Cell Therapy News/Articles, page-17707

Perhaps CYP are struggling to get trial participants in their phase 2 GVHD trial given they have just sponsored and written this article for Nature Magazine claiming their cells are superior etc ... this paragraph subtly attacking (I assume) MSB's manufacturing gave me a laugh given we have FDA sign off on our manufacturing while CYP don't ?


Data from 15 phase 1 trial participants and now having only dosed 1 person that we know of in their phase 2 (first ever) USA trial and yet claims of superiority of sorts throughout the entire paid / sponsored article .... lol


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-02990-z

Two-year safety outcomes of iPS cell-derived mesenchymal stromal cells in acute steroid-resistant graft-versus-host disease


A fundamental challenge for conventional MSC manufacture lies in the disparity between the small number of MSCs isolated from a single tissue donation and the large number of cells required to treat adults. For example, while a bone marrow collection yields a starting population of approximately 10,000–80,000 MSCs², a typical bone marrow-derived MSC dose regimen requires a total of at least 1 × 10⁸ MSCs for an average adult³. Thus, extensive ex vivo culture expansion is necessary to generate enough cells to treat a single patient, with even greater levels of expansion required to manufacture batches of allogeneic MSCs. While such in vitro passaging can generate large numbers of therapeutic doses per donation, it can result in MSCs undergoing functional changes and ultimately entering replicative senescence^2,4. Consequently, there is a limit to the extent that donor-derived MSC populations can be expanded without adversely affecting cell functionality.