The California stem cell agency today
enjoyed substantial, if sparse, news coverage of the

“For Melissa Biliardi of Santa
Maria, the (CIRM board) vote symbolizes hope. Her son, James
Birdsall, 32, was diagnosed four years ago with Huntington's disease.
The degenerative brain disorder could prove fatal over the next 10 to
15 years. There is currently no cure or treatment, but with the
grant, UC Davis researchers hope to deliver an effective therapy in
four years.
"'This is the most hope we've ever
had for a cure or treatment,' Biliardi said.”

“California's stem cell funding
agency on Thursday approved nearly $100 million in grants for
research into heart disease, cancer and spinal cord injuries, and to
the cheers of dozens of patients and their supporters, it also
awarded money to rare but devastating diseases with no cure.”

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

Directors of the California stem cell
agency next Thursday are likely to approve spending $12.4 million to
lure a couple of stem cell stars to the Golden State.

“Major strengths include the
candidate's exceptional productivity and contributions to the fields
of mammalian embryology and kidney development, the significance and
potential of the research program, the PI's proven leadership
capabilities, and the outstanding institutional commitment.”

 The other grant was larger–$6.7
million–but reviewers raised a number of questions about the
candidate although they recommended it for funding. The review summary ranked the application at 57 and said,

“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.“

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

Directors of the California stem cell
agency approved an additional
$20 million disease team grant today before adjourning their
meeting. The grant brought the disease team round to a total of $151 million.

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

The governing board of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency today rejected a proposal that would have
restricted transparency surrounding the financial interests of its
directors and top executives.

"I personally feel strongly that
because of CIRM's unique mission and the agency's incredibly
long-standing commitment to transparency, i believe that we should
continue to set an example by requiring the broadest disclosure for
members of the board and high level staff."

"When people have to fill a void
in information, they assume the worst."

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

The California stem cell agency's
leading efforts to find a cure for HIV – one tied to the famous "Berlin Patient" – received a plug today in a piece in the
state capital's largest circulation newspaper, The Sacramento Bee.

"The
possibility of curing a global pandemic like AIDS with funding from
the California bond is exactly the kind of exciting potential that
inspired voters to approve Proposition 71 by
a wide margin. But the HIV research is also a good example of the
challenge facing the state's stem cell agency
as it tries to show voters that they made a good investment. 

“None
of the research under way will reach patients until long after the 10
years of funding by the ballot measure runs out. With the HIV
project, researchers hope to be in human trials by 2014, but it is
likely to be at least 10 years before they can show it might work in
humans. And in the case of a stem cell cure
for AIDS, it would be many years after that before a treatment is
widely available.”

"Nobody
thought stem cells might
be used to cure HIV when the bond (funding for the stem cell agency)
passed. Far from the embryonic stem cell treatments
that inspired the ballot measure, the HIV research involves a new and
growing integration of stem cell and
genetic science."

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

Scientists at the University of
California at Davis are set to win nearly half of $113 million
expected to be awarded next week by the California stem cell agency
as it pushes aggressively to turn research into marketplace cures.

• Vicki Wheelock, UC Davis, $19 million,
  for development of a genetically modified cell therapy for
  Huntington's disease, an inherited neurodegenerative disorder.
  Scientific score 87.
• Antoni Ribas, UCLA, $20 million, for
  genetic reprogramming of cells to fight cancer. Scientific score 84.
• Nancy Lane, UC Davis, $20 million, for
  development of a small molecule to promote bone growth for the
  treatment of osteoporosis. Scientific score 80.
• John Laird, UC Davis, $14.2 million,
  for development of mesenchymal stem cells genetically modified for
  treatment of critical limb ischemia, which restricts blood flow in
  the lower leg and can lead to amputation. Scientific score 79.
• StemCells, Inc., (principal
  investigator not yet known), $20 million, for development of human
  neural stem cells to treat chronic cervical spinal cord injury. The
  company, founded by Stanford scientist Irv Weissman, who serves on
  its board, said earlier this year that it had filed two applications
  in this round, one of which dealt with cervical cord spinal injury.
  No other applicants filed a proposal for such research. Scientific score 79.
• Robert Robbins, Stanford, $20 million,
  development of a human embryonic stem cell treatment for end-stage
  heart failure. Scientific score 68.

In the case of businesses, the awards
come in the form of loans. Grants go to nonprofits. One of the
reasons behind the varying mechanisms is the difference in CIRM's
intellectual property rules for businesses and nonprofits.

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

The $3 billion California stem cell
agency received a "very favorable" performance audit report
compared to other government agencies, CIRM directors were told
today.

 "Comparatively we
have done very well."

"CIRM board members and senior
management do not receive regularly updated, enterprise-level
performance information. The ability to evaluate performance against
strategic goals is critical to effective leadership and program
monitoring, evaluation, and reporting. CIRM does not currently have a
formal performance reporting program."

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

The $3 billion California stem cell
today officially embarked on a course that will mean closer ties to
the biotech industry in hopes of fulfilling the campaign promises to voters to
turn stem cells into cures.

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

In a sharp-edged analysis of Geron's abandonment of stem cell research, the Center for Genetics and Society yesterday described the action as a "real blow" to the California stem cell agency.

Written by Pete Shanks, a regular contributor to the Berkeley center's Biopolitical Times, the piece chronicled some of the history and hype involving Geron and hESC research. The center has long taken a skeptical view of the California stem cell agency and Geron. Shanks wrote,

"Geron has been in trouble for a while. Former CEO Thomas Okarma, who left abruptly in February, was the subject of ridicule for his repeated announcements that ESC-based clinical trials would begin "next year" — that is, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 — and the trial they eventually came up with was so dubious that Arthur Caplan called it "nuts and hugely risky." Even experts in the field thought that targeting spinal cord injury in the first ESC trial was dubious, though some seem to be more willing to be critical now it has ended.

"And that was on the scientific and perhaps commercial merits. The ethical problems were much worse, since the trial was intended for people who had recently suffered damage to their spinal cords. Bioethicist Laurie Zoloth (who was once on Geron's ethics advisory board, and basically approved of the study), noted at the time of its announcement that:

"'True informed consent in this very vulnerable population, people who have suffered a devastating and life-changing injury a week prior to being asked to enter the first clinical trial for such long-awaited, highly publicized and desperately needed treatment, is hard to obtain and will need to be carefully thought through.'"

Shanks also wrote,

"What of CIRM's role? After Geron's announcement, they issued a remarkably bland press statement, followed by an internal memo that expressed deep disappointment (the California Stem Cell Report has the text). It's a real blow to them: Geron was the first private company to receive funds from CIRM to run a clinical trial using ESCs.

"This was a loan, not a grant, and was only made, as the indefatigable David Jensen (publisher of the California Stem Cell Report) discovered, after a 'major departure from longstanding procedures.' The proposal received a low score (66/100) that was not publicly revealed until Jensen specifically asked for it. And the other applicants who might have competed for those funds rather surprisingly all withdrew.

"The suspicion arises that CIRM, or some people within it, badly wanted the trial to proceed in the hope that it would give them a therapeutic success to boast about. If so, the decision just backfired."

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

Commenting on Geron's decision to abandon hESC research, the chairman of the California stem cell agency, Jonathan Thomas, says the agency knew "the road to new therapies would be arduous, and that for each success, there would be setbacks as well."

In a memo Monday to the agency's 29 board members, Thomas reiterated that Geron maintains the decision had nothing to do with safety concerns. He said the company's action underscores the agency's commitment to long-term development of stem cell therapies.

Thomas also said the $3 billion agency will retain the stock warrants it received from Geron, but did not disclose their numbers. We have queried CIRM for more details. CIRM loaned Geron $25 million, which was paid back by Geron on Monday.

A copy of the Thomas memo was provided to the California Stem Cell Report. Here is the full text.

"Dear Board Members:

"Earlier this afternoon, we learned that Geron made a decision to discontinue its stem cell research program, including the CIRM-funded clinical trial involving spinal cord injury. Geron made this decision in order to shift its focus to its oncology program. Geron has assured us that its decision to discontinue the trial had nothing to do with safety concerns; the cells have been well-tolerated and the patients have experienced no adverse effects. Geron will continue to follow all enrolled patients and has committed to accrue data and update the FDA and the medical community regarding the patients’ progress.

"In addition, Geron has returned CIRM’s funds, with accrued interest. CIRM will maintain the warrants it received.

"Of course, we remain committed to funding clinical development of stem cell therapies. We have always recognized that the road to new therapies would be arduous, and that for each success, there would be setbacks as well. We also know that companies make decisions for business reasons, and that it is not unusual for a company to pursue a new strategy, as Geron has done. CIRM, by contrast, is focused on its long-term goal of delivering therapies and cure to patients, and today’s events underscore the importance of CIRM’s long-term commitment to funding therapy development.

"This trial represented the first-ever clinical trial of human embryonic stem cells and we expected that it would be challenging. We share the frustration of all the patients for whom this trial offered great hope. I spoke personally with both Don and Roman Reed to express my commitment to the on-going search for therapies.

"Although we are deeply disappointed by Geron’s decision, we are grateful that Geron has established a regulatory pathway for human embryonic stem cell therapies and we are confident in the potential of stem cells to treat patients suffering from chronic disease and injury.

"Here is a link to CIRM’s press release: http://www.cirm.ca.gov/PressRelease_2011-11-14"

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

In a surprise move, Geron today said it was terminating its stem cell business and what was the first-ever clinical trial of an hESC therapy, a potential product backed by a $25 million loan made by the California stem cell agency only six months ago.

Geron's move has "stark implications" for development of stem cell therapies in the United States, The Associated Press said. Andrew Pollack of the New York Times reported,

"The move is expected to be widely seen as a setback for the field, because of Geron’s central role."

The Menlo Park, Ca., company said it will fire 66 employees, 38 percent of its workforce, and will try to find buyers for its stem cell business.

The company's CEO, John Scarlett, cited the need to "focus our resources" given the "current environment of capital scarcity and uncertain economic conditions." The clinical trial of its spinal cord treatment will be closed to further enrollment, although it will continue to follow all four enrolled patients. The company said it now plans to focus on cancer drugs.

The company did not mention CIRM or the $25 million loan in its statement. The stem cell agency issued a press release that said,

"Geron had received $6.42 million of their loan, which the company today repaid in full with accrued interest."

In the news release, CIRM's Ellen Feigal, senior vice president for research and development, did not comment directly on Geron's move. She said CIRM remained optimistic about "many exciting stem cell programs in California." She said moving a therapy into the clinic is a "highly complicated process."

Absent from CIRM's press release were any comments from its new chairman, Jonathan Thomas, and CIRM President Alan Trounson.

Dropping stem cell research will improve Geron's cash situation. The New York Times' Pollack said,

"Geron will be able to last without needing to raise new money until it receives results of clinical trials of its cancer drugs over the next 18 months. By contrast, Dr. Scarlett said, given all the precautions in the stem cell field, he did not think there would be results from the stem cell trial until 2014."

The AP quoted stock analyst Steve Brozak of WBB Securities as saying Geron had encountered difficulty in finding partners for its stem cell program. He said potential partners wanted to see "later stage results." Of the clinical trial, Brozak said,

"It could be outsourced to a place like China very easily. In that case, this would be the de facto abdication of U.S. leadership in biotechnology."

With Geron's departure, Advanced Cell Technology of Santa Monica, Ca., is the only company with a clinical trial involving hESC, one targeting macular degeneration. ACT has never received an award from the California stem cell agency although it relocated its headquarters to California in the wake of the passage of Prop. 71, which created the state's $3 billion research program.

ACT was widely believed to have applied in CIRM's financing round last spring involving Geron.

CIRM directors approved the loan to Geron last May in a meeting that departed radically from its normal awards process.

As reported by the California Stem Cell Report in August,

"The Geron application was not given a public scientific score, standard practice for all the other 433 applications that the agency has approved over the last six years. The usual summary of grant reviewer comments was not provided to the public or the board. The three other applicants in the $50 million round all withdrew prior to presentation to the CIRM board – another first in CIRM's grant program. And no public explanation was provided at the time for the departures from long-established procedures." 

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

The news about Geron's abrupt departure from hESC research is rippling around the world this morning, casting a pall over the entire field.

The Financial Times of London, in a story by Andrew Jack, said,

"Geron, the pioneering stem cell therapy company, has dealt a powerful blow to one of the most hyped areas of medicinal research by withdrawing entirely from the field."

Ron Leuty at the San Francisco Business Times said in an analysis,

"Just why would I want to invest in a space where one of the most promising companies just called it quits."

In a Washington Post article by Rob Stein, a patient advocate expressed bitterness.

"'I’m disgusted. It makes me sick,' said Daniel Heumann, who is on the board of the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation. 'To get people’s hopes up and then do this for financial reasons is despicable. They’re treating us like lab rats.'"

Geron, based in the San Francisco peninsula city of Menlo Park, cited financial problems when it announced yesterday that it was giving up on its stem cell efforts in favor of its cancer drug program. Geron is laying off 38 percent of its staff and says it will try to find a buyer for the stem cell program. Geron also settled its accounts with the California stem cell agency, which loaned it $25 million last May amidst considerable publicity.

The stem cell agency and other advocates expressed optimism about the long term potential of the field and noted the difficulties of bringing any therapy to production. Geron produced 21,000 pages of material over a years-long period to get FDA permission to begin only the first step in the long clinical trial process.

But the dominant tone of the news stories was negative. Heidi Ledford of Nature said Geron is "walking out on the field." Steve Johnson of the San Jose Mercury News said the decision casts "a cloud over the commercial viability of stem cell treatments."

Here are other excerpts:

San Francisco Business Times:

"What does this mean for companies that the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state’s stem cell research funding agency, is pushing toward clinical trials? Will they only get so far before they, too, exit the business?" 

Fergus Walsh, medical correspondent for the BBC(see here), wrote:

"The decision does seem to be extraordinary given the huge investment of time and resources. When I visited Geron nearly three years ago, the then chief executive claimed the technology had an incredible future. 

"John Martin, professor of cardiovascular medicine at University College London said: 'The Geron trial had no real chance of success because of the design and the disease targeted. It was an intrinsically flawed study. And for that reasons we should not be describing this as a set back. 

"The first trials of stem cell that will give an answer are our own in the heart. The heart is an organ that can give quantitative data of quality.'"

Ryan Flinn of Business Week wrote,

"Geron fell 16 percent to $1.86 in extended trading. The shares have declined 58 percent this year.  

Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of Advanced Cell Technology Inc.(of Santa Monica, Ca.), the second company to win permission from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to test human embryonic stem cells in people, said the news wasn’t surprising, given the small patient population affected with spinal cord injuries. 

"'It was a very difficult choice to go in and treat spinal cord injury,' Lanza said in an interview. 'There was considerable concern in the scientific community that that might not have been the ideal first indication."

As first reported by the California Stem Cell Report, Geron's loan application was scored as a 66 on a scale 100 last May by scientific reviewers for the California stem cell agency. The score was not disclosed publicly at the time CIRM directors approved the award as has been the practice for all the other 400-plus awards that the agency has granted. The Geron approval process departed radically from the agency's regular procedures.

The news coverage in California of the Geron decision was marked by the absence of a story in the Los Angeles Times, the state's largest circulation newspaper. The San Francisco Chronicle carried only a brief story buried on page 6 of its business section. The California stem cell agency is based in San Francisco and the Bay Area contains one of the larger and more important biotech business and academic research communities in the world.

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

Earlier today, an anonymous reader posted a comment on the California Stem Cell Report wondering where the "good news" was about the stem cell agency. We are not sure whether the reader was wondering about the content of this site or the mainstream media or both.

Sanford Consortium lab from live Webcam shot this weekend on the Sanford web site.

But the comment came less than 24 hours after a San Diego area newspaper published a glowing piece about the opening of a new stem cell research building under the auspices of five powerful research organizations – Salk, Scripps, Sanford Burnham, UC San Diego and the La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, a recent addition to the consortium.

Bradley Fikes of the North County Times wrote the story. He may be the last reporter in California to regularly, albeit infrequently, cover California stem cell issues for a mainstream newspaper.

Fikes' story heralded the $127 million structure. (The cost includes equipment.) He wrote,

"San Diego County's bid for supremacy in the fast-growing field of stem cell research will gain an iconic new image Nov. 29, when a gleaming headquarters for some of San Diego County's top stem cell researchers officially opens.

"The 132,000 square-foot building off in La Jolla will become the headquarters of the Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine...."

The consortium was formed in the wake of voter approval of Prop. 71, which created California's $3 billion stem cell program and provided hundreds of millions of dollars for new labs. Edward Holmes, formerly vice chancellor at UC San Diego, is president and CEO of the consortium. Holmes is also chairman of the National Medical Research Council in Singapore. (For Holmes perspective on the consortium, see this 2010 interview.)

The building was financed with $43 million from the California stem cell agency, $65 million in bonds guaranteed by the University of California and $19 million from T. Denny Sanford, a South Dakota billionaire banker.

After CIRM approved funding for the building in May 2008, the consortium struggled with finding cash beyond what CIRM provided. The roadblocks delayed work on the facility, which was supposed to be completed by May 2010 at a cost of $155 million, according to the stem cell agency.

Like the other new labs assisted by $271 million in stem cell agency construction funds, the San Diego building is touted as conducive to bringing scientists together. Indeed, it has been dubbed a "collaboratory."

Fikes wrote,

"Even the staircases have been designed in keeping with the goal of making as much space as possible serve collaboration. The Sanford Consortium's staircases are wide, open and airy. They connect multiple 'laboratory neighborhoods' on different levels, so that scientists from different labs and floors will inevitably pass each other on their way to work."

Fikes said that at each level the staircases include areas with tables and chairs for quick chats. He quoted Louis Coffman, chief operating officer of the consortium, as saying,

"It's a lively interlude between floors. It creates an interesting space. More than that, it connects the physical locations of two different floors. So whereas people on different floors, who would otherwise be as disconnected as they would be in different buildings, hopefully they're going to make connections."

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

Today, I posted this to Twitter:

3 Innovative Cancer Treatments...But Which Is The Best Bet? seekingalpha.com/a/fjed $GSK $IMUC $VSTM #cancerSC via @seekingalpha — Jim Till (@jimtill) July 17, 2012

The article is about three companies that are working on treatments designed to target cancer stem cells (CSCs). The companies are OncoMed, Verastem and ImmunoCellular Therapeutics. The article is interesting.

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

Jonathan Thomas, chairman of the $3 billion California stem cell agency, took to the blogosphere today with an item promoting CIRM's progress, declaring that it is a record of which Californians can be proud.

In his debut performance as a blogger, Thomas declared that the agency has 43 research projects that are in various stages of moving towards clinical trials. He wrote on CIRM's research blog,

"Given that it normally takes a decade or longer for a basic science discovery to reach clinical trials, 43 projects seemed to me like quite an achievement – an achievement that the people of California should take pride in supporting. Not only is CIRM driving stem cell science in our state, but through our national and international collaborations California has become a stem cell hub that accelerates stem cell progress worldwide."

Thomas, a Los Angeles bond financier, pointed to a new document from CIRM, titled "Funding therapies: Fueling Hope." It summarizes some of the agency's work and touts the "incredible potential" of stem cells.

The document also explains the laborious process for creating a therapy before it can be brought to market and actually used to treat patients. The document said,

"Altogether, carrying out the basic research, translational work and preclinical data leading up to a clinical trial can take a decade or longer, and that's just to start the clinical trial. CIRM’s funding approach speeds that timeline by providing stable funding that eliminates pauses in the research to raise new funds, by strategically funding areas thought to be barriers to the clinic and by forming teams of researchers who work in parallel rather than sequentially to reach clinical trials faster."

When Thomas was elected chairman of the agency last June, he told directors that the agency was in a "communications war" in which its record was not fully appreciated by the public. He made telling the CIRM story one of his top priorities.

Today's blog posting by Thomas and, more particularly the "Fueling Hope" document, will be useful to CIRM in dealing with the overblown expectations of rapid cures that were generated by the hype of the 2004 ballot initiative campaign that created the stem cell research program.

The campaign generated impressions among voters that cures – specifically human embryonic stem cell cures – were just around the corner and that the Bush Administration, with its restrictions on hESC research, was the only thing standing in the way. Indeed, without George Bush, there would be no state stem cell agency  since his stand against hESC created an apparent need for alternative funding. For voters who expected instant cures, however, CIRM must be a sad disappointment since it has developed no therapy that is being used to treat people.

Managing expectations is a critical task for CIRM, which will run out of funds in 2017 and which is expected to be asking voters for another multibillion dollar bond measure sometime in the next few years.

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

Neural Tumor-Initiating Cells Have Distinct Telomere Maintenance and Can be Safely Targeted for Telomerase Inhibition by Pedro Castelo-Branco and 12 co-authors, including Uri Tabori, Clin Cancer Res 2011(Jan 1); 17(1): 111-121 [Full text]. Translational Relevance:

Pediatric neural tumors (brain tumors and neuroblastoma) are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in childhood cancer. This is due to their ability to recur after minimal disease is achieved. Telomerase is active in most malignant pediatric neural tumors. Therefore, telomerase inhibition may offer an effective treatment option for such patients. Because normal stem cells may require telomerase for continuous self-renewal, this therapy may have devastating effects on normal nervous system development and maintenance.

This study reveals that telomerase activation exists only in the tumor-initiating cancer subpopulation and is critical to sustain their survival and self-renewal potential. Importantly, normal neural or neural crest stem cells do not require telomerase for their self-renewal. Furthermore, as opposed to conventional chemoradiation therapies, telomerase inhibition results in irreversible loss of self-renewal capacity of tumor initiating cells in vitro and in vivo.

These observations uncover a difference between normal and cancer stem cell biology in the nervous system and suggest that telomerase inhibition may offer a specific and safe therapeutic approach for these devastating tumors.

For a commentary on this article, see: Anita B Hjelmeland and Jeremy N Rich, Clin Cancer Res 2011(Jan 1); 17(1): 3-5 (unlike the article, the commentary is not publicly accessible). Abstract:

Telomerase is an important mechanism by which cancers escape replicative senescence. In neural tumors, cancer stem cells express telomerase, suggesting that this may explain their preferential tumorigenesis. Oligonucleotide telomerase targeting selectively disrupts cancer stem cell growth through the induction of differentiation, adding to the armamentarium of anticancer stem cell therapies.

Why did Geron "fail" in its
much ballyhooed pursuit of the first-ever human embryonic stem cell
therapy?

"How did Geron’s R&D program
meet such a demise? After all, the company raised more than $583
million through 23 financings, including two venture rounds, and
plowed more than half a billion dollars into R&D (about half of
that into hESC work) through 2010. 

"There are problems with being at
the forefront of unknown territory. Of Geron’s development efforts,
the hESC trial was the most prominent, and fraught. Therapies based
on hESCs were new territory for the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), and it eyed Geron warily. The
investigational new drug application (IND), filed in 2008, was twice
put on clinical hold while more animal data were collected among
fears that nonmalignant tumors would result from stray hESCs that
escaped the purification process. Geron says it spent $45 million on
the application, and at 22,000 pages, it was reportedly the largest
the agency had ever received."

"Your technology may be
revolutionary, your team may be dedicated and you may believe. But it
does not matter if no one else will stand at your side."

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

If you are looking to follow the money
trail at the $3 billion California stem cell agency, next Thursday's meeting of its 29-member board of directors is a good place to start.

“It provides that grantees and
collaborators must share revenues resulting from CIRM funded research
as follows: after revenues exceed $500,000, three times the grant
award, paid at a rate of 3% per year, plus upon earning
$250M(million) in a single calendar year, a onetime payment of three
times the award, plus upon earning revenues of $500M in a single
calendar year, an additional onetime payment of three times the award
and, finally, in the instance where a patented CIRM funded invention
or CIRM funded technology contributed to the creation of net
commercial revenue greater than $500M in a single calendar year, and
where CIRM awarded $5 million or more, an additional 1% royalty on
revenues in excess of $500 million annually over the life of the
patents.”

"The proposed amendments re-strike
the balance both to ensure that industry will partner with CIRM and
to ensure that the State has the opportunity to benefit from
successful therapy development."

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