This was not a double blind test, so placebo effect cannot be ruled out, BUT two years after therapy, there's considerable reason for cautious optimism.
"Two years after the surgeries, the patient has had no adverse events and reports improvements in daily function. Standardized examinations of motor functions also showed stabilization or improvement, and a PET scan suggested that the progenitor cells were making dopamine at the transplantation sites.
"This particular patient is an outdoor sports person and had to give up many of his favorite activities as the disease progressed," says Dr. Schweitzer. "It has been gratifying to see the patient regain ability and confidence in physical activities such as skiing and swimming that he has most appreciated throughout his life. "
Not only was the study un-blinded, but there are a lot of assumptions made, that all the other potential mechanisms and processes are subordinated to "there is only one single issue, that there's not enough cells (producing &) living" right there, or whether they used enough cells or not enough, or too-small area as opposed to too large, or too shallow as opposed to too deep, or goldilocks; nor what standard of improvement on which to compare the post-surgical experience, was it enough or too little and for how long does the activity prevail before changing. Also, the large motor activities of the individual as a professional lifelong busy athlete style isn't common to all of us, what role the large role stimulation has is I guess anyone's guess...say a Jimmy Connors or a pro-football quarterback is going to be different than Jo Shmo down the block.
So I would hope that the extremely or not extremely detailed story of exactly how and why they selected and didn't select candidates, processes, mechanisms, amounts, locations, time frames, outcome expectations, and measurement standards, that's a lot of variation, is fully disclosed. So maybe, but it looks more like basic research than treatment research, despite that it was treatment. So the "mild" in 'mildly promising' at this point. A nice, but baby, step. I wouldn't sell my pharmaceutical stock just yet.
Another concerning aspect of autologous iPSC treatment for Parkinson's disease is the (expected) cost.
Here is a quote from a 2018 PNT article that discussed Jeanne Loring's work:
"The biggest downside to this technology is its cost, which is still fairly high, but Loring says the economic burden would not be higher in comparison with other personalized cell therapies, such as CAR-T cell therapies — priced at roughly $500,000."
The cost is a definite issue, but to me the larger issue is one of scale. Assuming stem cells turn out to be the cure (which I believe it eventually will), the current application methods of the treatment make it available to only a handful of the millions living with PD. But nonetheless, it's still very interesting.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Stem Cell Therapy for Parkinsons
Stem Cell therapy for PD
Parkinson's patient experiences improvements following stem cell infusions
Update on Japanese stem cell trial
