“Latest Stem Cells News”

Stanford University’s Faculty Senate today approved the creation of what officials believe is the first PhD program devoted solely to stem cell science in the nation and, perhaps, the world. The new doctoral program in stem cell biology and regenerative medicine is also the first interdisciplinary doctoral program created by the School of Medicine in recent years.

School officials say the fact that the university is taking the rare step of creating a new doctoral program acknowledges the growing importance of stem cell research in the realm of biomedical science. The senate’s initial approval of the program extends for five years.

“Stem cell biology is a distinct discipline that requires unique skills and includes a scope of knowledge and a skill set that is not covered by other disciplines,” said Renee Reijo Pera, PhD, professor of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the new PhD program.

Program leaders note that Stanford is among a small number of U.S. universities that have the necessary ingredients to create a doctoral program teaching the full range of stem cell science. They add that although a few other schools have recently established PhD programs involving stem cell biology, Stanford is the first to create a free-standing doctoral program dedicated solely to stem cell biology and regenerative medicine.

Incoming search terms:

A Guest Post from Sandra Ochoa…

Sandra Ochoa

Well.. .my idea is always that prior you decide to set yourself on one of these paths do a little clinical shadowing and several lab research.

Some definitions first….
MD: Indicates Doctor of Medicine, a doctor’s education in medicine
PhD: Is the highest qualification obtained at a college or university, usually requiring 3 to 5 years of original analysis in a specific field of study.
MD/PhD: refers to an education consisting of both the medical training of a medical doctor (MD or DO) with the rigor of a scientific examiner (PhD)

You could also consider to get involved in some clinical research. This can get you a taste of the different fields. Some MDs do clinical research, if you decide to get interested in that, you would not need an MD/PhD.

You actually must gain some quality exposure before you make any decisions. Neither clinical work nor lab bench job is what it really may appear like in theory. You will need to get your hands dirty. Make an effort to request information, learn about them, and have a couple of tastes of each one.

I do think it’s more easy to find a personality niche when you find yourself delighted by the specific work you’re doing daily, rather than make an effort to enjoy doing work you hate, even if you fit the “typical profile” of the career.

Generally a double degree is made for those who find themselves interested in both, basically. However, you will possibly not wind up doing a lot of the actual bench work if you are an MD/PhD. The MD/PhD that’s the P.I. of the research laboratory I currently work for NEVER does the actual experiments we currently do, he simply manages administrational stuff and discusses problems/ideas together with his henchmen.

All his time throughout the week is spent on clinical work. I am not sure this may be the way it always works, but this really is my own experience. However , if you might be equally interested in both, then I would still think an MD/PhD will probably be worth considering.

MD/PhD will place you at some advantage in grant-writing when you are a new researcher. (Eventually, the degree matters less because research employers assess you according to your actual accomplishments.)

Imagine that studying scientific research can be easier if you have been trained as being a physician. This advantage just isn’t well worth the extra 3 years, however it is somewhat of an advantage. It offers you the flexibleness to determine patients if you want. A slight majority of the MD/PhD’s I have come across don’t, but some do and in any case all of them could. It may help out with the pursuit of an academic position too.

So you? What are your advantages and disadvantages of choosing a MD, MD/PhD or PhD career?

About the writer: S. Ochoa is writing for the clinical research training program blog, her own and non-commercial in nature hobby blog to deliver free ideas for clinical research training newbie’s/experts to help them get a new job.

Incoming search terms:

Those suffering from a damaged heart can be treated with their own heart cells. According to a recent research, heart stem cells from children with congenital heart disease can rebuild the damaged heart in the laboratory. The findings apparently have great significance in the health zone.

While conducting the research, cells were achieved from patients ranging in age from a few days after birth to 13 years. These patients were previously subjected to routine congenital cardiac surgery. The number of heart stem cells appears greatest in neonates, that reduce with progression in age. Majority of the stem cells can be possibly found in the upper right chamber of the heart, or the right atrium. The cardiac stem cells seem to be functional and are capable to repair the damaged heart.

“Due to the advances in surgical and medical therapies, many children born with cardiomyopathy or other congenital heart defects are living longer but may eventually succumb to heart failure. This project has generated important pre-clinical laboratory data showing that we may be able to use the patient’s own heart stem cells to rebuild their hearts, allowing these children to potentially live longer and have more productive lives,” shared Sunjay Kaushal, MD, PhD, surgeon in the Division of Cardiovascular Thoracic Surgery at Children’s Memorial Hospital and assistant professor of surgery at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, lead author of the research.

Incoming search terms:

The body is a battle zone. Cells constantly compete with one another for space and dominance. Though the manner in which some cells win this competition is well known to be the survival of the fittest, how stem cells duke it out for space and survival is not as clear. A study on fruit flies published in the October 2 issue of Science by Johns Hopkins researchers describes how stem cells win this battle by literally sticking around.

“Our work exemplifies how one signal coordinately maintains two types of stem cells in a single niche, or microenvironment,” says Erika Matunis, Ph.D., associate professor of cell biology at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. “What we found may emerge as common themes of mammalian stem cell niches as they become better characterized.”

To tackle the stem cell competition quandary, the team looked at fruit fly testes where two different stem cells exist: germline stem cells which give rise to sperm, and somatic stem cells which develop into non-reproductive cell types.

Using genetics, the researchers grew flies lacking the SOCS protein, which controls other molecules that promote stem cell growth. SOCS normally ensures that the right numbers of stem cells are present in the stem cell niche, a region at the far end of the fly testis where new cells are born. In a normal testis, the germline stem cells are surrounded by somatic stem cells at a ratio of about one germline stem cell for every two somatic stem cells.

The researchers isolated testes from flies lacking SOCS and, under a microscope, counted the number of germline stem cells and somatic stem cells. They found that nearly half of the germline stem cells were gone and the somatic stem cells appeared to be occupying that space.

“The somatic stem cells almost look like they’ve invaded the niche area,” says Melanie Issigonis, a graduate student in the Biochemistry, Cellular, and Molecular Biology graduate program at Johns Hopkins. “I saw that image and said, ‘Wow, it’s right there. Germline stem cell loss.’”

To figure out where the lost germline stem cells went and how they lost the battle for space, the team returned to the microscope. This time, they examined the cells for whether they contained integrin, a protein that helps cells stick to each other. They found that somatic stem cells from flies lacking SOCS seemed to contain more integrin than somatic stem cells from flies with functional SOCS. According to Matunis, it’s the increase in integrin that allows somatic stem cells to gain the upper hand because they can stick to the niche better than neighboring germline stem cells can.

Though the somatic stem cells were invading the niche, germline stem cells were not dying. In the microscope images, the team found that all remaining germline stem cells still looked alive and healthy, but elbowed out of their niche by somatic stem cells. Says Matunis, no matter how healthy a germline stem cell is, if it cannot stick, it will eventually be outcompeted by the somatic cells and pushed all the way out of the niche. Issigonis found the discovery remarkable: “The germline stem cells are perfectly fine,” she says. “They’re just leaving the niche and differentiating.”

The team believes this model can be applied to other stem cell niches such as cancer. Just like the somatic stem cells overrunning the fly testes, cancer stem cells in mammalian systems become a danger when they become the stickiest cell in the niche. In both cases, the important control protein, SOCS, is lost. Knowing what is necessary for some stem cells to thrive and others to dwindle could have great importance to understanding the roots of stem cell diseases.

from http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2009/12_04a_09.html