CIRM Alpha Stem Cell Clinics: Collaboratively Addressing Regenerative Medicine Challenges

The hidden influence of communities in collaborative funding of clinical science

Every year the National Institutes of Health allocates $10.7 billion (one-third of its funds) for clinical science research while the pharmaceutical companies spend $52.9 billion (90% of its annual budget). However, we know little about funder collaborations and the impact of collaboratively funded projects. As an initial effort towards this, we examine the co-funding network, where a funder represents a node and an edge signifies collaboration. Our core data include all papers that cite and receive citations by the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, a prominent clinical review journal. We find that 65% of clinical papers have multiple funders and discover communities of funders that are formed by national boundaries and funding objectives. To quantify success in funding, we use a g-index metric that indicates efficiency of funders in supporting clinically relevant research. After controlling for authorship, we find that funders generally achieve higher success when collaborating than when solo-funding. We also find that as a funder, seeking multiple, direct connections with various disconnected funders may be more beneficial than being part of a densely interconnected network of co-funders. The results of this paper indicate that collaborations can potentially accelerate innovation, not only among authors but also funders.

Regulated, reliable, and reputable: Protect patients with uniform standards for stem cell treatments

The promise of cell and gene therapies is being realized as new products emerge to treat diseases once considered intractable. These treatments are emerging amidst reports of patients being injured by unproven "stem cell" interventions. At this juncture, it is vital to be supporting the continued development of promising regenerative medicine products while protecting patients from the risks posed by unproven interventions. Various stakeholders, including governments, patient groups, medical societies, and the media, are committed to this outcome. In this perspective, we draw on our experience gained from partnerships in developing regenerative medicine products to identify technical, organizational, and ethical benchmarks for the responsible delivery of regenerative medicine treatments. These benchmarks may serve as the basis for policy interventions intended to drive the responsible delivery of stem cell and regenerative medicine products. Our particular focus is on a California-based policy, but the suggested benchmarks are broadly applicable to national and international jurisdictions.

Translating Science into the Clinic: The Role of Funding Agencies

CIRM has created a unique funding process and structure aimed to make a meaningful impact on translating science into the clinic. By sharing some of the lessons learned by CIRM, we hope to provide insights into concrete improvements that have made a difference in our efforts.

Mapping and driving the stem cell ecosystem

The stem cell and regenerative medicine arena has become increasingly complicated in recent years with thousands of people involved. There are as many as a dozen or more main groups of stakeholders, who together may be viewed as one ecosystem that is now rapidly evolving. The nature of the ecosystem and its evolution have major implications for not just those within it, but also for medicine and society at large. Here, I describe this ecosystem and its evolution, as well as the negative impacts within the ecosystem of a constellation of hundreds of unproven for-profit clinics and related businesses. Finally, I propose approaches for how to positively influence and drive the future of the global stem cell ecosystem.