US 7,736,892 to Kansas State
Note US 7,736,892 titled: Cultures, products and methods using umbilical cord matrix cells.
The first claim recites:
A method for obtaining a population of cells from an umbilical cord matrix comprising: a) enzymatically dispersing umbilical cord matrix to provide enzymatically dispersed umbilical cord matrix cells; b) culturing the enzymatically dispersed umbilical cord matrix cells in the presence of epidermal growth factor (EGF) and platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) to proliferate the umbilical cord matrix cells; c) culturing the enzymatically dispersed umbilical cord matrix cells on a substrate surface and removing non-adherent cells; d) culturing adherent cells from c) to select for a population of umbilical cord matrix cells that comprise cells that are negative for CD34 and CD45, positive for telomerase activity, can be expanded in vitro, and maintained in culture through repeated passages.
Within the specification:
The proposal that stem cells be obtained from an embryo source (commonly fertilized egg cells from fertility clinics) remains ethically controversial. The controversy surrounding obtaining stem cells from newly fertilized human material has increased a need for obtaining useful stem cells from a non-controversial source. Accordingly a substantial need for obtaining stem cells having a powerful universal and versatile treatment capability is present.
Multipotent stem cells have been found in adult tissue. For example, blood stem cells, found in the bone marrow and blood stream of adults, continually replenish red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets. However as a source for therapeutically useful or pluripotent stem cells adults remain problematic. Stem cells have not been isolated from all body tissues. Even when present in a tissue, adult stem cells are often present in only minute numbers and are difficult to isolate and purify. There is evidence that such adult stem cells may not have the same capacity to adapt or proliferate or differentiate as younger cells obtained from blastocyst, fetal or neonatal sources. Research on the early stages of cell specialization may not be possible with more mature and specialized adult stem cells.
The Kansas State patent cites US 5843780 and 6200806 to Thomson and 6271436 to " Piedrahia et al. " [sic: Piedrahita]. IPBiz notes that work of Piedrahita was cited in the re-exams of the Thomson patents.
***Footnote
One law professor, recently highlighted on californiastemcellreport, had written that there were no issued US patents on embryonic stem cells post (initial) Thomson. Merely fyi, contemplate:
US 7,413,904, Human embryonic stem cells having genetic modifications
US 7,432,104, Methods for the culture of human embryonic stem cells on human feeder cells
US 7,439,064, Cultivation of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder cells or without conditioned medium
US 7,504,257, Embryonic stem cells and neural progenitor cells derived therefrom
US 7,781,216, Spontaneous differentiation of human embryonic stem cells in culture (Thomson patent issued August 24, 2010)
Law professors will say just about anything, and some blogs will quote them, without checking the facts.
**Separately, to californiastemcellreport on 10 Sept
Of funding matters, back in the day, the Wright Brothers paid for their own research on flight, while Professor Langley got $50,000 (1900 vintage) from Congress. Who flew? But when the Wright Brothers tried to enforce their patent, there was tremendous criticism of the Wrights.
In passing, the appellate panel was comprised of judges appointed by Republicans. Congress can alter the Dickey-Wicker amendment at any time, and this whole matter could go away.
The first claim recites:
A method for obtaining a population of cells from an umbilical cord matrix comprising: a) enzymatically dispersing umbilical cord matrix to provide enzymatically dispersed umbilical cord matrix cells; b) culturing the enzymatically dispersed umbilical cord matrix cells in the presence of epidermal growth factor (EGF) and platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) to proliferate the umbilical cord matrix cells; c) culturing the enzymatically dispersed umbilical cord matrix cells on a substrate surface and removing non-adherent cells; d) culturing adherent cells from c) to select for a population of umbilical cord matrix cells that comprise cells that are negative for CD34 and CD45, positive for telomerase activity, can be expanded in vitro, and maintained in culture through repeated passages.
Within the specification:
The proposal that stem cells be obtained from an embryo source (commonly fertilized egg cells from fertility clinics) remains ethically controversial. The controversy surrounding obtaining stem cells from newly fertilized human material has increased a need for obtaining useful stem cells from a non-controversial source. Accordingly a substantial need for obtaining stem cells having a powerful universal and versatile treatment capability is present.
Multipotent stem cells have been found in adult tissue. For example, blood stem cells, found in the bone marrow and blood stream of adults, continually replenish red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets. However as a source for therapeutically useful or pluripotent stem cells adults remain problematic. Stem cells have not been isolated from all body tissues. Even when present in a tissue, adult stem cells are often present in only minute numbers and are difficult to isolate and purify. There is evidence that such adult stem cells may not have the same capacity to adapt or proliferate or differentiate as younger cells obtained from blastocyst, fetal or neonatal sources. Research on the early stages of cell specialization may not be possible with more mature and specialized adult stem cells.
The Kansas State patent cites US 5843780 and 6200806 to Thomson and 6271436 to " Piedrahia et al. " [sic: Piedrahita]. IPBiz notes that work of Piedrahita was cited in the re-exams of the Thomson patents.
***Footnote
One law professor, recently highlighted on californiastemcellreport, had written that there were no issued US patents on embryonic stem cells post (initial) Thomson. Merely fyi, contemplate:
US 7,413,904, Human embryonic stem cells having genetic modifications
US 7,432,104, Methods for the culture of human embryonic stem cells on human feeder cells
US 7,439,064, Cultivation of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder cells or without conditioned medium
US 7,504,257, Embryonic stem cells and neural progenitor cells derived therefrom
US 7,781,216, Spontaneous differentiation of human embryonic stem cells in culture (Thomson patent issued August 24, 2010)
Law professors will say just about anything, and some blogs will quote them, without checking the facts.
**Separately, to californiastemcellreport on 10 Sept
Of funding matters, back in the day, the Wright Brothers paid for their own research on flight, while Professor Langley got $50,000 (1900 vintage) from Congress. Who flew? But when the Wright Brothers tried to enforce their patent, there was tremendous criticism of the Wrights.
In passing, the appellate panel was comprised of judges appointed by Republicans. Congress can alter the Dickey-Wicker amendment at any time, and this whole matter could go away.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 6:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home