Cloning debate: Stem-cell researchers must stay engaged. Nature. 2013;498:159-161. [PMID: 23765475 DOI: 10.1038/498159a]

Practical pursuit in stem cell biology: Innovation, translation, and incomplete theorization

This paper aims to contribute to the study of practical pursuit-worthiness in science by engaging with a case in therapeutic stem cell biology. Induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) research emerged from research in developmental biology and the molecular biology of cell fate conversion. It took on practical significance when proposed as an alternative to therapeutic stem cell research that used human embryonic stem cells. The supposed ability of iPSC research to tackle ethical and regulatory constraints on research at the beginning of the twentieth century was a central part of the heuristic assessment of iPSC. However, the development and transfer of knowledge from experimental and theoretical biology to preclinical pursuit conflicted with the framing of biomedical innovation in public policy. The framing of innovation operated as part of the heuristic assessment of the pursuit-worthiness of iPSCs in the United States and was characterized by attempts to underdetermine conflicting ethical and socio-economic values - to seek innovations that are "incompletely theorized" in the sense that they purportedly allow stakeholders to refrain from engagement with the divisive values that created impediments to research in stem cell biology. When conflict arose with the epistemic standards in preclinical pursuit required to ensure the safety and efficacy of biomedical innovations, it resulted in the critical appraisal of the values used to rationalize policies for the distribution of federal resources for biomedical research. The case demonstrates how non-epistemic values impinge on standards of assessment in translational science, how background assumptions about innovation can drive practical pursuit, and how conflicting values and goals in research creates an important context for the appraisal of emerging science, technology and policy.

Human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cell research trends: complementation and diversification of the field

Research in human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) is rapidly developing and there are expectations that this research may obviate the need to use human embryonic stem cells (hESCs), the ethics of which has been a subject of controversy for more than 15 years. In this study, we investigated approximately 3,400 original research papers that reported an experimental use of these types of human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) and were published from 2008 to 2013. We found that research into both cell types was conducted independently and further expanded, accompanied by a growing intersection of both research fields. Moreover, an in-depth analysis of papers that reported the use of both cell types indicates that hESCs are still being used as a “gold standard,” but in a declining proportion of publications. Instead, the expanding research field is diversifying and hESC and hiPSC lines are increasingly being used in more independent research and application areas.

•

Research in hESCs and hiPSCs has recently expanded, but to different extents

•

Research in hESCs and hiPSCs partially overlaps, but is also diversifying

•

The “gold standard” use of hESCs is relatively declining

•

Only a few hESC lines are predominantly used as a benchmark in hiPSC research

Stem cells for spine surgery

In the past few years, stem cells have become the focus of research by regenerative medicine professionals and tissue engineers. Embryonic stem cells, although capable of differentiating into cell lineages of all three germ layers, are limited in their utilization due to ethical issues. In contrast, the autologous harvest and subsequent transplantation of adult stem cells from bone marrow, adipose tissue or blood have been experimentally utilized in the treatment of a wide variety of diseases ranging from myocardial infarction to Alzheimer’s disease. The physiologic consequences of stem cell transplantation and its impact on functional recovery have been studied in countless animal models and select clinical trials. Unfortunately, the bench to bedside translation of this research has been slow. Nonetheless, stem cell therapy has received the attention of spinal surgeons due to its potential benefits in the treatment of neural damage, muscle trauma, disk degeneration and its potential contribution to bone fusion.