Plans Unveiled for State-Financed Stem Cell Work in California [NYT]
By NICHOLAS WADE
Published: October 5, 2006
The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine issued a plan today for how it would spend the $3 billion assigned by the state’s voters to finance stem cell research.
Navigating between scientists who say that much basic research remains to be done and patients’ advocates who want the focus to be on new treatments, the institute says it will spend $823 million on basic stem cell research, $899 million on applied or preclinical research and $656 million on taking new treatments through clinical trials.
A further $273 million is allocated for universities to construct “N.I.H-free” buildings, meaning laboratories in which none of the equipment has been bought with money from the National Institutes of Health. In this way, researchers can be sure of not violating the rules that restrict federal money to research using government-approved stem cell lines.
The plans must be approved by the institute’s board and are subject to favorable resolution of the legal problems that have tied up the institute’s money. But court decisions so far have been going the institute’s way. In July, after President Bush’s veto of a bill to widen stem cell research, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger lent the institute $150 million from the state to begin awarding grants.
The new plan does not earmark money for specific diseases. Patients’ advocates may also be disappointed at the long horizon held out for the promised cures.
“It is unlikely that CIRM will be able to fully develop stem cell therapy for routine clinical use during the 10 years of the plan,” the institute warned.
But the institute hopes within the 10 years to have proof of principle of a stem cell treatment for at least one disease, with another two to four treatments having reached the stage of early clinical trials.
The president of the institute, Dr. Zach Hall, said there was great attrition in developing new drugs and treatments, since many promising candidates turned out to be flawed.
“There is so much hope invested in stem cells that it’s sobering for all of us to realize what a long time it takes to bring a safe and effective therapeutic into widespread clinical use,” Dr. Hall said.
nytimes.com |
