Funding opportunities

Patient-specific cells with nuclear transfer

Funding Type: 
SEED Grant
Grant Number: 
RS1-00404
Principle Investigator: 
Institution: 
Funds requested: 
$656 074
Funding Recommendations: 
Recommended
Grant approved: 
Yes
Public Abstract: 
Statement of Benefit to California: 
Review Summary: 
SYNOPSIS: Armed with experience and success in somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) in mouse, the investigator proposes to generate novel human embryonic stem cell lines from human embryos generated by SCNT. This proposal contains two specific aims. The first includes studies to optimize nuclear transfer in human oocytes. The second specific aim is the identification of methods to generate blastocyst-stage embryos with SCNT. Primary human fibroblasts or cultured fibroblast lines will serve as nuclear donors for specific aim 1. The oocyte donation will involve collaboration with Dr. Behr, who is the head of obstetrics and gynecology and the IVF laboratory at Stanford University Medical Center, and who has the appropriate protocols (no letter of collaboration was provided in the present application). This project can not be funded by the NIH and is the type of high risk, high reward project that CIRM is uniquely able to fund. INNVOATION AND SIGNIFICANCE: This proposal is of the highest caliber in terms of innovation and significance. After the Korean debacle on SCNT, there is currently no evidence that SCNT approaches can be used in humans. SCNT, however, has been successfully performed in a variety of animals, clearly establishing the feasibility of the technology. There is no reason to believe that provided with the right combination of technology and talent it will not work in humans. This proposal has a very high significance, as it boldly addresses this issue, and the reviewers strongly believe that this technology will work, given the appropriate infrastructure. Finally, the NIH cannot fund this grant. STRENGTHS: The lead investigator is part of a team assembled specifically to focus on nuclear transfer. In fact, the group assembled seems to be one of the most qualified to attempt this type of research. The team and the institutional environment are such that if success in SCNT is to be achieved, there is a high likelihood that it could be here. Another strength of this proposal is that the investigator is proposing to take a systematic approach toward optimizing nuclear transfer and culture of embryos to blastocyst stage. Overall, the proposal is well written, well planned, and well substantiated by preliminary data. WEAKNESSES: This is an extremely high-risk, but high-reward, project. As acknowledged by the author, the scientific risks of strategies to achieve nuclear reprogramming by SCNT with human cells are self-evident. There is the lack of a good disease target for SCNT. The only disease mentioned is Downs Syndrome, which would be better modeled from available PGD embryos, not via SCNT. The best disease candidates for SCNT are complex genetic diseases not easily assessed by PGD. There is no such disease presented nor any description of how they might procure somatic donor cell lines from patients with a suitable disease. An additional weakness is the proposed use of RNAi to modulate levels of DNMT1. Knock-down of DNMT1 in differentiated cells is incompatible with their growth and survival; while this could potentially be overcome in the donor somatic cells there is no strategy presented that would make the resulting hES cells usable in terms of differentiating them. In fact, there is no evidence that hES cells can tolerate a loss of DNMT1. Many of the other proposed improvements in aim 2 have already been evaluated in normal human embryo culture with extremely limited success. Thus, there are no experiments presented that would perhaps ovecome the previous problem of cleavage arrest of SCNT embryos noted in the preliminary results. The PI should explore the use of cleavage stage embryos for the derivation of hESC lines as there is clear evidence that they can generate this type of embryo. They might also take a cue from Boiani and Scholer and consider aggregating cloned embryos to improve their development to the blastocyst stage. Finally, a major issue here, as in any project of this nature, is the availability of enough human oocytes to perform all the experiments required to optimize SCNT in humans. What will the investigtors do if there are no oocytes donated/available for this research? DISCUSSION: A discussant noted that SCNT has been done in UK with human cells, (University of Newcastle by Murdoch) where investigators made hESC blastocyst but did not derive any lines. The point was made that the investigators would be well advised to try to diversify the source of oocytes, so as not to have 'all of your eggs in one basket'.
Conflicts: 

© 2013 California Institute for Regenerative Medicine