TY - JOUR
T1 - The evolving regulatory landscape in regenerative medicine
AU - Beetler, Danielle J.
AU - Di Florio, Damian N.
AU - Law, Ethan W.
AU - Groen, Chris M.
AU - Windebank, Anthony J.
AU - Peterson, Quinn P.
AU - Fairweather, De Lisa
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest. The work has been performed with support from National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant TL1 TR002380 and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) grants R21 AI145356 , R21 AI152318 , R21 AI154927 , American Heart Association grant 20TPA35490415 , Mayo Clinic Center for Regenerative Medicine grants , and NIH National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) grant R01 HL164520 .
Funding Information:
In 2011, the current good tissue practice (CGTP) FDA guidance was finalized with guidelines and standards for the use of SC and other cell-based products (this guidance was subsequently updated in July of 2020) (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020). Standardization for the generation of these biologics was a major step in the FDA helping to support modern manufacturing of biomedical products. EVs used in regenerative therapy can be collected from human tissue or manufactured by collecting them from cultured cells. However, there is currently no standardization in the collection/purification of EVs; the isolation of EVs can be accomplished by multiple methods such as: size-exclusion chromatography (SEC), dialysis or PEGylation with polyethylene-glycol. The various methods of isolation from the same sample source can change the population of EVs isolated, making standardization of isolation an important consideration (Thery et al., 2018). Sample storage methods can vary as well (lyophilization and reconstitution vs. frozen vs. freshly prepared) but ideal sample format may vary dependent on shipping requirements, short- and long-term storage availability, and how sample efficacy might vary with specific EV products. In 2019, the CBER Advanced Technologies Team (CATT) was established to improve communication between various stakeholders in the development and manufacture of biologics and the FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2021c). CATT also funds research for work involving the development of methods to manufacture current or evolving biologics (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2021d). Funding extramural research in this manner stimulates modernization of manufacturing products and falls under the FDA's third priority area.The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest. The work has been performed with support from National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant TL1 TR002380 and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) grants R21 AI145356, R21 AI152318, R21 AI154927, American Heart Association grant 20TPA35490415, Mayo Clinic Center for Regenerative Medicine grants, and NIH National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) grant R01 HL164520.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors
PY - 2023/6
Y1 - 2023/6
N2 - Regenerative medicine as a field has emerged as a new component of modern medicine and medical research that encompasses a wide range of products including cellular and acellular therapies. As this new field emerged, regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rapidly adapted existing regulatory frameworks to address the transplantation, gene therapy, cell-based therapeutics, and acellular biologics that fall under the broader regenerative medicine umbrella. Where it has not been possible to modify existing regulation and processes, entirely new frameworks have been generated with the intention of providing flexible, forward-facing systems to regulate this rapidly growing field. This review discusses the current state of FDA regulatory affairs in the context of stem cells and extracellular vesicles by highlighting gaps in the current regulatory system and then discussing where regulatory science in regenerative medicine may be headed based on these gaps and the FDA's historical ability to deal with emerging fields. Lastly, we utilize case studies in stem cell and acellular based treatments to demonstrate how regulatory science has evolved in regenerative medicine and highlight the ongoing clinical efforts and challenges of these therapies.
AB - Regenerative medicine as a field has emerged as a new component of modern medicine and medical research that encompasses a wide range of products including cellular and acellular therapies. As this new field emerged, regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rapidly adapted existing regulatory frameworks to address the transplantation, gene therapy, cell-based therapeutics, and acellular biologics that fall under the broader regenerative medicine umbrella. Where it has not been possible to modify existing regulation and processes, entirely new frameworks have been generated with the intention of providing flexible, forward-facing systems to regulate this rapidly growing field. This review discusses the current state of FDA regulatory affairs in the context of stem cells and extracellular vesicles by highlighting gaps in the current regulatory system and then discussing where regulatory science in regenerative medicine may be headed based on these gaps and the FDA's historical ability to deal with emerging fields. Lastly, we utilize case studies in stem cell and acellular based treatments to demonstrate how regulatory science has evolved in regenerative medicine and highlight the ongoing clinical efforts and challenges of these therapies.
KW - Extracellular vesicles
KW - Nanomedicine
KW - Regenerative medicine
KW - Stem cells
KW - Translational research
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85137288892&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85137288892&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.mam.2022.101138
DO - 10.1016/j.mam.2022.101138
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36050142
AN - SCOPUS:85137288892
SN - 0098-2997
VL - 91
JO - Molecular Aspects of Medicine
JF - Molecular Aspects of Medicine
M1 - 101138
ER -