|
|
Post by JHam on Jul 16, 2014 14:14:09 GMT
International Stem Cell Corporation is a developmental-stage biotechnology company. The Company focused on therapeutic and biomedical product development. The Company’s wholly owned subsidiary Lifeline Cell Technology, LLC (LCT) develops, manufactures and commercializes over 130 human cell culture products, including frozen human primary cells and the reagents (media) needed to grow, maintain and differentiate the cells, in order to address this market opportunity. The Company’s scientists have used a technology called basal medium optimization to systematically produce optimized products designed to culture specific human cell types and to elicit specific cellular behaviors. The Company’s wholly owned subsidiary Lifeline Skin Care, Inc. (LSC) develops, manufactures and markets cosmetic skin care products using an extract derived from its pluripotent stem cells.
|
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Jul 16, 2014 15:39:35 GMT
ISCO is back on another nice run today. Not sure what is up.
|
|
|
|
Post by tradeup on Jul 17, 2014 17:26:26 GMT
Up big today on this news ...
International Stem Cell Should Win EU Case, Adviser Says
International Stem Cell Corp. (ISCO) should win a court case that may pave the way for a U.K. patent for a procedure to extract stem cells, according to an adviser to the European Union’s top court.
The EU’s Court of Justice should rule that Carlsbad California-based International Stem Cell’s process based on unfertilized human eggs shouldn’t be considered a human embryo - - excluding it from an EU ban on patents for such stem-cell research, Advocate General Pedro Cruz Villalon said in a recommendation published today.
The cells concerned, known as parthenotes, “can only be excluded from the concept of embryos to the extent that they have not been genetically manipulated to become capable of developing into a human being,” the court said in a statement. EU law doesn’t prevent EU states from banning patents for the cells on ethical or moral grounds.
While the court adviser’s opinion isn’t binding, it is usually followed by the Luxembourg-based tribunal. The EU court ruled three years ago that stem-cell research involving human embryos couldn’t be patented, a decision that scientists called “devastating” for medical research in Europe.
The court aide’s opinion “is a triumph for science and rational thinking” and, if confirmed by the final ruling, may open up the use of such stem cells in the EU, said Simon Craw, a spokesman for International Stem Cell.
The U.K. high court is asking the Luxembourg tribunal whether it has to classify the unfertilized ova as a human embryo. Under an EU law from 1998, research methods that involve human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes can’t be patented.
The case is C-364/13 International Stem Cell Corporation.
|
|
|
|
Post by tradeup on Jul 26, 2014 14:48:30 GMT
EU Court Adviser: OK to Deny Patents On Stem Cells for 'Moral, Ethical' ReasonsBloomberg BNA Wednesday, July 23, 2014 July 18 --European Union member states should be allowed to deny for “ethical and moral” considerations patents to companies that produce stem cells even though the technology falls outside the EU Biotechnology Directive restrictions on inventions using the human body in any stage of development, said the legal adviser to the EU's highest court. European Court of Justice Advocate General Pedro Cruz Villalon, whose opinions are not binding on the court but adhered to 80 percent of the time, said the Biotechnology Directive (EEC/98/44) only “expresses a minimum, EU-wide prohibition.” “This does not prevent a member state from excluding parthenotes from patentability on the grounds of ethical and moral considerations,” he said. “By excluding human embryos from patentability, the directive only expresses a minimum, EU-wide prohibition, whilst allowing the member states to extend the prohibition of patentability to other organisms on the basis of ethical and moral considerations.”U.K. Case. The case at issue (C-364/13) involved a patent request by the U.K.-based International Stem Cell Corp. to the U.K. Intellectual Property Office for two patents for a technology that produces pluripotent stem cells, which can develop into all cells that make up the human body but not the embryonic tissue that can develop into the human body. The technology produces the pluripotent stem cells from “parthenogentically-activated oocytes.” The U.K. IP office rejected the patent request on the grounds that the inventions “entail uses and even the destruction of human embryos and are therefore not patentable based on a previous ECJ ruling (C-34/10) that any non-fertilized human ovum whose development has been stimulated by parthenogenesis and which is capable of commencing the process of development of a human being constitutes a human embryo.” The U.K. company appealed the decision, saying that as the “activated oocyte,” in the absence of paternal DNA, is not capable of becoming a human being, the restrictions of the ECJ ruling do not apply to its technology. The U.K. court referred the case to the ECJ asking whether unfertilized human ova whose development has been stimulated by parthenogenesis and which are not capable of becoming human beings should be considered as human embryos. The ECJ legal adviser emphasized the “inherent capacity” of an ova becoming a human being. That, he said, is “the decisive criterion.” A ruling from the court is expected in the coming months.
|
|
|
|
Post by dayanand33 on Jul 27, 2014 13:56:12 GMT
"The ECJ legal adviser emphasized the “inherent capacity” of an ova becoming a human being. That, he said, is “the decisive criterion.”
ECJ legal advisers are outrageous. By that rationale, we should hang most women undergo a menstruation cycle. Why? because the egg goes down the drain and the women prevents it from becoming a human.
Disclaimer - I don't mean to disrespect any woman. It is a sarcastic comment against european ethics committee.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyzandrea on Jun 30, 2015 8:29:11 GMT
International Stem Cell Corporation is good.
|
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Jun 30, 2015 8:37:41 GMT
International Stem Cell Corporation is good. Yeah? Should I buy it? |
|
|
|
Post by tatshensini on Nov 15, 2016 23:59:49 GMT
www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/biotech/sd-me-parkinsons-isco-20161114-story.htmlParkinson's stem cell therapy shows signs of safetyIn an early test of its therapy for Parkinson’s disease, International Stem Cell Corp. in San Diego said Monday that the stem cell-based treatment appears to be safe.
The first patient in the Phase 1 clinical trial, conducted in Australia, was treated at the end of July. A checkup three months later found no sign of complications, said Russell Kern, the company’s executive vice president and chief scientific officer.
In addition, there are some indications of efficacy in relieving symptoms of the movement disorder, Kern said after giving a presentation at the Society for Neuroscience’s 2016 convention in downtown San Diego. The conference is scheduled to run through Wednesday.
The patient’s handwriting has improved, Kern said. But because the trial is designed to measure safety, that’s considered a minor development that still needs to be confirmed. And more patients need to be treated.
|
|
