cardiology and obstetrics.

In addition to Matt Rubashkin, the other undergraduate members of the team were David Attarzadeh, Raghav Badrinath, Kristie Charoen, Stephanie D’Souza, Hayley Osen, Frank Qin, Avik Som, Steven Su and Lawrence Wei.

The University of Guelph announces that Thomas Koch has been awarded a three-year post-doctoral fellowship from the Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation which carries over $1 million in funding. The prestigious award is the largest of its kind ever awarded by the Danish funding agency in a highly competitive process. The funding will be specifically applied to research for the development of adult stem cell therapies in the treatment of cartilage injuries in horses, the results of which are expected to be translatable into human therapies. The award includes collaboration between Dr. Koch and other researchers in Canada, Sweden and at Denmark’s largest orthopedics laboratory.

According to Dr. Koch, who earned his DVM from the University of Copenhagen and who had already been using adult stem cells derived from the umbilical cords of foals for the therapeutic treatment and repair of damaged cartilage in horses, "I’m very grateful for this support, which will allow us to carry out the first controlled studies on live animals using the protocols developed here at Guelph for obtaining stem cells from equine cord blood." Additionally, Dr. Koch explains, "This is also great news for U of G and the Ontario Veterinary College because it recognizes that the horse is the premier animal model for studying the potential of using stem cells to repair cartilage injuries. Equine joints are similar to human joints in some respects such as joint thickness, and horses are also prone to spontaneous athletic injuries. So there is a great deal of interest in our work from the equine industry and in human medical circles as well."

Together Drs. Thomas Koch and Dean Betts of the University of Western Ontario have established a protocol for isolating adult mesenchymal stem cells from equine umbilical cord blood, which they have already differentiated into a number of cell types, most notably chondrocytes, from which cartilage is formed.

As Dr. Koch adds, "The goal is to screen these cell lines and pick the ones that are really good at creating cartilage in the lab and then test their regenerative potential in live horses at OVC (Ontario Veterinary College) and Cornell University. If we can make it work in horses, then there is the potential to apply thee same principles to make it work in people, too."

As previously reported a number of times on this website, veterinary adult stem cell medicine is progressing at a rapid pace throughout the world, especially in the U.S. and the U.K., where companies such as Vet-Stem and VetCell, respectively, have independently pioneered their own proprietary methods for the use of autologous adult stem cells in the treatment of a variety of ailments in a variety of animals, especially horses and dogs. To date, Vet-Stem’s procedure has been used to treat more than 2,000 dogs and 3,000 horses in the U.S., with autologous adult stem cells derived from each animal’s own adipose (fat) tissue. Similarly, VetCell’s procedure has been used to treat approximately 1,700 horses in the U.K. to date, and the company is scheduled to begin clinical trials on humans next year. Both companies report an 80% success rate in their animal therapies, significantly higher than that of conventional veterinary medical approaches which average around a 30% success rate.

Now, with such consistent and dramatic results as those documented by Vet-Stem and VetCell, it is hardly surprising that research into such a promising field is expanding throughout other countries, with the awarding of more than $1 million to fund a major collaborative research project between scientists in Canada, Sweden and Denmark.

(Please see a number of other related news articles on this website, which include but are not limited to that entitled, "Veterinary Stem Cell Therapies Translate into Human Therapies", dated July 14, 2009 and originally reported in the MIT Technology Review).

There’s a new buzz in the beauty industry, and it has to do with stem cells. For anyone who may be worried about wrinkles and all the other external signs of aging, now there’s a new remedy: creams and lotions with the words "stem cells" in their titles. Though they’re expensive and popular, in actuality none of these products are what they claim to be.

Taking advantage of the new stem cell craze, cosmetics companies are advertising anti-aging creams that purport either to be made from stem cells or to stimulate one’s own naturally occurring endogenous stem cells. With all the hype about stem cells in the media, it’s hardly surprising that commerical businesses would try to capitalize upon the trend, which has a virtually unlimited market potential.

Even in England, a relatively small country, anti-aging creams alone constitute more than a $1 billion industry, per year. In larger countries such as the U.S., and throughout Europe, such a market is staggering. That’s why in September of 2009, Lancome will launch its new anti-aging cream, "Absolue Precious Cells", which comes with the claim that it "will help restore the potential of skin stem cells and bring back the skin of youth." A 50 ml jar of the cream will sell for $237. Contrary to the advertised claims, however, the cream does not actually contain any stem cells, nor does it contain any components of stem cells. Under European and U.K. laws, it would be illegal for any cosmetics to contain human tissue or extracts thereof, and similar U.S. laws also exist. In fact, many doctors and scientists point out that it is impossible to incorporate living cells into creams because the cells would rapidly die. According to Dr. Jeanette Jacknin, an American dermatologist who specialises in anti-aging treatments, "Instead companies are creating products with specialized peptides – made from amino acids – and enzymes – proteins that speed up chemical reactions – or plant stem cells, which they claim help to protect the human skin stem cells from damage or stimulate the skin’s own stem cells." Obiously, such ingredients are vastly different from stem cells.

Currently on the market is another so-called "stem cell" cosmetic product, marketed by the U.K. store Harvey Nichols and known as "Amatokin Emulsion", a 30 ml jar of which sells for $220. Advertisements claim that the cream "awakens the body’s own reservoir of stem cells." Also currently available is "Peau Magnifique" by ReVive, which claims to contain patented ingredients that "convert resting adult stem cells to fresh newly minted cells for a firmer, more defined appearance." A month’s supply sells for $1,450. Additionally, Dior offers a "Capture XP" anti-aging cream which "works on skin stem cells to better repair wrinkles". And don’t forget the Emerge Swiss Apple Stem Cell Serum, which assures its buyers that it will "promote the self-renewal capacity of the skin", for only $120 a jar.

Chris Flower, director of the U.K. trade industry organization known as The Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association, says that these products which claim either to contain or to stimulate stem cells have created a "huge potential for confusion". As he describes, "I wasn’t sure what manufacturers meant by the product claims," although it is obvious that the various cosmetics companies merely seem to be "cashing in on the magic allure" of stem cells.

Dr. Bruno Bernard, project director at the Paris research laboratories of L’Oreal, the parent company of Lancome, offers a clarification by stating that their "Absolue" cream contains a new apple extract, not stem cells, which alters the "microenvironment" that surrounds the stem cells that feed the epidermis (the upper layer of the skin) and the dermis (the layer of skin between the epidermis and the subcutaneous tissues), thereby reactivating endogenous stem cells which might be "sluggish" and hence "encouraging the production of new epidermal skin cells, resulting in plumper, younger-looking skin."

Perhaps not everyone wants to have their skin cells encouraged to engage in new production, however. For those who are aware of the possible risks of cancer that some types of stem cells pose through uncontrolled cell growth, Lancome has carefully chosen its wording in order to avoid triggering such fears. The labeling cautiously states that the cream merely "harnesses" stem cell "potential", but does not directly stimulate the growth of new cells. Nevertheless, Lancome also claims that their Absolue cream is the result of 20 years’ research and represents a "decisive breakthrough on stem cells".

Indeed, cosmetics companies pour a hefty portion of their revenue into developing their products, as L’Oreal spends approximately $670 million per year on its laboratory product development. Nevertheless, as Tamara Griffiths, a consultant dermatologist for the British Skin Foundation research charity, explains, even though there may be legitimate scientific research behind a particular product, such as that of Lancome, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the product will reverse the natural process of aging. According to Ms. Griffiths, "The coarse wrinkles and loss of elasticity of the skin, which people commonly associate with an ‘old’ appearance, are due to changes in the collagen and elastic fibres in the dermis. This product will not have any effect on these changes and will not repair damage in the dermis, so the overall impact may be less than consumers’ expectations."

In fact, if a cosmetics product really did have a radical effect upon skin cells, the product would cease to be a cosmetic and would instead fall under the category of a "drug" and would therefore have to be regulated by the same government agencies that set the laws for pharmaceuticals. Most manufacturers of cosmetics, therefore, build definite boundaries and limits into their products.

Fortunately, this means that the products probably won’t hurt anyone. Unfortunately, they might not help anyone either.

As in all other aspects of free market capitalism, "caveat emptor" should be the guiding principle. Especially in the cosmetics industry, appearances can be deceiving.

In 2003, Mark Palmer was paralyzed from the chest down in a car accident. Now 29 years old, he is currently spending a month in Central America where is he is undergoing adult stem cell therapy.

His wife, Celeste, read about the clinic at ICM – the Institute for Cellular Medicine – which boasts an 80% success rate with its patients. Along with a local charity called Positive Impact, friends and family helped Mark and Celeste raise approximately $30,000 for trip, which includes the cost of the treatment itself as well as related travel expenses.

Currently, adult stem cell therapy is not available in the U.S., despite its wide availability overseas, due to a number of legal reasons which include a lethargic and outdated regulatory system in the U.S. which is in urgent need of reform. Among other problems, the U.S. FDA (Food and Drug Agency) has decreed that each person’s own endogenous, naturally occurring adult stem cells are a "drug" and therefore must be regulated according to the same laws to which pharmaceutical companies must conform. In other words, the FDA has outlawed the use of autologous adult stem cell therapies in the U.S., thereby forcing an increasing number of U.S. adult stem cell companies and physicians to take their business overseas. Only in the U.S. are a person’s own cells considered to be a "drug", with the hardly surprising result that people can obtain adult stem cell therapies just about anywhere at all in the world, except in the United States, which is especially ironic since most of the adult stem cell therapies that exist throughout the world were pioneered either in the United States or by U.S. researchers who have been forced to conduct their research outside of the United States.

A prime example of this legislative dead-end involves the adult stem cell company known as Regenerative Sciences, which found itself at the center of this controversy when, in July of 2008, the founding CEO of the company, Dr. Christopher Centeno, received a letter from the FDA stating that the autologous adult mesenchymal stem cells processed in the company’s prioprietary procedure, Regenexx, are considered to be "drugs" since they are intended for therapeutic use. In the letter, the FDA stated that, "These cells are considered drugs because the therapeutic claims shown on your website demonstrate that they are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease in man." The letter concluded by stating, "Please be advised that in order to introduce or deliver for introduction a drug that is also a biological product into interstate commerce, a valid biologics license must be in effect. Such licenses are issued only after a showing of safety and efficacy for the product’s intended use. While in the development stage, such products may be distributed for clinical use in humans only if the sponsor has an investigational new drug (IND) application in effect as specified by FDA regulations… The mesenchymal stem cells utilized in your Regenexx procedure are not the subject of an approved biologics license application (BLA) nor is there an investigational new drug application (IND) in effect. Therefore, your implantation of the mesenchymal stem cells for which a valid license or IND is not in effect appears to violate the Act and the PHS Act and may result in the FDA seeking relief as provided by law."

Regenerative Sciences responded by posting the following notice on their website, which was most recently updated on March 31, 2009: "Last summer we got a letter from the FDA stating that they felt that our Regenexx medical procedure was actually the manufacturing of a new drug. The letter made no sense, as what we’re doing is practicing medicine. We kindly wrote back stating our position and then we didn’t hear back for more than half a year. Recently, the FDA has again asserted that they believe we are manufacturing a drug. They haven’t given any credible rationale for why they believe this, as what we’re doing with adult stem cells is no different than the average fertility clinic that grows embryos in culture for re-implantation. The fertility clinic is not regulated as a drug manufacture facility. The fertility specialists fought that fight and won."

This is a critically important issue, since it illustrates the frustration that many, if not all, adult stem cell scientists in the U.S. feel, as it this stance by the FDA which poses an insurmountable, not to mention entirely illogical, hindrance to the clinical use of adult stem cell therapies in the United States. For anyone who has ever wondered why it is that adult stem cell therapies are available in ordinary clinics in most countries outside of the U.S., but only in a limited number of FDA-approved clinical trials within the U.S., here’s your answer: the FDA considers each person’s own autolgous adult stem cells to be a "drug", and therefore those stem cells are subject to the same multi-year, multi-million-dollar clinical trial process through which all pharmaceutically manufactured drugs must pass before being considered legally marketable within the United States.

A number of grass-roots organizations have been formed, therefore, in order to combat this antiquated stance by the FDA. As the statement on the website of Regenerative Sciences continues: "ASCTA (American Stem Cell Therapy Association) is a physician organization that was formed in opposition to the FDA’s position that adult stem cells are drugs. This group heralds a much bigger movement than what we’re doing here with the Regenexx procedure. We’ve found literally an outcry by patients with chronic diseases that the FDA would stand in their way of getting safe stem cell work performed by their doctors. We agree that there are hundreds of likely unsafe stem cell outfits around the globe injecting God-knows-what into whoever has the will to pay. All the more reason for an organization to step to the forefront to establish physician-run guidelines for safe lab practices and clinical oversight… The pre-clinical research on adult stem cells is much stronger than embryonic stem cells… When I’ve posed the question to numerous doctors and experts in the field, are your own stem cells drugs? They look at me like I’m crazy, and often reply ‘Of course my stem cells aren’t drugs!’ Why would the FDA take the position that your cells are drugs… The ASCTA physician group will be getting out its lab practices guidelines meant to hold new adult stem cell practices to the highest standards to protect patients. Our goal is clear and it’s worth fighting for: Safe Stem Cells Now!"

Likewise, the ASCTA has posted the following statement on their website: "The American Stem Cell Therapy Association (ASCTA) announced today the online publication of its mission statements and charter. The organization was formed in response to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) recent position that the adult stem cells found in everyone’s body are drugs, a position the ASCTA opposes. This physician organization is establishing laboratory guidelines that will allow doctors to bring adult stem cell therapy to their patients more quickly. These guidelines will be similar to those used by fertility specialists in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) labs, where many of the same cell culture techniques are used."

Dr. Centeno, one of the founding members of the ASCTA, is quoted on the ASCTA’s website where he states, "Many patients are dying or suffering daily with incurable diseases or problems that require major surgery. These patients should have access to basic adult stem cell therapy now. ASCTA is establishing guidelines which will allow the safe use of the patient’s own adult stem cells under the supervision of doctors." According to Dr. Frank Falco, another ASCTA founding member who is also quoted on the ASCTA’s website, "The FDA’s position against someone using their own stem cells is taking it too far. We are talking about a person using their own tissue to treat a degenerative disorder or process safely without the use of medications or surgery. Although we agree that oversight and standards are necessary, this should be provided through a physician organization such as ASCTA rather than by a government agency."

Not all stem cells are created equal, of course, and it is vitally important that the FDA make distinctions between embryonic, fetal and adult stem cells. In this regard, the ASCTA website continues, "Adult stem cells are different than embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells are found in the patient’s body in various tissues. In order to obtain enough stem cells for treatment, they often need to be cultured, similar to today’s fertility treatments. Adult stem cells have undergone much more research than embryonic stem cells and therefore are closer to real world treatments. These adult stem cells are taken from the patient’s own body (autologous) and ASCTA believes that they are therefore the safest for use in treating patients." To this Dr. Centeno adds, "While the Obama administration seems to have opened the embryonic stem cell door, their FDA seems to want to slam the adult stem cell door shut."

As also stated on their website, "The ASCTA is a physician group comprised of various medical and surgical specialists whose goal is to bring safe stem cell therapy to patients by establishing laboratory and clinical guidelines." More information is available at www.stemcelldocs.org.

Additionally, in April of 2009 a patients’ movement called "Safe Stem Cells Now!" was formed in response to the FDA’s unfounded position that a person’s own adult stem cells are "drugs" and therefore should be regulated in the same manner. More information about this organization is available at www.safestemcells.org.

As Barbara Hanson, cofounder of www.stemcellpioneers.com, states, "Adult stem cells are cells from our own body. They are very safe. There are no moral or ethical issues. They are safer than taking aspirin and yet the FDA has classified our own stem cells as drugs that require regulation. This means that prolonged investigations, including lengthy clinical trials, will be required for each and every disease and application that adult stem cells could be used for. This could take years and years. It smells of big pharma to me and many others."

Indeed, many people feel that this stance by the FDA is purely politically and economically motivated. At the very least, it is an entirely unscientific stance, and it is merely one example of the numerous ways in which the FDA needs to update its regulations so that these regulations are relevant and applicable to stem cells, which do not fall into any of the previously existing categories for which the FDA has ever had to formulate national law in the past. Such outdated laws are precisely what is driving many of the best and most accomplished adult stem cell physicians and scientists "off-shore", to set up their laboratories and clinics anywhere at all in the world, just as long as it is outside the borders of the United States. In the end, it is the U.S. patient who suffers, since the researchers and clinicians themselves are not stopped but are merely forced to relocate to other countries. Until the FDA is able to recognize the numerous and vast differences between an autologous adult stem cell and a pharmaceutically manufactured drug, it is no wonder that so many American adult stem cell companies and clinics can be found everywhere throughout the world, except in their own home country, the United States.

Hopefully, someday, the FDA might update its rules and regulations to match the pace of scientific discovery, at which time it might be possible for U.S. citizens such as Mark Palmer to receive adult stem cell therapy in their own home towns, in their own country, without having to travel to foreign countries. Meanwhile, however, at least such therapy is available somewhere, at clinics such as ICM, even if only outside of the United States.

(Please see the related news articles on this website, entitled, "Bangor Family Heads to Central America for Adult Stem Cell Therapy", dated July 8, 2009; "Texas Woman Travels to Central America for Adult Stem Cell Treatment", dated June 25, 2009; and "Two U.S. Adult Stem Cell Companies Form Collaboration in Asia", dated May 11, 2009).

In May of this year, Cellular Dynamics International (CDI) announced an exclusive agreement with New York’s Mount Sinai Medical School for the licensing of cardiovascular cells derived from iPS (induced pluripotent stem) cell technology. At that time, representatives of CDI indicated that further licensing agreements would be forthcoming in the near future. Today, CDI issued such a widely anticipated announcement.

The new agreement grants CDI the exclusive in-licensing of a patent portfolio from Dr. Loren Field and Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), within which 2 fundamental concepts are covered, namely, technology for optimizing the differentiation and selection process of cell types, and the specific use of cardiomyocytes in drug testing. The optimization process allows for cell purification with more than 90% purity, which will be applied to a number of cell types although the emphasis will be on cardiomyocytes that are differentiated from pluripotent cells, primarily of iPS (induced pluripotent stem) cell rather than from human embryonic stem cell (hESC) origin.

CDI already boasts a significant patent portfolio, and the new technology will be combined with patents already licensed from WARF (the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation), the technology transfer vehicle of the University of Wisconsin at Madison. The ultimate goal of CDI is to create a pipeline for the large-scale mass production of iPS cells that can be used for drug screening by pharmaceutical companies.

According to Chris Kendrick-Parker, chief commercial officer of the company, "CDI is building an industrial pipeline and automated process enabling us to plug in different cell types and generate large quantities of purified cells. That is the primary requirement for commercial application of these cells as tools in the pharmacology and toxicity testing market. Similar to our recently anounced in-licensed patent portfolio from Mount Sinai School of Medicine, the IUPUI agreement ensures that we have a commercial advantage in this area, providing our customers with the comfort that they are unencumbered when they do business with us."

According to Brad Fravel, business development manager at Indiana University Research and Technology Corporation, "As a leader in the pluripotent stem cell field, CDI is a great licensing partner for IUPUI. We are confident CDI will run with this technology, exploiting it to its fullest potential."

As described on CDI’s website, "Under the licensed technology, pluripotent stem cells are engineered to include a selectable ‘marker’. As the stem cells begin to differentiate into different terminal cell types (e.g., heart, blood, neural cells, etc.), the marker allows researchers to identify and select a particular cell type (e.g., heart cells) and produce a highly purified and functional cell population. … While cardiomyocytes are the company’s entree into the market, the company has programs in place for developing multiple cell types, and the Field patents enable the company to develop them into highly purified populations."

Although the new licensing agreement will allow CDI to sublicense the technology to other companies and institutions, specific financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.

Based in Madison, Wisconsin and co-founded by the renowned embryonic stem cell pioneer Dr. James Thomson along with 3 of his colleagues in 2004, CDI specializes in the development of iPS cells for drug screening. Often referred to as "the father of embryonic stem cell science", James Thomson, VMD, Ph.D., was the first person ever to isolate an embryonic stem cell in the laboratory, first from a nonhuman primate in 1995 and then from a human in 1998. In addition to serving on the Board of Directors and as Chief Scientific Officer of CDI, Dr. Thomson is currently also director of Regenerative Biology at the Morgridge Institute for Research and the John D. MacArthur Professor of Anatomy at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. As described on the website of CDI, Dr. Thomson "is a member of The National Academy of Sciences. His seminal work on stem cell isolation received many awards, including Science Magazine’s ‘Breakthrough of the Year’ in 1999, and he was the cover feature in Time Magazine’s America’s ‘Best in Science and Medicine’ in 2001. In November 2007, Dr. Thomson published another groundbreaking paper describing how differentiated cells can be reprogrammed into a pluripotent state. This isolation of human induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells was listed among the most significant scientific advances of 2007 in Science, Nature, Time, NBC News, USA Today, The Independent, and Wired Magazine, and Dr. Thomson was named one of Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in the World this same year. Dr. Thomson has published over 112 scientific, peer-reviewed papers and has been an inventor on 14 issued patents. Dr. Thomson received his VMD and PhD from the University of Pennsylvania."

Also clearly printed at the top of CDI’s website is the phrase, "iPS cells deliver". Contrary to popular opinion, and despite his distinguished background in embryonic stem cell (ESC) research, Dr. Thomson is no longer focused exclusively on ESCs but instead has turned his attention to iPS cells, of which he is also a co-discoverer and which he often describes as having a more immediate applicability in medicine than ESCs. Additionally, such an applicability is not so much in the development of actual cell-based therapies as it is in the screening of new pharmaceuticals, as clearly indicated by the commercial direction of CDI’s pipeline.

As further described on their website, "Cellular Dynamics is working with scientists worldwide to develop and deploy a number of cell lineages derived from human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) as well as a wide range of screening assays and services to aid pharmaceutical development. Currently CDI provides cardiac toxicity drug testing services, including GLP and non-GLP hERG channel electrophysiological assays as well as action potential and cytotoxicity screens using cardiomyocytes. The company is developing additional cell types from iPS cells, including hematopoietic cells (mast and CD34+ cells, megakaryocytes, and red blood cells), hepatocytes, neural cells, adipocytes, and more."

(Please see the related news article on this website, entitled "Cellular Dynamics and Mount Sinai Sign Licensing Agreement", dated May 29, 2009).