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

(Editor's note: The assertion in this item that 15 applications by ACT were rejected by the California stem cell agency is incorrect, according to the venture capitalist who made the statement. He retracted it on the afternoon of April 12. His explanation can be found here. )


IRVINE, Ca. --The only firm in the nation conducting an ongoing hESC clinical trial has been rejected 15 times for funding by California's $3 billion stem cell agency.

The figure was reported yesterday at a hearing by the blue-ribbon Institute of Medicine panel looking into the performance of the stem cell agency, which has been sharply criticized in recent years for its paucity of industry funding.

Gregory Bonfiglio, managing partner in Proteus Regenerative Medicine, a stem cell venture capital firm in Portola Valley, Ca., disclosed the grant attempts by Advanced Cell Technology, whose nominal headquarters are in Santa Monica, Ca. Bonfiglio indicated that it was a high profile example of how CIRM is not taking the necessary steps to fulfill its goal of developing therapies that actually reach the clinic.

He noted that ACT received national attention in January when it posted favorable findings for its clinical trial at UCLA dealing with blindness but that the firm was still unable to win a CIRM grant over the last several years.

ACT had moved much of its operations to California in the wake of passage of Proposition 71, the measure that created the state's stem cell research effort in 2004. It has since re-centered its operations in Massachusetts.

The California Stem Cell Report has queried ACT on its grant efforts and will carry its response verbatim when it is received.

Another firm, which cannot be identified, said privately yesterday that it was rejected 14 times.

According to our calculations based on figures this morning on the CIRM web site, businesses have received only $54.3 million in grants and loans during the last seven years, 4 percent of the $1.3 billion awarded. However, the CIRM list slightly understates the industry total. At least two other firms are sharing in two $20 million grants involving academic institutions, but are not noted on the list.

Yesterday's IOM meeting was the second and final California public session for the CIRM inquiry. Most of the day was occupied by a variety of critiques of the organization. The panel has already heard extensively from the agency itself and beneficiaries of its grants. The IOM report is expected in November.

Harold Shapiro, chairman of the panel and former president of Princeton University, described yesterday afternoon's panel involving stem cell business executives as "one of the more interesting" of the day.

One of the speakers was Michael West, CEO of Biotime in Alameda, which has received $4.7 million from CIRM. West, the founder of Geron, was also head of ACT when it moved it to California. He said CIRM had several "blind spots," including misconceptions about how products are made. For example, West said, CIRM's performance indicates that it does not fully understand that development leads directly to cures -- not research.

West said that if the high tech industry had to rely on CIRM-type funding years ago, laptops and iPads would still be in the lab instead of the marketplace.

The business industry representatives said that creation of CIRM has been beneficial for stem cell  research, but cited a number of deficiencies in connection with industry applications.

In some ways, their comments echoed past remarks by several CIRM board members, who have expressed concern about the lack of funding for industry, as well as those of the agency's own external review panel. One issue raised by those CIRM directors has been the lack of grant reviewers with product development and industry expertise.

At yesterday's hearing, Gabriel Nistor, vice president of research and development at California Stem Cell in Irvine, said, it is "exceedingly rare to find academics (grant reviewers) that understand the complexities" involving industry. Nistor said his firm has applied for a "few" CIRM grants. None have been awarded.

Also speaking was Allan Robins, CEO of Viacyte in San Diego, who said his firm has done well with CIRM funding. It has received $26.2 million, nearly all of it in the form of a loan. But he said companies develop products – not academia.

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

IRVINE, Ca. – The $3 billion California stem cell agency was praised this week for making progress in accountability and transparency during the last year.

The comments came from a representative of California state Controlller John Chiang, the state's top fiscal officer and who also chairs the only state entity specifically charged with financial oversight of the stem cell agency and its board.

Ruth Holton-Hodson, deputy state controller, told the blue-ribbon Institute of Medicine panel examining the performance of the stem cell agency that the controller's office "would like to acknowledge the progress the new leadership has made in the last year towards making CIRM a far more transparent and accountable agency than it has been in the past."

CIRM has a new chairman, J.T. Thomas, a Los Angeles financier, who has been in place since the beginning of last July. He succeeded Bob Klein, who was the initial agency chairman and who took office in 2004.

In her testimony at the IOM hearing here on Tuesday, Holton-Hodson discussed previous problems that CIRM had with the transparency of its budget. She said,

"We are very pleased that CIRM’s new leadership recognized this as a problem and quickly adopted a much more transparent budget format which is broken down by function. To make CIRM’s expenditures as transparent as possible, we have also recommended that they post the annual budget on the website. Again, we’re pleased to say that the new leadership has agreed to do this."

She also said,

"At our most recent meeting (of the Citizens Financial Accountability and Oversight Committee), we also recommended that CIRM post all of its private donations and they have agreed to do this."

Holton-Hodson criticized the dual executive arrangement at CIRM that is written into law by Proposition 71. She said,

"It is difficult to uphold the appearance of accountability and objectivity when the board chair has direct line authority over some CIRM staff positions. In essence under the current model, the chair is responsible for evaluating and approving some of the work of the chair.

"While this issue is still outstanding, it is important to acknowledge that the current leadership has made significant progress in more clearly delineating the responsibilities of the chair and the president."

Here is the full text of Holton-Hodson's remarks.Statement from California state controller's office to IOM-CIRM panel April 10, 2012

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

Chuck Winner is a name that doesn't surface often in connection with California's $3 billion stem cell research effort.

Chuck Winner (left) at USC in 2006 USC Photo

In fact, he rarely appears in the news. Winner's name, however, did surface yesterday when Gov. Jerry Brown appointed him to the state's horse racing board. Most of the stories about the appointment were in horse racing publications. But none, including The Sacramento Bee's, mentioned the Prop. 71 campaign managed by his firm, Winner & Mandabach Campaigns of Santa Monica, Ca.

Nonetheless, he and his firm were the key to winning approval of the 2004 ballot measure that created the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, an enterprise that is unprecedented in state or national history.

The firm's $35 million campaign for Prop. 71 attracted 59 percent of the vote. That same year, the firm also successfully managed four other ballot measures in the Golden State. Its lifetime average is remarkable. The firm's web site says it has won 90 percent of the 150 ballot measure campaigns it has run throughout the country.

Winner-Mandabach has this to say about how it pulled off the Prop. 71 campaign:

"Surveys (in 2003-04) showed that most voters supported the basic concept of expanding stem cell research. However, because of the state’s serious budget and debt problems, it was also clear that passing such a huge bond measure for any purpose would be a major challenge.

"The campaign overseen by Winner & Mandabach to overcome those odds involved a year-long coalition building effort that ultimately recruited over 40 Nobel Prize winning scientists and more than 100 patient groups, disease foundations and business groups – the largest, most diverse coalition of its kind ever formed to support a state ballot measure. The supporting groups helped mount an intense grassroots outreach and activation effort to their members, who numbered in the millions."

Winner-Mandabach continued,

"The TV advertising developed by the firm featured award-winning scientists, patients and their families, and highly-respected patient advocates like Michael J. Fox and the late Christopher Reeve. The ads focused on the potential for cures that could save millions of lives. Details of the initiative and economic issues were addressed through in-depth mail pieces and earned media efforts that included the release of an economic study showing that stem cell cures would help reduce the state’s skyrocketing health care costs. Prior to the implementation of the paid media campaign in late-September, polling showed Proposition 71 below the 50% threshold. But after an intense 6-week advertising, earned media and grassroots campaign, Prop. 71 steadily gained support, even in the face of final attacks by conservative groups and activists like Mel Gibson, and attacks from the left by some anti-biotech groups. Because of its precedent-setting nature, the Prop. 71 campaign became the most watched ballot measure campaign in the nation and generated worldwide press attention. On election day, it was approved overwhelmingly by a vote of 59% to 41%."

The key to success on any ballot measure is a firm like Winner-Mandabach, although high profile individuals – in the case of Prop. 71, Robert Klein, who became the first chairman of the stem cell agency – are often given complete credit. Top notch campaign firms have a keen understanding of voters, appropriate political timing and effective PR and TV advertising campaigns. Without Winner-Mandabach – or a firm with the same skillset – the California stem cell agency would not exist.

Chuck Winner, however, does not have an uncritical view of the ballot initiative process, which has resulted in much expensive mischief in California. He told a USC audience in 2006,

"It’s abused time and again. My opinion is that when you circumvent the legislative process or representative democracy to solve a problem, you can take it to an extreme and that extreme becomes, in some ways, worse than the problem you were trying to solve in the first place. Single-issue up or down initiative votes are very often not the best way to govern."

As for the horse racing business, Winner, a Beverly Hills resident, has been involved in horse racing since 1986. His partner, Paul Mandabach, is also involved in the sport of kings. Their firm has not disclosed their record at the track.

(Click here to see two powerful ads developed for the 2004 campaign, including the famous Christopher Reeve spot.)

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

A blue-ribbon Institute of Medicine panel is broadening its reach in its examination of the performance of the $3 billion California stem cell agency.

The group will hold a one-day public hearing next Tuesday at UC Irvine that will include independent perspectives along with comments from biotech firms, some of which have been unhappy with the paucity of CIRM funding for industry. The IOM has additionally expanded its efforts to generate responses to its questionnaires to include rejected applicants and the general public.

The hearing is the last public session scheduled in California and will be audiocast on the Internet. The IOM's fourth and final public session is scheduled for some time later this year with release of the full report in November. The stem cell agency is paying the IOM $700,000 to conduct the study. The public sessions so far have been taken up with testimony from recipients of CIRM largesse or from employees or directors of the agency.

The list of independent witnesses next week includes Stuart Drown, executive director of the state's good government agency, the Little Hoover Commission, which conducted a lengthy study of the stem cell agency. Also on tap are others including:

• Ruth Holton-Hodson, California deputy state controller, and who deals with CIRM issues for the state controller, who chairs the only state body officially charged with overseeing the agency.
• Marcy Darnovsky, associate executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society in Berkeley, an organization that has been critical of CIRM
• David Jensen, publisher of the California Stem Cell Report, which has posted more than 3,000 items on the agency since 2004 in addition to a number of freelance articles. 

The IOM has widened its efforts to secure comments from persons who cannot appear at its hearings. At the IOM's request, CIRM sent emails about the questionnaires to the 4,039 persons who have asked the agency to be notified about its RFAs. Recipients were asked by CIRM to complete the IOM surveys.

The online forms are due by April 23. Here are links in the various categories:  general public, CIRM investigators,CIRM industry partners, leadership from CIRM-funded institutions, technology transfer professionals,CIRM's international collaborators, members of the Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee (the CIRM governing board), and investigators not funded by CIRM.

The IOM said access to the Internet audiocast of the meeting can be gained on April 10 through this web page.

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

The California Stem Cell Report is concluding its coverage today of the meeting of the governing board of the directors meeting of the California stem cell agency.

No decisions were made on the general direction of future funding -- basic research and training vs development of therapies. Some of the directors differed sharply on the issues, however. We will have more on this subject later.

Here are slides from the presentation on the progress report on the agency's $230 million disease team round. One $19 million grant was cancelled.
Progress Report: Disease Team Grants by California Stem Cell Agency

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

The California stem cell agency has issued a statement from its president, Alan Trounson, concerning the cancellation of a Vatican stem cell conference at which Trounson was scheduled to speak.

According to the Catholic News Agency, the meeting was terminated because of the scheduled appearances of researchers such as Trounson, who support hESC research. The Catholic church opposes such research.

The news agency last week quoted one Vatican insider as saying the conference had generated a scandal within the higher echelons of the church. However, the Vatican later claimed it was cancelling the meeting because of "organizational, logistical and economic factors."

Trounson's statement said,

"I am disappointed that the decision was made to cancel the conference because it offered the opportunity for a constructive dialogue on all types of stem cell research.

"Open dialogue can enhance the field as a whole and accelerate our efforts to provide new therapies for patients in need."

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

SAN FRANCISCO – A proposed $17.9 million operational budget for the California stem cell agency has cleared a key hurdle despite objections concerning the addition of another attorney to its $2.4 million annual legal effort.

The spending plan was approved yesterday by the CIRM directors' Finance Subcommittee on an 8-0 vote. The proposal is 7.2 percent higher than spending for the current fiscal year, which ends in June. The agency by law operates with a stringent budget cap of 6 percent of its bond funding.

Most of the budget goes for salaries at the agency, which has slightly more than 50 employees. The agency spends $8.4 million annually administering its 400-plus grants and developing new grant programs.

The proposal to add another lawyer to its staff drew fire from CIRM Co-vice chairman Art Torres. He asked why the agency wanted to spend more money for "a lawyer we don't need."

CIRM President Alan Trounson and CIRM General Counsel Elona Baum defended the plan, saying another lawyer was needed to deal with intellectual property and research commercialization issues. They said that grantee institutions and businesses are not dealing with the legal ramifications in a satisfactory manner.

Trounson said the agency would be "at risk" if it did not have control of the legal issues.

Torres brought up a memo on the subject, which he said did not justify the addition of a lawyer. Other directors said they had not seen the memo and asked for copies. The California Stem Cell Report has also asked for a copy.

Michael Goldberg, a venture capitalist and chair of the Finance Subcommittee, asked CIRM staff and a handful of directors to resolve the matter between now and the end of May, when the budget is expected to be approved by the full board.

Currently CIRM has five attorneys on staff, not including directors who are lawyers. The budget for the internal legal operation is $1.3 million annually. The rest of the $2.4 million goes for contracted services, including the firm of Remcho, Johansen & Purcell of San Leandro, Ca., a highly regarded political and governmentally oriented law firm that is budgeted for as much as $650,000 for the coming year, down from $695,000 this year. Another attorney is also on contract for $250,000, down from $325,000 this year.

CIRM budget documents projected savings in $190,000 in legal costs from the current year that could be used to help hire another attorney. The total legal costs for next year are budgeted at $2.44 million, compared to $2.39 million for the current year.

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

CARLSBAD, Calif. (May 05, 2011) - At the annual shareholders meeting of International Stem Cell Corporation (OTCBB:ISCO) on May 3, 2011, Kenneth Aldrich, Chairman and co-founder of ISCO conducted a presentation to shareholders that included the following remarks:

Good morning to all our shareholders and friends of ISCO. Let me make just a few comments about where we are and the progress we have made over the last year. All of the developments and news I will discuss were announced in the past 12 months, but with the passage of time it is easy to lose track of how much progress ISCO has actually made. I won’t mention everything—we don’t have that much time, but some highlights will, I hope, help put these recent achievements into perspective.

A little less than a year ago, in June 2010, our first parthenogenetic patent application was formally approved by the US Patent Office. More applications are pending, but this approval established ISCO as the lawful owner of the rights to produce human stem cell lines through parthenogenesis. That is a platform on which we expect to build for a long time.

Also in June we eliminated all of our outstanding corporate debt and we remain debt free.

In July we announced the signing of a distribution contract with Sristi Biosciences, a major seller of research products in India, which continues the international commercial expansion of our Lifeline Cell Technology^® brand.

In October we announced the first steps toward the formation of a major funded collaboration in India with Insight Bioventures India Private Limited (IBVI) to develop treatments for corneal damage and retinal disease. Planning for that work is ongoing and the Executive Director of Insight Bioventures has flown in from India to meet with us today, so we remain very optimistic about this project.

In November, we presented the results of scientific studies demonstrating a new and better method for differentiating our parthenogenetic cells into liver cells, a critical step toward using them to treat liver disease.

In November and December we launched the first test marketing runs of our new skin crème products, first to our own shareholders and friends, then to a select mailing list developed by our marketing partner, John Mauldin. Those resulted in sales of over 7,000 bottles of our new products.

In December we established $25 million financing commitment that provides access to capital on an as-needed basis over a three year period, but never requires the sale of stock unless we think it will benefit the company and its shareholders. This agreement provides us a high degree of flexibility in meeting our financial needs.

In January 2011 we announced publication of peer-reviewed studies further validating the functional equivalency of our parthenogenetic stem cells with embryonic stem cells. These studies confirm our ability to benefit from much of the millions of dollars of research on embryonic stem cells over the last decade. In short, we have a running start in the search for cures.

Throughout the year we have made steady progress in development of liver cells and liver precursor cells, culminating in an announcement in April of this year that we had successfully completed the first in a series of pre-clinical tests of parthenogenetically derived liver cells.

Last, but by no means least, we have received the necessary approvals for creating new Parthenogenetic Stem Cell Lines in the United States. These will be clinical grade lines suitable for human trials, and are the first major step in this country to begin building a “Bank” of stem cells enabling the matching of immune systems of millions of people worldwide, with the potential to eliminate or reduce the harmful effects of immune suppressing drugs that would normally have to be used with stem cell transplant procedures.

All of these news stories and more are available on our website along with presentations we have made recently to investors in the US and Europe. On behalf of the Board of Directors and everyone at ISCO, I thank you for your support.

About International Stem Cell Corporation

International Stem Cell Corporation is focused on the therapeutic applications of human parthenogenetic stem cells and the development and commercialization of cell-based research and cosmetic products. ISCO's core technology, parthenogenesis, results in the creation of pluripotent human stem cells from unfertilized oocytes (eggs). hpSCs avoid ethical issues associated with the use or destruction of viable human embryos. ISCO scientists have created the first parthenogenic, homozygous stem cell line that can be a source of therapeutic cells with minimal immune rejection after transplantation into hundreds of millions of individuals of differing genders, ages and racial background. This offers the potential to create the first true stem cell bank, UniStemCell™. ISCO also produces and markets specialized cells and growth media for therapeutic research worldwide through its subsidiary Lifeline Cell Technology, and cell-based skin care products through its subsidiary Lifeline Skin Care. More information is available at http://www.internationalstemcell.com.

To subscribe to receive ongoing corporate communications, please click on the following link: http://www.b2i.us/irpass.asp?BzID=1468&to=ea&s=0.

Forward-looking Statements

Statements pertaining to anticipated developments, product introduction plans and related support, the potential benefits of products, and other opportunities for the company and its subsidiaries, along with other statements about the future expectations, beliefs, goals, plans, or prospects expressed by management constitute forward-looking statements. Any statements that are not historical fact (including, but not limited to statements that contain words such as "will," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "expects," "estimates,") should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, risks inherent in the development and/or commercialization of potential products and the management of collaborations, regulatory approvals, need and ability to obtain future capital, application of capital resources among competing uses, and maintenance of intellectual property rights. Actual results may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements and as such should be evaluated together with the many uncertainties that affect the company's business, particularly those mentioned in the cautionary statements found in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The company disclaims any intent or obligation to update forward-looking statements.

Contact:

International Stem Cell Corporation

Kenneth C Aldrich, Chairman

760-940-6383

kaldrich@intlstemcell.comn>

# # #

International Stem Cell Corporation (OTCBB:ISCO) announced today that Kenneth Aldrich, Chairman of the Board, and Dr. Ruslan Semechkin, President and CEO of Lifeline Skin Care^® (http://www.lifelineskincare.com), a subsidiary of ISCO, which develops and markets stem cell based anti-aging skincare products, will be addressing recent advances in stem cell technology at the HBA Global Expo being held June 28 – 30 at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in New York City. This annual conference attracts more than 15,000 beauty industry professionals and is one of the largest events in the cosmetics and personal care industry. Product development and marketing executives attend the annual HBA conference for education and information on the latest trends in ingredients and raw materials.


Mr. Aldrich is participating in the "Executive Leadership Panel: Generating the Future in the Skin Anti-Aging Category," on Tuesday, June 28, at 1:30 p.m. Dr. Semechkin is presenting at the Expo's Anti-Aging Symposium as an expert on emerging technologies in skincare. Dr. Semechkin's presentation, titled "Stem Cell Derived Growth Factors - the Next Breakthrough in Anti-Aging," is scheduled for Wednesday, June 29, at 1:30 p.m.


International Stem Cell is a world leader in the research and development of parthenogenetic stem cells for therapeutic applications and is developing and commercializing stem cell-based research and cosmetic products through Lifeline Skin Care^®. The first cosmetic products, a defensive day moisture serum and a recovery night moisture serum containing extracts from human parthenogenetic stem cells, were launched in November 2010 and are available for purchase through http://www.lifelineskincare.com and selected luxury spas across the United States.


About International Stem Cell Corporation
International Stem Cell Corporation is focused on the therapeutic applications of human parthenogenetic stem cells and the development and commercialization of cell-based research and cosmetic products. ISCO's core technology, parthenogenesis, results in the creation of pluripotent human stem cells from unfertilized oocytes (eggs). hpSCs avoid ethical issues associated with the use or destruction of viable human embryos. ISCO scientists have created the first parthenogenic, homozygous stem cell line that can be a source of therapeutic cells with minimal immune rejection after transplantation into hundreds of millions of individuals of differing genders, ages and racial background. This offers the potential to create the first true stem cell bank, UniStemCell™. ISCO also produces and markets specialized cells and growth media for therapeutic research worldwide through its subsidiary Lifeline Cell Technology, and cell-based skin care products through its subsidiary Lifeline Skin Care. More information is available at http://www.internationalstemcell.com.


To subscribe to receive ongoing corporate communications, please click on the following link: http://www.b2i.us/irpass.asp?BzID=1468&to=ea&s=0.


Forward-looking Statements
Statements pertaining to anticipated developments, product development and marketing plans, and other opportunities for the company and its subsidiaries, along with other statements about the future expectations, beliefs, goals, plans, or prospects expressed by management constitute forward-looking statements. Any statements that are not historical fact (including, but not limited to statements that contain words such as "will," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "expects," "estimates,") should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, risks inherent in the development and/or commercialization of potential products, competition, regulatory approvals, need and ability to obtain future capital, application of capital resources among competing uses, and maintenance of intellectual property rights. Actual results may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements and as such should be evaluated together with the many uncertainties that affect the company's business, particularly those mentioned in the cautionary statements found in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The company disclaims any intent or obligation to update forward-looking statements.



International Stem Cell Corporation
760-940-6383
Kenneth C. Aldrich, Chairman
kaldrich@intlstemcell.com
Ruslan Semechkin, PhD
Vice President, ISCO
President and CEO, Lifeline Skin Care
ras@intlstemcell.com
or:
Lippert/Heilshorn & Associates
Don Markley, 310-691-7100
dmarkley@lhai.com

International Stem Cell Corporation (OTCBB:ISCO) (http://www.intlstemcell.com), the first company to perfect a method of creating human "parthenogenetic" stem cells derived from unfertilized human eggs, reports that its wholly owned subsidiary, Lifeline Cell Technology (Lifeline), grew 2011 first quarter product sales by 35% and gained well over 200 new customers compared with the prior year through new product introductions and the development of worldwide distribution channels. Lifeline also made significant progress in its strategy to expand its product applications into manufacturing human tissues and cells for clinical use. Lifeline Cell Technology develops, manufactures and markets the Lifeline^® brand of cell culture products used by researchers to grow human cells for basic and pre-clinical research. Lifeline also fulfills an important role in parent ISCO's long-term strategy to be a leading developer and manufacturer of human cells and human-cell-based products for clinical applications.


Lifeline's chief executive officer, Jeffrey Janus, stated, "Our product sales growth was largely due to the development and launch of more than 30 new products in 2010, including products that allow researchers to study human stem cells. Lifeline also opened new distribution channels in Japan, India, Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore and has achieved significant sales in those new markets. Importantly, we have also moved closer to validating the feasibility of ISCO's strategic plan as our proprietary FibroLife^® media is being used to cultivate tissue-engineered blood vessels for Cytograft Tissue Engineering in Novato, California. Cytograft's vessels are expected to be used as coronary grafts for coronary bypass procedures, as peripheral grafts to prevent lower limb amputations and as living tissue shunts for hemodialysis patients."


Cytograft's technology was recently featured at the American Heart Association's conference of emerging technology and can be viewed on the AHA's "Emerging Science Series Webinar" at scientificsessions.org/emergingscience.


Cytograft's chief executive officer, Todd McAllister, Ph.D., said, "Cytograft's clinical programs are going forward in Phase III trials and we are excited to be working with Lifeline as one of our key media developers and suppliers as we transition to commercialization and as we develop our next generation platform."


In anticipation of producing clinical grade products, Lifeline recently moved into new laboratory facilities that are capable of cGMP level manufacturing. Said Janus, "Lifeline Cell Technology provides ISCO the capacity to develop and manufacture human cell-based products for growing field of regenerative medicine, while at the same time generating revenue in the research market. The Cytograft opportunity is but one example of many potential clinical applications for Lifeline's products."


About International Stem Cell Corporation
International Stem Cell Corporation is focused on the therapeutic applications of human parthenogenetic stem cells and the development and commercialization of cell-based research and cosmetic products. ISCO's core technology, parthenogenesis, results in the creation of pluripotent human stem cells from unfertilized oocytes (eggs). hpSCs avoid ethical issues associated with the use or destruction of viable human embryos. ISCO scientists have created the first parthenogenic, homozygous stem cell line that can be a source of therapeutic cells with minimal immune rejection after transplantation into hundreds of millions of individuals of differing genders, ages and racial background. This offers the potential to create the first true stem cell bank, UniStemCell™. ISCO also produces and markets specialized cells and growth media for therapeutic research worldwide through its subsidiary Lifeline Cell Technology, and cell-based skin care products through its subsidiary Lifeline Skin Care. More information is available at http://www.internationalstemcell.com.


To subscribe to receive ongoing corporate communications, please click on the following link:http://www.b2i.us/irpass.asp?BzID=1468&to=ea&s=0.


Forward-looking Statements
Statements pertaining to anticipated developments, product development and marketing plans, and other opportunities for the company and its subsidiaries, along with other statements about the future expectations, beliefs, goals, plans, or prospects expressed by management constitute forward-looking statements. Any statements that are not historical fact (including, but not limited to statements that contain words such as "will," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "expects," "estimates,") should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, risks inherent in the development and/or commercialization of potential products, competition, regulatory approvals, need and ability to obtain future capital, application of capital resources among competing uses, and maintenance of intellectual property rights. Actual results may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements and as such should be evaluated together with the many uncertainties that affect the company's business, particularly those mentioned in the cautionary statements found in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The company disclaims any intent or obligation to updat
e forward-looking statements.



International Stem Cell Corporation
Jeffrey Janus
President and CEO, Lifeline Cell Technology
760-940-6383
jjanus@lifelinecelltech.com
or:
Lippert/Heilshorn & Associates
Don Markley
310-691-7100
dmarkley@lhai.com

International Stem Cell Corporation (OTCBB:ISCO), a California-based biotechnology company creating human stem cell lines through its patented parthenogenetic process that requires no use of fertilized embryos, today announced that it is has scheduled a conference call for June 15, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. PST. ISCO Chairman, Mr. Kenneth Aldrich will discuss the Company's newly issued patent, its recently completed financing, and the present status of the company and its vision for the coming year. The dial-in number for participants is 1 (800) 774-6070 and the pass code ID is 8273 225#. An alternate dial-in number is: 1 (630) 691-2753 and the pass code will be the same for both numbers. A replay of the call will be available on the home page of the company's web site at: http://www.internationalstemcell.com.

ABOUT INTERNATIONAL STEM CELL CORPORATION (ISCO.OB)

International Stem Cell Corporation is a California-based biotechnology company focused on therapeutic and research products. ISCO's core technology, parthenogenesis, results in creation of pluripotent human stem cells (hpSCs) from unfertilized oocytes (eggs). hpSCs avoid ethical issues associated with the use or destruction of viable human embryos. ISCO scientists have created the first parthenogenic, homozygous stem cell line that can be a source of therapeutic cells with minimal immune rejection after transplantation into hundreds of millions of individuals of differing sexes, ages and racial groups. This offers the potential to create the first true stem cell bank, UniStemCell^TM, while avoiding the ethical issue of using fertilized eggs. ISCO also produces and markets specialized cells and growth media for therapeutic research worldwide through its subsidiary Lifeline Cell Technology. More information is available at ISCO's website, http://www.internationalstemcell.com.

To subscribe to receive ongoing corporate communications please click on the following link: http://www.b2i.us/irpass.asp?BzID=1468&to=ea&s=0.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS:

Statements pertaining to anticipated technological developments and therapeutic applications, and other opportunities for the company and its subsidiary, along with other statements about the future expectations, beliefs, goals, plans, or prospects expressed by management constitute forward-looking statements. Any statements that are not historical fact (including, but not limited to statements that contain words such as "will," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "expects," "estimates,") should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, risks inherent in the development and/or commercialization of potential products, uncertainty in the results of clinical trials or regulatory approvals, need and ability to obtain future capital, application of capital resources among competing uses, and maintenance of intellectual property rights. Actual results may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements and as such should be evaluated together with the many uncertainties that affect the company's business, particularly those mentioned in the cautionary statements found in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The company disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

International Stem Cell Corporation
Kenneth C. Aldrich, Chairman
760-940-6383
kaldrich@intlstemcell.com
or
Brian Lundstrom, President
760-640-6383
bl@intlstemcell.com

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

DCA research on brain cancer, EurekAlert, May 12, 2010. [FriendFeed entry]. Excerpt: "... the orphan generic drug Dichloroacetate (DCA) may hold promise as potential therapy for ... a form of brain cancer called glioblastoma". Another excerpt:

By extracting glioblastomas from 49 patients over a period of 2 years and studying them within minutes of removal in the operating room, the team showed that tumors respond to DCA by changing their metabolism. Then, the team treated 5 patients with advanced glioblastoma and secured tumor tissues before and after the DCA therapy. By comparing the two, the team showed that DCA works in these tumors exactly as was predicted by test tube experiments. This is very important because often the results in non-human models tested in the lab do not agree with the results in patients. In addition, the team showed that DCA has anti-cancer effects by altering the metabolism of glioblastoma cancer stem cells, the cells thought responsible for the recurrences of cancer.

And,

No conclusions can be made on whether the drug is safe or effective in patients with this form of brain cancer, due to the limited number of patients tested by the study's leads Drs Michelakis and Petruk. Researchers emphasize that use of DCA by patients or physicians, supplied from for-profit sources or without close clinical observation by experienced medical teams in the setting of research trials, is not only inappropriate but may also be dangerous. ...

See also: Generic drug may be potential treatment for deadly brain cancer: U of A medical study by Noreen Remtulla and Julia Necheff, ExpressNews, University of Alberta, May 12, 2010.

And: Potential brain-cancer drug shows promise, CBC News, May 12, 2010. [CBC video].

And: Cancer drug trial raises hopes by Elise Stolte, Edmonton Journal, May 13, 2010.

These news reports are about the publication: Metabolic Modulation of Glioblastoma with Dichloroacetate by Evangelos D Michelakis and 12 co-authors, including Kenneth C Petruk, Sci Transl Med 2010(May 12); 2(31): 31ra34.

See also an editorial: Targeting Cell Metabolism in Cancer Patients by Matthew G Vander Heiden, Sci Transl Med 2010(May 12); 2(31) :31ed1. From the TOC: "Dichloroacetate can safely modify glucose metabolism in aggressive brain tumors when administered to patients". Last sentence of the editorial: "Time will tell whether this strategy constitutes an effective cancer therapy".

Comments: After an initial research publication in January 2007 [PubMed citation], DCA attracted much attention. See, for example, the Wikipedia entry for Dichloroacetic acid. And, Cancer society warns of untested drug, CBC News, March 22, 2007.

The Official University of Alberta DCA Website provides FAQs about DCA. It includes, in the News & Updates section, DCA Research Team publishes results of Clinical Trials (dated May 12, 2010) and an earlier Letter from Dr. Evangelos Michelakis (dated October 2008).

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

The Proposition 71 campaign of 2004,
which has filled the coffers of more than 500 researchers and
institutions with $1.4 billion, was the subject today of a discussion
about miracles.

"Joan Samuelson, a leading
Parkinson's patient advocate, is shown in another ad asserting,
'There are more Americans than I think we can count who are sick
now, or are going to be sick in the future, whose lives will be saved
by Prop. 71.' Shortly after the measure passed, Samuelson was
appointed to the stem cell program's board. 

"Do these ads amount to promising
'miracles'? Given that the essence of scientific research is that no
one can predict the outcome, to assert as fact that 'lives will
be saved by Prop. 71' is plainly to promise something downright
extraordinary, if not outright miraculous. 

"Yes, this is the language of
advertising, not research, but for Trounson and Thomas to pretend
that the ad campaign somehow promised merely 'good science' and not
specific outcomes, as their letter suggested, is (at least)
miraculously disingenuous."

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

Two directors of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency have popped up in the battle over the
anti-tobacco initiative on tomorrow's ballot in the Golden State.

"The...problem with Proposition 29
is its pigeonholing of the money for cancer research rather than for
immediate needs here in California that are absolutely dire. It’s
all well and good to say that cancer research benefits everyone, but
the real question is whether it should be the absolute top priority
for a state that can’t afford to keep its children fed or offer
them medical care in the here and now. 

"Lansing and Vuori say the fact
that Prop. 29 'fails to provide funding for schools, roads or
affordable housing' is irrelevant, because it was 'was never intended
to solve these problems.'

"In the context of the state’s
needs, this is a rather callous approach to take. Let’s spell out
why, so Lansing and Vuori won’t be so inclined to dismiss these
necessities of life so casually."

"That’s just the beginning of
what might be cut because the state needs money—and won’t be able
to lay its hands on the hundreds of millions of dollars that Lansing,
Vuori, and their research colleagues are angling for. They don’t
want voters to be reminded that there are competing demands for the
tobacco money, and they do so by failing to mention that they exist,
and also by presenting the spending on cancer research as the voters’
only choice. 

"It’s the only choice because
the promoters of Proposition 29 designed it that way. Advocates of
programs like this love to pass them in via voter initiatives because
they leave no room to measure them against alternative needs."

"Organizers argued that the tax would have
less chance of passing if voters thought it would go into the state
coffers, and said that their only goal here was cutting down on
smoking."

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