Identifying viable regulatory and innovation pathways for regenerative medicine: A case study of cultured red blood cells

New Biotechnology

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 180-190

  Mittra, J ^a   Tait, J ^a   Mastroeni, M ^a   Turner, M L ^b,c   Mountford, J C ^b,d   Bruce, K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b SCOTTISH NATIONAL BLOOD TRANSFUSION SERVICE   (United Kingdom)

^c Roslin Cells Limited   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BLOOD; CYTOLOGY; MANUFACTURE; NATURAL SCIENCES; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; STEM CELLS;

BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CASE STUDY ANALYSIS; GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; INNOVATION SYSTEM; PRE-CLINICAL TESTING; REGENERATIVE MEDICINE; TECHNOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS;

INNOVATION;

ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); ECOSYSTEM; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; ERYTHROCYTE CULTURE; GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE; HUMAN; NATURAL SCIENCE; NONHUMAN; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; REGENERATIVE MEDICINE; SCALE UP; ANIMAL; CELL CULTURE; CYTOLOGY; ERYTHROCYTE; INVENTION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MEDICAL RESEARCH;

ANIMALS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CELLS, CULTURED; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; ERYTHROCYTES; HUMANS; INVENTIONS; REGENERATIVE MEDICINE;

EID: 84912090715     PISSN: 18716784     EISSN: 18764347     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2014.07.008     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Mason C., Dunnill P. Assessing the value of autologous and allogeneic cells for regenerative medicine. Regen Med 2009, 4(6):835-853.
2. Mastroeni M., Mittra J., Tait J. Methodology for the analysis of life science innovation systems (ALSIS) and its application to three case studies. Final report to Technology Strategy Board (TSB) Regenerative Medicine Programme: Value Systems and Business Models 2012, ESRC Innogen Centre. http://www.genomicsnetwork.ac.uk/media/REALISE%20Case%20Study%20Report-Innogen.pdf.
3. Harvey O. Speculative stem cell futures: some prospective commercial models for induced pluripotent stem (ips) cell based technologies. J Fut Stud 2010, 14(4):85-96.
4. Prescott C. The promise of stem cells: a venture capital perspective. Advances in tissue engineering London 2008, J. Polack (Ed.).
5. HOL Regenerative Medicine Report 2013, House of Lords Science and Technology Committee, 1st Report of Session 2013-2014. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldsctech/23/23.pdf.
6. Ratcliffe E., Tomas R.J., Williams D.J. Current understanding and challenges in bioprocessing of stem cell-based therapies for regenerative medicine. Brit Med Bull 2011, 100:137-155.
7. Williams D.J. Overcoming manufacturing and scale-up challenges. Regen Med 2011, 6:67-69.
8. Tigerstrom B. The challenges of regulating stem cell-based products. Trend Biotechnol 2008, 26(12.):653-658.
9. Tait J. Systemic interactions in life science innovation. Technol Anal Strat Manage 2007, 19(3.):257-277.
10. Mittra J., Tait J., Wield D. From maturity to value-added innovation: lessons from the pharmaceutical and agro-biotechnology industries. Trend Biotechnol 2011, 29(3):105-109.
11. Lovell-Badge R. The regulation of human embryo and stem-cell research in the United Kingdom. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2008, 9:998-1003.
12. Warren V. Understanding regenerative medicine: a commissioner's viewpoint. Regen Med 2013, 8(2):227-232.
13. Kent J., Pfeffer N. Regulating the collection and use of fetal stem cells. BMJ 2006, 332(7546):866-867.
14. Eriksson L., Webster A. Standardising the unknown: practical pluripotency as doable futures. Sci Cult 2008, 17(1.):57-69.
15. Brown N., Kraft A. Blood ties: banking the stem cell promise. Technol Anal Strat Manage 2006, 18(3/4):313-327.
16. Hauskeller C. How traditions of ethical reasoning and institutional processes shape stem cell research in the UK'. J Med Philos 2004, 29(5):509-532.
17. Kato K., Kimmelman J., Robert J., Sipp D., Sugarman J. Ethical and policy issues in the clinical translation of stem cells: report of a focus session at the ISSCR tenth annual meeting. Cell Stem Cell 2012, 11:765-767.
18. Parry S. The politics of cloning: mapping the rhetorical convergence of embryos and stem cells in parliamentary debates. New Genet Soc 2003, 22(2):177-200.
19. Parry S. Stem cell scientists' discursive strategies for cognitive authority. Sci Cult 2009, 18(1):89-114.
20. Borup M., Brown N., Konrad K., Lent H.V. The sociology of expectations in science and technology'. Technol Anal Strat Manage 2006, 18(3-4):285-298.
21. Caulfield T. Stem cell research and economic promises. J Law Med Ethics 2010, 38:303-313.
22. Brevignon-Dodin L. Regulatory enablers and regulatory challenges for the development of tissue-engineered products in the EU. Bio-Med Mater Eng 2010, 10.3233/BME-2010-0623.
23. Rowley E., Martin P. Barriers to the commercialisation and utilisation of regenerative medicine in the UK. EPSRC REMIDI Project 2009.
24. McKernan R., McNeish J., Smith D. Pharma's developing interest in stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2010, 6:517-520.
25. Cuende N., Izeta A. Clinical translation of stem cell therapies: a bridgeable gap. Cell Stem Cell 2010, 6(6):508-512.
26. Phillips W., Johnsen T.E., Caldwell N., Chaudhuri J.B. The difficulties of supplying new technologies into highly regulated markets: the case of tissue engineering. Technol Anal Strat Manage 2011, 23(3):213-226.
27. Prescott C. Regenerative medicine: navigating the uncertainties. TSB Value Project Final Report 2012, http://www.biolatris.com/Biolatris/News_%26_events_files/VALUE%20Final%20Report.pdf.
28. Silverman T.A., Weiskopf R.B. Haemoglobin-based oxygen carriers: current status and future directions. Anesthesiology 2009, 111(5):946-963.
29. Cohn C.S., Cushing M.M. Oxygen therapeutics: perfluorocarbons and blood substitute safety. Crit Care Clin 2009, 25(2):399-414.
30. Brittenham G.M., Griffith P.M., Nienhuis A.W., McLaren C.E., Young N.S., Tucker E.E., et al. Efficacy of deferoxamine in preventing complications of iron overload in patients with thallassemia major. N Engl J Med 2013, 331(9):567-573.
31. Musallam K.M. Iron overload in non-transfusion-dependent thalassemia. Thalassemia Rep 2013, 3(1):34-36.
32. Courtney A., de Sousa P., George C., Laurie G., Tait J. Balancing open source stem cell science with commercialisation. Nat Biotechnol 2010, 29(2):115-116.
33. Moran N. European court bans embryonic stem cell patents. Nat Biotechnol 2011, 29:1057-1059.
34. Moran N. Brustle patent holds up in Germany. Nat Biotechnol 2013, 31(2):94.
35. Brandenberger R., Burger S., Campbell A., Fong T. Cell therapy bioprocessing, integrating process and product development for the next generation of biotherapeutics. Bioprocess Int 2011, 9(3):30-37.
36. EMA Guideline on the requirements for quality documentation concerning biological investigational medicinal products in clinical trials, EMA/CHMP/BWP/534898/2008 2012, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/eudralex/vol-10/2012-05_quality_for_biological.pdf.
37. Hu Z., Van Rooijen N., Yang Y. Macrophages prevent human red blood cell reconstitution in immunodeficient mice. Blood 2011, 118:5938-5946.
38. CAT Challenges with advanced therapy medicinal products and how to meet them. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2010, 9:195-201.
39. Kaitin K.I. Deconstructing the drug development process: the new face of innovation. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010, 87:469-479.
40. Mittra J. Life science innovation and the re-structuring of the pharmaceutical sector: mergers, acquisitions and strategic alliances. Technol Anal Strat Manage 2007, 19(3):279-301.
41. FDA Innovation/stagnation: critical path opportunities report 2006, US Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/CriticalPathInitiative/CriticalPathOpportunitiesReports/UCM077254.pdf.
42. FDA Advancing regulatory science at the FDA: a strategic plan 2011, http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/RegulatoryScience/UCM268225.pdf.
43. Academy of Medical Sciences A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research 2011, http://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/p99puid209.html.
44. Webster A., Haddad C., Waldby C. Experimental heterogeneity and standardisation: stem cell products and the clinical trial process. Biosocieties 2011, 6(4):401-419.
45. EMA Guidance on the risk-based approach according to annex 1, part IV Directive 2001/83/EC applied to advanced therapy medicinal products, EMA/CAT/CPWB/686637/2011 2013, European Medicines Agency.
46. Trounson A., Baum E., Gibbons D., Tekamp-Olson P. Developing a case study model for successful translation of stem cell therapies. Cell Stem Cell 2010, 6:513-516.