Print

Print


Japanese researchers also used a dangerous virus as delivery system.  have
to find a good one.
Ray
Stem cell breakthrough uses no embryos
By MALCOLM RITTER, AP Science Writer 4 minutes ago
NEW YORK - Scientists have made ordinary human skin cells take on the
chameleon-like powers of embryonic stem cells, a startling breakthrough that
might someday deliver the medical payoffs of embryo cloning without the
controversy.

Laboratory teams on two continents report success in a pair of landmark
papers released Tuesday. It's a neck-and-neck finish to a race that made
headlines five months ago, when scientists announced that the feat had been
accomplished in mice.
The "direct reprogramming" technique avoids the swarm of ethical, political
and practical obstacles that have stymied attempts to produce human stem
cells by cloning embryos.
Scientists familiar with the work said scientific questions remain and that
it's still important to pursue the cloning strategy, but that the new work
is a major coup.
"This work represents a tremendous scientific milestone - the biological
equivalent of the Wright Brothers' first airplane," said Dr. Robert Lanza,
chief science officer of Advanced Cell Technology, which has been trying to
extract stem cells from cloned human embryos.
"It's a bit like learning how to turn lead into gold," said Lanza, while
cautioning that the work is far from providing medical payoffs.
"It's a huge deal," agreed Rudolf Jaenisch, a prominent stem cell scientist
at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. "You have the proof of
principle that you can do it."
There is a catch. At this point, the technique requires disrupting the DNA
of the skin cells, which creates the potential for developing cancer. So it
would be unacceptable for the most touted use of embryonic cells: creating
transplant tissue that in theory could be used to treat diseases like
diabetes, Parkinson's, and spinal cord injury.
But the DNA disruption is just a byproduct of the technique, and experts
said they believe it can be avoided.
The new work is being published online by two journals, Cell and Science.
The Cell paper is from a team led by Dr. Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto
University; the Science paper is from a team led by Junying Yu, working in
the lab of in stem-cell pioneer James Thomson of the University of
Wisconsin-Madison.
Both reported creating cells that behaved like stem cells in a series of lab
tests.
Thomson, 48, made headlines in 1998 when he announced that his team had
isolated human embryonic stem cells.
Yamanaka gained scientific notice in 2006 by reporting that direct
reprogramming in mice had produced cells resembling embryonic stem cells,
although with significant differences. In June, his group and two others
announced they'd created mouse cells that were virtually indistinguishable
from stem cells.
For the new work, the two men chose different cell types from a tissue
supplier. Yamanaka reprogrammed skin cells from the face of an unidentified
36-year-old woman, and Thomson's team worked with foreskin cells from a
newborn. Thomson, who was working his way from embryonic to fetal to adult
cells, said he's still analyzing his results with adult cells.
Both labs did basically the same thing. Each used viruses to ferry four
genes into the skin cells. These particular genes were known to turn other
genes on and off, but just how they produced cells that mimic embryonic stem
cells is a mystery.
"People didn't know it would be this easy," Thomson said. "Thousands of labs
in the United States can do this, basically tomorrow."
The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, which holds three patents for
Thomson's work, is applying for patents involving his new research, a
spokeswoman said. Two of the four genes he used were different from
Yamanaka's recipe.
Scientists prize embryonic stem cells because they can turn into virtually
any kind of cell in the body. The cloning approach - which has worked so far
only in mice and monkeys - should be able to produce stem cells that
genetically match the person who donates body cells for cloning.
That means tissue made from the cells should be transplantable into that
person without fear of rejection. Scientists emphasize that any such payoff
would be well in the future, and that the more immediate medical benefits
would come from basic research in the lab.
In fact, many scientists say the cloning technique has proven too expensive
and cumbersome in its current form to produce stem cells routinely for
transplants.
The new work shows that the direct reprogramming technique can also produce
versatile cells that are genetically matched to a person. But it avoids
several problems that have bedeviled the cloning approach.
For one thing, it doesn't require a supply of unfertilized human eggs, which
are hard to obtain for research and subjects the women donating them to a
surgical procedure. Using eggs also raises the ethical questions of whether
women should be paid for them.
In cloning, those eggs are used to make embryos from which stem cells are
harvested. But that destroys the embryos, which has led to political
opposition from President Bush, the Roman Catholic church and others.
Those were "show-stopping ethical problems," said Laurie Zoloth, director of
Northwestern University's Center for Bioethics, Science and Society.
The new work, she said, "redefines the ethical terrain."
Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of pro-life activities for the U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops, called the new work "a very significant
breakthrough in finding morally unproblematic alternatives to cloning. ... I
think this is something that would be readily acceptable to Catholics."
Another advantage of direct reprogramming is that it would qualify for
federal research funding, unlike projects that seek to extract stem cells
from human embryos, noted Doug Melton, co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell
Institute.
Still, scientific questions remain about the cells produced by direct
reprogramming, called "iPS" cells. One is how the cells compare to embryonic
stem cells in their behavior and potential. Yamanaka said his work detected
differences in gene activity.
If they're different, iPS cells might prove better for some scientific uses
and cloned stem cells preferable for other uses. Scientists want to study
the roots of genetic disease and screen potential drug treatments in their
laboratories, for example.
Scottish researcher Ian Wilmut, famous for his role in cloning Dolly the
sheep a decade ago, told London's Daily Telegraph that he is giving up the
cloning approach to produce stem cells and plans to pursue direct
reprogramming instead.
Other scientists said it's too early for the field to follow Wilmut's lead.
Cloning embryos to produce stem cells remains too valuable as a research
tool, Jaenisch said.
Dr. George Daley of the Harvard institute, who said his own lab has also
achieved direct reprogramming of human cells, said it's not clear how long
it will take to get around the cancer risk problem. Nor is it clear just how
direct reprogramming works, or whether that approach mimics what happens in
cloning, he noted.
So the cloning approach still has much to offer, he said.
Daley, who's president of the International Society for Stem Cell Research,
said his lab is pursuing both strategies.
"We'll see, ultimately, which one works and which one is more practical."

Rayilyn Brown
Board Member AZNPF
Arizona Chapter National Parkinson's Foundation
[log in to unmask]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn