Marketing Experimental Stem Cell Therapies in the UK: Biomedical Lifestyle Products and the Promise of Regenerative Medicine in the Digital Era

The evolution and ongoing challenge of unproven cell-based interventions

Unproven cell-based interventions (CBIs) emerged early in the 2000s as a particularly problematic form of unproven therapy and remain a vexing policy problem to this day. These unproven interventions can harm patients both physically and financially and can complicate the process of developing a rigorous evidence base to support the translation of novel stem cell or other cell therapies. In this concise review, we examine the emergence of unproven CBIs and the various policy approaches that have been pursued or proposed to address this problem. We review the evolution of this field over the last 2 decades and explore why these policy efforts have proven challenging. We conclude by highlighting potential directions that the field could evolve and urging continued attention to both current and future forms of unproven CBIs to minimize future risks to patients and the field and to promote the development of evidence-based cell therapies.

US businesses engaged in direct-to-consumer marketing of perinatal stem cell interventions following the Food and Drug Administration's enforcement discretion era

BACKGROUND AIMS

The goal of this study was to analyze online marketing representations made by 300 US businesses selling allogeneic perinatal stem cell products. The study was conducted after a period of enforcement discretion by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

METHODS

Data mining and content analysis were used to identify, analyze and categorize marketing claims made on the websites of 300 businesses selling perinatal stem cell interventions.

RESULTS

The study identified types of perinatal interventions companies advertised, geographic locations of clinics selling such products, types of companies operating in this space, diseases and injuries such businesses claim to treat, prices companies charge for such interventions, brand names of advertised perinatal cell products and identities of suppliers.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of US businesses market unapproved perinatal stem cell products for various indications. This widespread commercial activity occurred following the conclusion of a period of enforcement discretion by the FDA and suggests the need for more robust and comprehensive regulatory responses to businesses selling unapproved perinatal stem cell products.

Creative regulatory practices to develop stem-cell technology: the way forward for Malaysia

Malaysia aspires to develop regenerative medicine through stem-cell technology. It needs a regulatory system that could facilitate development and prevent unethical practices. A comparative legal analysis on the regulation of stem-cell technology, with a focus on stem-cell research in Malaysia and selected Commonwealth countries that are experienced in regulating this complex technology, demonstrates that the selected Commonwealth countries have adopted a hybrid of different regulatory mechanisms. This paper argues that Malaysia should consider adopting a similar approach to equip relevant authorities with different regulatory mechanisms that are able to promote innovation in stem-cell research activities and cultivate a successful and profitable regenerative medicine industry in the future. Such a strategic action can produce an optimal regulatory outcome and help Malaysia to realize its aspiration.

Stem-cell clinics in the UK: a web-based study

Aim: Explore the nature and extent of web-based promotion of stem cell treatments marketed by clinics in the UK. Materials & methods: Web-based analysis of clinics in the UK using predefined variables, with analysis of eligible clinics according to preset criteria of ethical relevance. Results: A majority (79%) of UK clinics were judged to be problematic. Information was found to be lacking, misleading or otherwise problematic in several respects, including a lack of information on risks of adverse effects, unjustifiably optimistic depictions of therapeutic effectiveness, and questionable presentational approaches such as the use of celebrity patient testimonials. Conclusion: In a majority of cases, commercial clinics in the UK portray stem-cell therapies on their websites in ethically questionable ways.

Weighing up the evidence used by direct-to-consumer stem cell businesses

Hundreds of businesses across the United States offer direct-to-consumer stem-cell-based interventions that have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Here, we characterize the types of evidence used on the websites of 59 stem cell businesses in the Southwest United States to market their services. We identify over a dozen forms of evidence, noting that businesses are less likely to rely on “gold-standard” scientific evidence, like randomized clinical trials, and instead draw substantially on forms of evidence that we identify as being “ambiguous.” Ambiguous evidence has some scientific or medical basis, but its interpretation is highly context-dependent. These findings highlight the interpretive responsibility placed on prospective patients. We identify actions for regulators and professional societies to assist with evaluating evidence, but caution that focusing on the (in)validity of particular evidence types is unlikely to eliminate demand for stem-cell-based treatments in this complex marketplace.

•

We characterize the evidence used by 59 stem cell businesses in the Southwest United States

•

We identify that clinics rely on scientifically and medically “ambiguous” evidence

•

Ambiguous evidence places interpretive responsibility on prospective patients

•

We offer suggestions to help prospective patients navigate this complex landscape

Reflection on the enactment and impact of safety laws for regenerative medicine in Japan

Japan's Act on the Safety of Regenerative Medicine (ASRM) created an innovative regulatory framework intended to safely promote the clinical development of stem cell-based interventions (SCBIs) while subjecting commercialized unproven SCBIs to greater scrutiny and accountability. This article reviews ASRM's origins, explains its unprecedented scope, and assesses how it envisions the regulation of SCBIs. This analysis is used to highlight three key insights that are pertinent to the current revision of the ASRM: clarifying how the concept of safety should be defined and assessed in research and clinical care settings; revisiting risk criteria for review of SCBIs; and taking stronger measures to support the transition from unproven interventions to evidence-based therapies. Finally, the article reflects on lessons drawn from Japanese experiences in dealing with unproven SCBIs for international endeavors to regulate SCBIs.

Cell-based therapy in soft tissue sports injuries of the knee: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

An ever-increasing number of clinics are offering purportedly 'regenerative' stem-cell treatments, although cell-based therapies may not primarily act as stem cells and have shown the ability to regenerate end-target tissues in some clinical studies only. We aim to systematically review the evidence for their use in soft-tissue sports injuries of the knee.

AREAS COVERED

A search for articles pertaining to the use of preparations of, or containing, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in human subjects in sports knee injuries yielded 14 relevant results for inclusion after screening: 7 used cultured MSCs, 5 bone marrow concentrate (BMC), and the remaining 2 evaluated stromal vascular fraction (SVF) and tenocyte-like-cells. Most studies were level 3 or lower (n = 9).

EXPERT OPINION

There is insufficient high-quality evidence for the use of cell-based therapies that demonstrates either ligamentous or tendinous healing, meniscal volume restoration, or post-traumatic osteoarthritis amelioration/regression. Methods of cell harvesting, preparation, and application are highly heterogenous. Efforts should be directed toward standardization of protocols and their reporting, starting with more basic scientific investigations of MSCs and their niche, as well as rigorous, large clinical RCTs adhering to the reporting principles set out by recent expert consensus.