I was reading an article that was discussing the merits of an allogeneic iPS cell bank. (http://www.signalsblog.ca/ips-cell-banking-how-to-almost-but-not-quite-have-patient-matched-stem-cell-therapies/)
The author was referencing a recent publication in Cell Stem Cell that quotes:
“While it is possible that clinical GMP-grade autologous iPSC lines could be derived on an individual basis, it seems unlikely that these will be used as a source for large numbers of patients in the near future, given the time and cost required to produce clinical GMP cell lines and to differentiate these into cells and tissues of clinical utility. It is likely, therefore, that a bank of allogeneic clinical GMP cell lines will be required to allow the ﬁeld to develop over the next few years…” (http://www.cell.com/cell-stem-cell/retrieve/pii/S1934590913003664)
It is a very good article that makes valid points and I agree that the authors of the Cell paper are a very scholarly team, I give them much credence. But I could not help but reflect on an article that I had read a few weeks earlier in the journal Nature titled “Stem cells made with near-perfect efficiency” (http://www.nature.com/news/stem-cells-made-with-near-perfect-efficiency-1.13775)
Will this extremely efficient iPS cell production protocol become an industry standard? Only time will tell, but it is exciting news. I’m not sure if the team of the Cell paper had the opportunity to incorporate this information into their article but I think this shows that it is difficult to predict future trends in a field that redevelop’s itself so rapidly.
What may be considered “fact” today could be hearsay tomorrow!