We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse this site, you accept our cookie policy.×
Skip main navigation
Open Drawer MenuClose Drawer Menu
Aging Health
Bioelectronics in Medicine
Biomarkers in Medicine
Breast Cancer Management
CNS Oncology
Colorectal Cancer
Concussion
Epigenomics
Future Cardiology
Future Medicine AI
Future Microbiology
Future Neurology
Future Oncology
Future Rare Diseases
Future Virology
Hepatic Oncology
HIV Therapy
Immunotherapy
International Journal of Endocrine Oncology
International Journal of Hematologic Oncology
Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine
Lung Cancer Management
Melanoma Management
Nanomedicine
Neurodegenerative Disease Management
Pain Management
Pediatric Health
Personalized Medicine
Pharmacogenomics
Regenerative Medicine
Perspective

The early career researcher's toolkit: translating tissue engineering, regenerative medicine and cell therapy products

    Qasim A Rafiq†

    *Author for correspondence:

    E-mail Address: q.rafiq@aston.ac.uk

    Centre for Biological Engineering, Wolfson School of Mechanical & Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK

    Aston Medical Research Institute, School of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Ilida Ortega†

    Bioengineering & Health Technologies Group, The School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, S10 2TA, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Stuart I Jenkins†

    Institute for Science & Technology in Medicine, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Samantha L Wilson†

    Academic Ophthalmology, Division of Clincial Neuroscience, Queen's Medical Centre Campus, University of Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Asha K Patel†

    Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering & Modeling, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK

    David H Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Amanda L Barnes†

    Department of Biology, University of York, YO10 5DD, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Christopher F Adams†

    Institute for Science & Technology in Medicine, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    ,
    Derfogail Delcassian†

    Department of Materials, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, London SW7 2AZ, UK

    Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Centre for Biological Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    &
    David Smith†

    Centre for Biological Engineering, Wolfson School of Mechanical & Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK

    PCT, a Caladrius company, 4 Pearl Court, Suite C, Allendale, NJ 07401, USA

    †All authors contributed equally.

    Search for more papers by this author

    Published Online:2 Dec 2015https://doi.org/10.2217/rme.15.56

    Abstract

    Although the importance of translation for the development of tissue engineering, regenerative medicine and cell-based therapies is widely recognized, the process of translation is less well understood. This is particularly the case among some early career researchers who may not appreciate the intricacies of translational research or make decisions early in development which later hinders effective translation. Based on our own research and experiences as early career researchers involved in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine translation, we discuss common pitfalls associated with translational research, providing practical solutions and important considerations which will aid process and product development. Suggestions range from effective project management, consideration of key manufacturing, clinical and regulatory matters and means of exploiting research for successful commercialization.

    Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

    References

    • 1 Cyranoski D. Collateral damage: how a case of misconduct brought a leading Japanese biology institute to its knees. Nature 520(7549), 600–603 (2015).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 2 Cyranoski D. Whistle-blower breaks his silence. Nature 505(7485), 593–594 (2014).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 3 Collins FS, Tabak LA. Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility. Nature 505(7485), 612–613 (2014).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 4 Freedman LP, Cockburn IM, Simcoe TS. The economics of reproducibility in preclinical research. PLoS Biol. 13(6), e1002165 (2015).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 5 Fogler HS. Experimental planning. In: Essentials of Chemical Reaction Engineering. Fogler HS (Ed.). Pearson Education, Inc., NJ, USA, 271–272 (2011).
      Google Scholar
    • 6 Kirouac DC, Zandstra PW. The systematic production of cells for cell therapies. Cell Stem Cell 3(4), 369–381 (2008).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 7 Placzek MR, Chung IM, Macedo HM et al. Stem cell bioprocessing: fundamentals and principles. J. R. Soc. Interface 6(32), 209–232 (2009).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 8 Williams DJ, Thomas RJ, Hourd PC et al. Precision manufacturing for clinical–quality regenerative medicines. Philos. Trans. A. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 370(1973), 3924–3949 (2012).•• An overview of the importance of precision manufacturing in the tissue engineering and regenerative medicine field with a description of quality engineering techniques and their application for successful translation
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 9 Ratcliffe E, Thomas RJ, Williams DJ. Current understanding and challenges in bioprocessing of stem cell-based therapies for regenerative medicine. Br. Med. Bull. 100(1), 137–155 (2011).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 10 Bravery CA, Carmen J, Fong T et al. Potency assay development for cellular therapy products: an ISCT review of the requirements and experiences in the industry. Cytotherapy 15(1), 9–19 (2013).• A comprehensive review of the requirements for defining and measuring the quality of cellular products, a prerequisite for successful translation.
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 11 Burger SR, Juliano L, Wang W. Cellular raw material collection in cell therapy: critical determinant of product quality. Drug Discov. World 15(3), 29–34 (2014).
      Google Scholar
    • 12 Lionberger RA, Lee SL, Lee L, Raw A, Yu LX. Quality by design: concepts for andas. AAPS J. 10(2), 268–276 (2008).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 13 Zimmerman RL. 10 best practices of good laboratories. ASTM Stand. News 38(6), 24–31 (2010).
      Google Scholar
    • 14 Brosnan K, Want A, Coopman K, Hewitt CJ. Multiparameter flow cytometry for the characterization of human embryonic stem cells. Biotechnol. Lett. 35(1), 55–65 (2013).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 15 Shapiro HM. Practical Flow Cytometry. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA (2005).
      Google Scholar
    • 16 Plagnol AC, Rowley E, Martin P, Livesey F. Industry perceptions of barriers to commercialization of regenerative medicine products in the UK. Regen. Med. 4(4), 549–559 (2009).
      Google Scholar
    • 17 Couto DS, Perez-Breva L, Cooney CL. Regenerative medicine: learning from past examples. Tissue Eng. Part A 18(21–22), 2386–2393 (2012).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 18 Cai M, Yang Y. Targeted genome editing tools for disease modeling and gene therapy. Curr. Gene Ther. 14(1), 2–9 (2014).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 19 Mason C. Regenerative medicine 2.0. Regen. Med. 2(1), 11–18 (2007).
      Google Scholar
    • 20 Bubela T, Mccabe C. Value-engineered translation for regenerative medicine: meeting the needs of health systems. Stem Cells Dev. 22(Suppl. 1), 89–93 (2013).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 21 Bertram TA, Tentoff E, Johnson PC, Tawil B, Van Dyke M, Hellman KB. Hurdles in tissue engineering/regenerative medicine product commercialization: a pilot survey of governmental funding agencies and the financial industry. Tissue Eng. Part A 18(21–22), 2187–2194 (2012).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 22 Weinstein MC, Torrance G, McGuire A. QALYs: the basics. Value Health 12, S5–S9 (2009).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 23 Wouters S, Van Exel NJA, Rohde KIM, Brouwer WBF. Are all health gains equally important? An exploration of acceptable health as a reference point in health care priority setting. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13(1), 1–10 (2015).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 24 Brinker M, O'connor D. Stakeholders in outcome measures: review from a clinical perspective. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 471(11), 3426–3436 (2013).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 25 Mcateer H, Cosh E, Freeman G, Pandit A, Wood P, Lilford R. Cost-effectiveness analysis at the development phase of a potential health technology: examples based on tissue engineering of bladder and urethra. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 1(5), 343–349 (2007).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 26 Trounson A, Baum E, Gibbons D, Tekamp-Olson P. Developing a case study model for successful translation of stem cell therapies. Cell Stem Cell 6(6), 513–516 (2010).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 27 Rose JB, May M, Williams DJ. Determinants of clinician adoption of regenerative therapies in the UK and Canada: an ophthalmology perspective. Regen. Med. 10(4), 1–13 (2015).
      CASGoogle Scholar
    • 28 Champkin J. George E.P. Box, 1919–2013. Significance 10(3), 32–34 (2013).
      Google Scholar
    • 29 Box GEP. Robustness in the strategy of scientific model building. In: Robustness in Statistics. Launer RL, Wilkinson GN (Eds). Academic Press, NY, USA, 201–236 (1979).
      Google Scholar
    • 30 Leist M, Hartung T. Inflammatory findings on species extrapolations: humans are definitely no 70-kg mice. Arch. Toxicol. 87(4), 563–567 (2013).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 31 Lemmon VP, Ferguson AR, Popovich PG et al. Minimum information about a spinal cord injury experiment: a proposed reporting standard for spinal cord injury experiments. J. Neurotrauma 31(15), 1354–1361 (2014).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 32 Lowenstein PR, Castro MG. Uncertainty in the translation of preclinical experiments to clinical trials. Why do most Phase III clinical trials fail? Curr. Gene Ther. 9(5), 368–374 (2009).• An easily digestible survey of why clinical failures occur with an important rallying call for ‘preclinical robustness’.
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 33 Cook N, Jodrell DI, Tuveson DA. Predictive in vivo animal models and translation to clinical trials. Drug Discov. Today 17(5–6), 253–260 (2012).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 34 Andersen ME, Betts K, Dragan Y et al. Developing microphysiological systems for use as regulatory tools – challenges and opportunities. Altex 31(3), 364–367 (2014).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 35 Balls M. The origins and early days of the three Rs concept. Altern. Lab. Anim. 37(3), 255–265 (2009).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 36 Liebsch M, Grune B, Seiler A et al. Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives. Arch. Toxicol. 85(8), 841–858 (2011).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 37 Varga OE, Hansen AK, Sandoe P, Olsson IA. Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion. Altern. Lab. Anim. 38(3), 245–248 (2010).• A comprehensive overview of the urgent need for, and a proposed route toward, preclinical model validation.
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 38 US FDA. Guidance for industry and FDA staff: classification of products as drugs and devices and additional product classification issues (2011). www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM258957.pdf.
      Google Scholar
    • 39 Lee JK, Responte DJ, Cissell DD, Hu JC, Nolta JA, Athanasiou KA. Clinical translation of stem cells: insight for cartilage therapies. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 34(1), 89–100 (2014).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 40 FDA. Definition of primary mode of action of a combination product. Final rule. Fed. Regist. 70(164), 49848–49862 (2005).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 41 Kramer DB, Xu S, Kesselheim AS. Regulation of medical devices in the United States and European Union. N. Engl. J. Med. 366(9), 848–855 (2012).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 42 Pashuck ET, Stevens MM. Designing regenerative biomaterial therapies for the clinic. Sci. Transl Med. 4(160), 160sr164 (2012).
      Google Scholar
    • 43 European Medicines Agency, Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT). Reflection paper on classification of advanced therapy medicinal products (ema/cat/600280/2010) (2012). www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2015/06/WC500187744.pd.
      Google Scholar
    • 44 Baum E, Littman N, Ruffin M, Ward S, Aschheim K. White paper: key tools and technology hurdles in advancing stem-cell therapies (2013). www.cirm.ca.gov/files/files/funding_page/Key-Tools-Tech-Hurdles-in-Advancing-Stem-Cell-Therapies.pdf.
      Google Scholar
    • 45 Halme DG, Kessler DA. Fda regulation of stem-cell-based therapies. N. Engl. J. Med. 355(16), 1730–1735 (2006).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 46 Prestwich GD, Bhatia S, Breuer CK et al. What is the greatest regulatory challenge in the translation of biomaterials to the clinic? Sci. Transl Med. 4(160), 160cm114 (2012).
      Google Scholar
    • 47 FDA. Medical devices containing materials derived from animal sources (except for in vitro diagnostic devices) 2014. www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM381491.pdf.
      Google Scholar
    • 48 Kemp P. History of regenerative medicine: looking backwards to move forwards. Regen. Med. 1(5), 653–669 (2006).
      Google Scholar
    • 49 US FDA. Summary of safety and effectiveness data for Apligraf™ (1998). www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf/P950032b.pdf.
      Google Scholar
    • 50 Azuma K. Regulatory landscape of regenerative medicine in Japan. Curr. Stem Cell Rep. 1(2), 118–128 (2015).•• A brief but important paper providing an overview of the regulatory, reimbursement and other strategic changes in Japan with respect to regenerative medicine.
      CASGoogle Scholar
    • 51 Cyranoski D. Japan to offer fast-track approval path for stem cell therapies. Nat. Med. 19(5), 510–510 (2013).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 52 Office for Life Sciences, Department for Business Innovation & Skills. Taking stock of regenerative medicine in the United Kingdom (2011). www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32459/11-1056-taking-stock-of-regenerative-medicine.pdf.
      Google Scholar
    • 53 Narkilahti S, Rajala K, Pihlajamaki H, Suuronen R, Hovatta O, Skottman H. Monitoring and analysis of dynamic growth of human embryonic stem cells: comparison of automated instrumentation and conventional culturing methods. Biomed. Eng. Online doi:10.1186/1475-925X-6-11 (2007) (Epub ahead of print).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 54 Health Canada. Summary Basis of Decision (SBD) for PROCHYMAL® (2012). www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/sbd-smd/drug-med/sbd_smd_2012_prochymal_150026-eng.php.
      Google Scholar
    • 55 Thurman-Newell JA, Petzing JN, Williams DJ. Quantification of biological variation in blood-based therapy – a summary of a meta-analysis to inform manufacturing in the clinic. Vox Sang. 6, 11 (2015).
      Google Scholar
    • 56 Rafiq QA, Hewitt CJ. Cell therapies: why scale matters. Pharm. Bioprocess. 3(2), 97–99 (2015).• A perspective on the importance of understanding the significance and impact of scale for therapeutic bioprocess development.
      Google Scholar
    • 57 Pollard D. Are automated disposable small-scale reactors set to dominate the future of pharmaceutical bioprocess development? Pharm. Bioprocess. 2(1), 9–12 (2014).
      Google Scholar
    • 58 Fierabracci A. Recents patents for isolating, delivering and tracking adult stem cells in regenerative medicine. Recent Pat. Drug Deliv. Formul. 4(2), 105–113 (2010).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 59 Gov UK. Intellectual property and your work (2014). www.gov.uk/intellectual-property-an-overview/what-ip-is.
      Google Scholar
    • 60 Willemse L, Lyall D, Rudnicki M. Catalyzing stem cell research. Regen. Med. 3(5), 761–764 (2008).
      Google Scholar
    • 61 Munisi HI, Xie Z, Sengoku S. Exploring innovation in stem cell and regenerative medicine in Japan: the power of the consortium-based approach. Regen. Med. 9(4), 467–477 (2014).
      CASGoogle Scholar
    • 62 Research Councils UK. Material world: knowledge economy (2004). www.rcuk.ac.uk/Publications/archive/MaterialWorld.
      Google Scholar
    • 63 British Standards Institute (BSI). PAS83:2012 developing human cells for clinical applications in the European Union and the United States of America (2012). www.cambridge-brc.org.uk/sites/default/files/PAS83-2012%5B1%5D.pdf.
      Google Scholar