Children’s Memorial Hermann Hospital and Cord Blood Registry® (CBR) are launching the first FDA-approved, Phase I safety study on the use of cord blood stem cells to treat children with sensorineural hearing loss.
The study, which will use patients’ stem cells from their own stored umbilical cord blood, is the first-of-its-kind, and has the potential to restore hearing. This follows evidence from published laboratory studies that cord blood helps repair damaged organs in the inner ear.
The year-long study will follow 10 children, ages 6 weeks to 18 months, who have sustained post-birth hearing loss. Children who are deaf as a result of a genetic anomaly or syndrome are not eligible. To ensure consistency in cord blood stem cell processing, storage, and release for infusion, CBR is the only stem cell bank providing clients for the study.......
......
Researchers will obtain and process the patients’ stored cord blood for treatment. The cells then will be given to the patients via IV infusion, and patients will be observed for several hours in the hospital.
Patients will return to the hospital to repeat all tests except the MRI at one month and one year, and all tests with an MRI at six months.
“This study is exciting because it might offer a non-surgical option for some children with profound loss,” Linda Baumgartner said. “More importantly, this is the first treatment with the potential to restore normal hearing.”The new Phase 1 study already began in April 2011 and will end April 2015 although the collection on final study results will end in April 2014. This study will use stem cells from cord blood saved at a cord bank after a baby is born. Stem cells from the deaf baby's cord blood will be done via IV transfusion back into the child. Parents whose deaf children qualify for the trial study will decide whether to try the new procedure or not.
Since this news came out it didn't take long for an outcry in the form of a petition for culturally deaf people and others to decry the IV transfusion stem cell study as:
....inhumane and unethical and condemn this hospital, corporation, other collaborators and the FDA for treating our Deaf infants in this experiment as their guinea pigs.The original petitioner went so far as to claim such procedure as dangerous and that it carries "long lasting risks" but never elaborated on exactly what those "long lasting risks" are. However, there is a similar but previous safety study using cord blood stem cells on children with cerebral palsy age 1 to 12 years old that began in January 2010. Final data collection on outcome ends in February 2012 which is next month. Ironically, there appears to be no objection from any particular protest group for this IV transfusion safety study for babies and older on reversing their cerebral palsy condition.
The MCG team follows on the heels of a pilot study at Duke University which is exploring if cord blood can be readily applied to infant’s with palsy like symptoms in the first two weeks after birth. Both teams are looking to verify the anecdotal evidence that cord stem cells can be used to ‘cure’ CP children. If successful, the work at MCG and Duke University may provide parents with hope that storing a child’s cord blood could be an effective shield against cerebral palsy.Cord blood IV transfusions have been done in children and adults.
To be safe, most cord blood transplants done so far have been in children and smaller adults. Researchers are now looking for ways to use cord blood for transplants in larger adults.This first ever FDA approved study on hearing restoration (sensorineural hearing loss) for deaf children describes the study:
Acquired sensorineural hearing loss is characterized by a loss of functioning hair cells in the Organ of Corti, with greater hair cell loss correlating with more severe hearing impairment. Children with sensorineural hearing loss experience difficulty developing normal language which usually leads to poor academic and social development. Currently, there are no reparative therapeutic options available, and treatments are designed to augment the diminished function of the injured Organ of Corti.This may turn out to be a promising result since it says that pre-clinical data suggest that such a procedure may restore hair cells thus lead to hearing improvement. This is obviously a much more natural process, if proved successful, involving the baby's own stem cells from the baby's umbilical cord (cord blood) could ultimately turn out to be much better option than cochlear implants. In fact, if successful would shorten the prediction time scale to seveal years on a reversing sensorineural hearing loss instead of a few decades away. Over a year and half a ago in my blog I commented that in 2004 a prediction was made that an application for hearing loss rather than a cure could be at least twenty years away (or by 2024) by Dr. Rubel. In another article in 2004 Dr. Rivolta said a cure could be possible in 10 to 15 years away (by 2014 to 2019). In 2009 in the Department of Otolaryngology University of Miami Ear Institute's newsletter quoted believing they could be 10 years away (or 2019) from a cure at the earliest possible timeline. But most scientists seem to concur that a cure or a very applicable treatment on reversing hearing loss would be seen within their (the scientists') lifetime...and that's not very far off folks.
Pre-clinical data suggest progenitor cell infusions may enhance intrinsic repair mechanisms in the Organ of Corti which may restore hair cells. This treatment could ultimately lead to hearing improvement. Human umbilical cord blood (hUCB) is an available, autologous, stored progenitor cell population available for potential therapeutic use. The primary objective of this study is to determine the safety of autologous hUCB infusion in children with acquired hearing loss. The secondary objective is to determine if functional, physiologic and anatomic outcomes are improved following hUCB treatment in this patient population.
15 comments:
HUH? this is so outdated (very old information like 2 years ago) where have you been? You must be in the basement and studies to sterotypes the deaf community? Sadly
Occupy KokonutPundit
I think we need to thank genetic engineering for doing the stem cells that might aid the hair cells.
The Appeals Court ok'ed to process the fundings for the ESC program.
Here's the link....
www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/04/esc-funding-ban
Audism Free America (AFA) made the vlog about the five demands for the EDHI conference in St. Louis. You can see the demand #5 -- Genetic Engineering. I was like huh? It's good to have the genetic engineering to prevent from getting any diseases or fixing the irregularities of the chromosomes.
I am pretty sure that the EHDI researchers/scientists will laugh at AFA's demand #5. We need the genetic engineering! They cannot win.
http://www.youtube.com/user/audismfreeamerica and you will see "AFA-ehdi 5 demands"
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how the audiogram charts be changed over the years if the hair cells from the ESC continues to be successful in the long run.
Anony #1, It is not old information. This is relatively new. The study began in April 2011 and will continue for three years while they get qualified candidates to do their year long Phase I study.
This study could actually be a turning point in regenerative medicine for hearing loss. We won't know until a few years out the final result. Meanwhile, stem cells research continues to mature in the field of regenerative medicine.
No wonder I am seeing a petitions being signed by angry deaf people to ban stem cell research.
I hope stem cell research becomes successful for deaf people. Once deaf people get hearing, they can move to better things, get real jobs instead of VRS jobs, hang out with anybody instead of just deaf friends, be able to listen to radio and television, and have much more freedom!
Someone shared with me a study done in England (so far it's off the top of that person's head...I have not bothered to search for it..might, later) that if there were a cure for deafness, approximately 70 percent will go for it and the remaining 30 percent would not.
If that is true, deafness will not be eradicated. A cure would be available for those who are ELIGIBLE and those who WANT it.
I'm all for stem cell cures for any defect, disease, or disorder. Of course, deafness isn't a disease, but there are diseases that causes deafness.
The only thing that will stop me in my tracks is if government mandates cure for every deaf person. Otherwise, we should have a choice to decide whether or not we want a cure. I know I will go for it if and when it is available for someone with my kind of deafness.
This petition is silly. Who are they to dictate to other deaf persons the choice to choose a cure if they want it? Who are they to dictate to parents who have the right to decide for their child?
Mike, an interesting blog. Of course, I was not aware of this recent study until you brought it up. Again, I have been out of touch.
I had to opportunity to look at your information and think it is very good and give plenty of information to digest and to comphrened what exactly the stem cell researchers are trying to accomplish in their experiment. It is not without any difficulties to build criteria for its purpose.
I have been reading the acquired hearing loss (syndromic deafness). According to their guidelines, the positive test for genetic hearing loss is not part of their critera. Also, I went into their CBR (Cord Blood Registry) to "Get Connected" for the hearing loss research issue. They were specifically looking for a baby, who had viral disease, which was induced by high fever, meningitis, Head Injury from a fall or accident that had resulted with hearing loss, but not adversely affected the brain functions (this particular section does bothers me a little bit), prematurity, and an abrupt noise, such as explosion, or sustained hearing resulting from. I find it very curious on their criteria.
It a little different than what was written down in the ClinicalTrials.gov website. It had mentioned that the exclusion of the criteria is known history or recently treated ear or other infection. I am wondering how and why those two CBR and Clinical Trials have different perpectives because CBR wants the ones with Viral Disease and Meningitis, but Clinical Trials does not. Is there something I am missing or misunderstanding something?
Secondly, when they mentioned about positive genetic hearing loss, are they referring to greater than 70 genetic variations that can cause hearing loss such as Connexion 26, 30, and 33? Are they including the ones with mitochondrial DNAs (mtDNA), that were cause by aminoglycosides medications for example? Is the mitochondrial DNA is part of the genetic material are they? I do find this a very difficult to research separately without the genetic issues since there had been evidence that it does cause hearing loss. Can you shed more light? I would appreciate it.
WisDeaf
Candy, I agree. They do not speak for nor decide for all parents of deaf babies. Parents have the right to make their decisions for their deaf/hh children.
Klort, I'd like to see stem cells address blindness or vision impairments, cerebral palsy, paralysis, hearing loss, Parkinson, Alzheimer's, etc...
"If that's true, deafness will not be eradicated. A cure would be available for those who are ELIGIBLE and those who WANT it."
"I'm all for Stem Cell cures for any defect, disease, or disorder. Of course, deafness isn't disease, but there are diseases that causes deafness."
I agree.
I never thought deafness would be curable. If it is succeeded by the stem cells' works, Cochlear Implant and Enovy Esteem will go out of the business. Who knows? Sorry to say, girl, Sarah Churman, you CAN'T get a cure! *wink*
BTW, opps. It's me White Ghost who made a comment at 7:06 am (second comment).
*wink*
White Ghost
Mike, thank you for blogging about this important news. I was hoping someone reasonable would. I also ready the original web site about what will be done to deaf babies, and see absolutely nothing to be alarmed about. Expectant parents have a lot of reasons to want to plan on storing their baby's cord blood. Cord blood from the placenta is rich in stem cells that could potentially be used to treat a long list of conditions, illnesses, and diseases. The baby's own stem cells will be infused via IV. What could possibly be inhumane about that? This is much less invasive than cochlear implant surgery. The study is small and only 10 infants will be included.
It makes me very sad that several of my highly intelligent, well-educated professional Deaf friends have bought into the baloney that's being spread about this study. I think they took someone's word for it without taking the trouble to read the original research study.
*shakes my head*
Another Anonymous
I apologized that I made a mistake syndromic instead of using non-syndromic.
It appears that the biggest challenge is the cost for the patient's families to travel and to stay a place if they are not nearby unless they have relatives or good friends to stay with.
According to your source in nonsyndromic deafness, it had indicated more than 30 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations. As for my source regarding more than 70 genetic markers for hearing loss, it was through my ENT Dr., which we were discussing about DNA for hearing loss. This was pre-cochlear implant discussion. Again, I do find the source and information very interesting and helpful. Thank you.
Nice thing about cord blood is a person can store them in liquid nitrogen for indefinite period of time. I think it is wonderful to have the ability to store them as long as they are needed especially for research purpose and/or their health reason.
As for the AFA issue about the stem cell research, I do have a problem with it. First of all, most of those people, who are involve with the "organization" despite they are not registered as one unless I am mistaken, are not involve with the medical society at all nor have in depth knowledge in medicine. Second of all, they are ethnocentric and egocentric, which only focus on Deaf Culture and linguistics. They do not care about other forms of hearing loss people. They will never be open and accept diversity including people, who can speak and listen very well. That is who they are. It is trivial to bring this point up. Lastly, we can not change who they are and want them to be. Bottom line, just ignore them and move on to enjoy this new journey of stem cell research.
The petition made me scratching my head.
First, the research is intended only for babies and toddlers who are born hearing and then, lose hearing to bacteria, virus or accident. Then, it uses baby or child's own stem cells that are harvested from umbilical cord to attempt to restore the damaged or lost hair cells in cochlear.
Where is the crime in that?
It looks like that they (people who signed the petition) truly want the babies and toddlers that are born hearing and become deaf later to remain deaf for the rest of the life and shun any possible means to restore hearing. I read the press release from Audism Free America and I shook my head at it. It seems that they are too eager and too enthusiastic to cast the audism red flag, as a referee in football game could do, and yell "Foul" whenever they see anyone who attempts to restore hearing.
It is all déjà vu. When FDA approved experiment on cochlear implant on toddlers way back in early 1990's (or was it late 1980's), there was outcry from the members of the Deaf culture including myself. But, the pioneers in cochlear implant kept on and now, many, if not all, cochlear implant users owed a great debt to them. History is going to repeat.
Joseph Pietro Riolo
josephpietrojeungriolo@gmail.com
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.
JPR, I think it's the fact that the originator of the petition didn't bother to research who the study is for. Everybody just simply jumped on board without bothering to investigate on their own. I actually had to go back in my blog and bold the words in red with an underline to make it clear to readers that this study is for babies/toddlers who have sustained post-birth hearing loss. Either they didn't read carefully or they are truly showing their colors on wanting to make sure that babies and toddlers born hearing but later become deaf stay deaf.
Deja vu is right. Except this time they cannot use the same excuses for cochlear implants on young children to try and justify their protests because regenerative medicine using stem cells to help restore hearing loss in children is a more natural process involving no surgery at all.
anonymous1 is correct. I notice the link is dated nov 2006. This paper was likely the result of several years worth of research.
Anony @8:11 PM....
"This study is currently recruiting participants.
Verified on April 2011 by Memorial Hermann Healthcare System
First Received on April 25, 2011. Last Updated on May 19, 2011
.
.
.
Further study details as provided by Memorial Hermann Healthcare System:
Primary Outcome Measures:
Physiologic Outcome [ Time Frame: One year ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Age appropriate physiologic outcome measures will be recorded pre-treatment, and one year following hUCB treatment
Secondary Outcome Measures:
Functional Outcome [ Time Frame: one year ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Age approriate Speech-Language assessments will be performed pre-treatment and one year post-treatment.
Estimated Enrollment: 10
Study Start Date: April 2011
Estimated Study Completion Date: April 2015
Estimated Primary Completion Date: April 2014 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)"
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01343394?term=hearing+loss+cord+blood&rank=1
This is a current study in progress.
Post a Comment