The announcement of the business relation between Cytori and Sistemic (Scottish Company) I believe will be very important going forward for the development of the platform technology. To better understand that, I will simply start with a few quotes from the site of Sistemic (from their scientific chief-Dr. McErlane) and will develop/build on them i.e.give you something to think about in all aspects of the business and some publications by Cytori that build on this technology.

First- The future for regenerative medicine is huge, but there are issues to be faced on this road to success,” said Dr McErlane. “Firstly we need to establish reliable cell standards, and secondly these standards should inform the development of a validated and dependable toolbox for monitoring and characterizing stem cells during research and manufacturing. Only through characterization can this technology enter the mainstream clinical practice and provide the patient benefits we are all hoping for.”

thereto: Dr McErlane went on to say, “Without adequate control, this unique opportunity to positively impact on the treatment of many un-treatable conditions will be lost. Standardization is key and Sistemic are at the forefront of assisting in making Regenerative Medicine a reality for clinical practice.”

Hesitantly I would like to mention the tech is based on miRNA´s- I don't think you need to know what that is, the maximum maybe some key-words that you might have picked up in your "careers as stem cell company investors".
which is that micro RNA´s do the following:

• Accurately describe the phenotype
• Small oligonucleotide (single strand, 17-24 bases)
• Measured in all cell types and biofluids as well retrospective tissues
• Stable
• Analytically robust
• Manageable dataset
• Control cell pathways and cell systems
• Delivers reliable biomarkers

Whats more important is they do those measurements with relatively substantial accuracy and are able to determine the type, viability and potency of a cell population.
Now combine that knowledge with your own of a Cytori investor, who knows that you can program Celution in different ways to arrive at cell populations which are rife with specific cells deemed relevant for specific disorders and applications and things get to be quite interesting.
Sistemic has the tech to check before inputting cells into a patient, what the potency of the dose is likely to be i.e its characterized and counted if you like, which means you can expect a specific therapeutic outcome for the patient, based on prior samples and treatments and can verify conformity.

This is right up the alleyway of the FDA of course and thus far separates us from all other adult stem cell outfits, except Tigenix- the Belgian/Spanish Company which has a collaboration with Sistemic too.
Coincidence that both Companies work with Adipose Derived Stem Cells (i.e. ADRCs?).

Not really- but more tomorrow. :P

So lets pick up this thought from the above-
There is a procedure to characterize the type of cells from a given population or therapeutic dose of mononuclear cells which are either fresh or cultured and contain an x-percentage of either cultured or fresh stromal cells or stromal progenitors (MSC´´s). Potency and viability of those cells can be determined.
In the stem cell space, we have a limited number of participants in the field, which develop their therapies either with fresh- or cultured cells and they are either the allogeneic or autologous type i.e. donor or own cells.


The general rule of thumb in the different processes is- culturing decreases potency of the cell- certainly after about 4-5 passages- with one´s own cells you have the problem of variability. Especially with marrow cells, elder folks do not have very potent cells any longer- besides quality the quantity of stromal cells diminishes sharply whilst aging.
Presently we have the situation that the ASC Companies give their stem cell product a name- Osiris- Prochymal, MesoBlast-Resvascor, Aastrom-Ixmyelocel-T and Athersys dubs its mix of cultured donor cells MultiStem.
All these Companies keep the composition of their mixes (recipe if you like) a well guarded secret. Don´t you however think, that as general knowledge of adult stem cell technology progresses and realization of the therapeutic action of specific type of cells increases- i.e mesenchymal paracrine action to induce specific therapeutic cell-to-cell anti-apoptotic and other actions- endothelial- and smooth muscle cells for angiogenesis and macrophages for anti-inflammatory processes for instance,
that DOCTORS AND PATIENTS want to know this type of information, before they decide which "product" to use for the diagnosis of a certain indication with a patient?
I think they will.
Characterization and openness not only in respect of results of clinical trials for a certain specified population of patients, but also "product knowledge" IMHO will become key, when we move forward.

Something to think about concerning this miRNA technology.

If it is capable to characterize a given cell population and also can determine the potency of the cell types based on some data base prior experience, the whole field- that is the allogeneic app suppliers and their mixes can be analyzed as easily as any autologous gimish of cells delivered to a patient.

That infers- TRANSPARENCY from a product perspective and some of these players in the field most likely will not like this type of characterization, since it would/could provide them with a competitive disadvantage.

Do you think MesoBlast with their "secrecy" around their technology ever publish a paper on Resvascor?

What if Athersys Inc did and would compare the virtues (scientifically) of MultiStem with a sample of Resvascor?

Interesting? You can extrapolate these thoughts further of course.

:P