Not exactly the news for which we hoped.
Most of us know in our bones that stem cells can provide a great deal of benefit for us. Whether we grow those stem cells to create new kidneys or new hearts to deal with our ailing folks or use stem cells to create new skin for those who have suffered terrible burns, we look forward to the day that stem cell research will be fully allowed.
But, in the meantime, we do some experiments with pluripotent stem cells- cells we have tricked to behave like stem cells, others with adult stem cells (as found in our dermis, among other places).
Many health practitioners have been using these adult stems cells, injecting them into damaged heart tissue, hoping they will replace the dead or dying cells. This is not a new thought- the trials have been effected over the past 15 years. And, the results have been problematic.
Part of the reason this research continued was because of results reported by Dr. Piero Anversa, a heretofore esteemed scientist at Peter Bent Brigham/Harvard Med. He was considered a giant in stem cell research, claiming that he could provide cardiac progenitor cells to an ailing heart and create cardiomyocetes, the cells that afford the heart the ability to beat.
Except, Harvard and Peter Bent Brigham have forced the recall of 31 papers by Anversa and his team. His data was fabricated. Dr. Jeffrey Molkentin (University of Cincinnati and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital),among others, reported in Nature that these cardiac progenitor cells were not stem cells. Moreover, they didn’t regenerate heart muscle when injected into mouse hearts.
Then, the retort was that the injections did not directly cause heart regeneration, but factors that these cells secreted were so doing. But, Dr. Molkentin, along with his team at the University (Drs. RJ Vagnozzi, M Maillet, MA Sargent, H Khalil, AK Johansen, JA Schwanekamp, AJ York, V Huang, and S Sadayappan) and Dr. M Nahrendorf of Mass General/Harvard Med just published a new study in Nature. “An acute immune response underlies the benefit of cardiac stem-cell therapy”.
Their study demonstrated that there were only modest benefits from the injections- whether they were cardiac progenitor cells or bone marrow cells. But, more importantly, the benefits were due to an immune response. Injecting dead cellular debris or an immunopotentiator (aka, immunostimulator) could heal a heart attack scar. The researchers showed that the injected cells die- and those dying and dead cells stimulate an immune response that is the healing factor. Instead of stimulating the production of new cardiomyocytes, an acute immune response by CCR2+ and CX3CR1+ macrophages was the ‘saving grace’. (This was the response upon administration of 2 different adult stem cells, freeze/thaw killed cells, or a chemical inducement of the immune response- all with identical results- and all provided functional rejuvenation of the injured heart.)
Maybe now we can improve that immune response development to truly heal the damaged heart.
Not the news we wanted, but sounds like a glimmer of hope in here somewhere. But fabricated results? Not again….
Alana recently posted..Offbeat Christmas#MusicMovesMe
The real issue is all those PhD students who were following the false leads and spent years attempting to complete their studies- only to find out they were relying on the false data to start their studies.