Advancing Progress in Stem Cells and Biomedicine: 2018–2019 Year in Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the course of my year as president of the ISSCR, significant advances in stem cell science and regenerative medicine have propelled the field forward, with several therapies moving closer to the clinic. The society’s role in actively supporting and nurturing the field has been front and center throughout the year, with efforts directed toward remaining at the forefront and anticipating opportunities and challenges ahead. In 2018, we led an important strategic planning effort that involved many of the society’s past and present leaders, committee members, and others who met over the course of the year to examine all areas of our work, identify priorities, and plan for future initiatives. The group affirmed that the ISSCR mission is to promote excellence in stem cell science and ethical applications to human health. They identified member needs and the changing landscape of the field as priorities and developed a set of recommendations to keep the society at the forefront of field-wide changes. Several of the recommendations are already underway, and others will be implemented in the next several months. The co-chairs of strategic planning, Janet Rossant and Joanna Wysocka, authored a terrific summary of the planning and recommendations in this issue of the journal. We successfully transitioned to a new Editor-in-Chief for Stem Cell Reports at the beginning of 2019, and under Martin Pera’s leadership the journal continues to publish high-quality scientific articles. The journal is a terrific resource for the field, with scientist editors who actively practice stem cell research and its clinical translation. In addition to scientific advances, the journal provides Perspectives and Editorial pieces on key issues, select author Q&As, and Reviews that provide insights on new developments in the field. ISSCR members are invited to contribute “front matter” articles to the journal in addition to scientific papers. Additional ISSCR efforts throughout the year help the society advance science, give voice to our members, and sustain this ever-evolving field. The ISSCR has invested in building a robust policy and advocacy program, and our efforts have grown significantly in recent years. The voice of the stem cell community is actively being heard by public officials around the world, as the society stands up for principles laid out in our Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation. Over the past year we encouraged regulators in Australia, India, Hong Kong, Canada, Mexico, and China to improve the regulation of stem cell research and products, and we have been pleased to see new regulatory regimes in Australia and Canada that conform to our recommendations. Our Public Policy Committee continues to offer assistance to the international community to help ensure responsible regulatory oversight of cell-based products. Several ISSCR members meet directly with policy makers in their local and national communities to advocate for basic science funding and support for research, and we will be coordinating and expanding those efforts in 2019 to include an advocacy day in the U.S. and continued outreach to the European Union, along with communications in other regions of the world. In Washington, D.C., after a day-long meeting with the FDA to talk about regulatory issues, ISSCR members will meet with their members of Congress on Capitol Hill to talk about science policy and support for fetal tissue research, and efforts in Brussels will focus on funding and investment priorities being set by Horizon Europe. Our support for fetal tissue research was front and center in the U.S. over the last year, as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) conducted a review of current and future scientific research using fetal tissue, and Congress held a hearing questioning the need and utility of fetal tissue in scientific research. We provided key information and answered questions in HHS “listening sessions,” and we testified before Congress in support of this research, including its role as an essential tool in validating research models. Along with an ISSCR-led coalition of 70 scientific, medical, and patient organizations, we wrote to the U.S. Congress and HHS regarding the important role of fetal tissue research. We remain vigilant on this issue as it continues to be raised in policy debates in the U.S. The ISSCR annual meeting remains the go-to meeting for stem cell scientists and those translating science to the clinic, and nearly 3,000 attendees from 52 countries took part in ISSCR 2018 in Melbourne, Australia. The meeting featured more than 150 oral presentations and nearly 1,400 posters on topics across the breadth of the field. This year the annual meeting format will feature more abstract-selected speakers than ever before, with the goal of showcasing new and emerging talent in the field. In addition to exciting and emerging science being presented throughout the meeting, we are pleased to have remarks from Nobel Laureates John Gurdon, speaking in the Presidential Plenary session, and Shinya Yamanaka, delivering keynote remarks in the closing plenary. Our 2018 international symposium was in partnership with the European Society of Gene & Cell Therapy annual meeting in Lausanne, where scientists gathered to discuss “Changing the Face of Modern Medicine.” Shortly thereafter in February, we hosted a successful international symposium in Amsterdam focused on “Stem Cells & Organoids in Development & Disease,” which brought together more than 500 scientists to discuss the latest developments in organoid research and technologies. Later in 2019 we will be hosting symposia in Seoul (September 26–27) and Toronto (November 6–8). Stem Cell Reports entered its sixth year in 2019 and continues to build on the platform’s reputation for sharing excellent science, reinforcing its relationship with the society and drawing on scientists and professionals from across the field to contribute insightful Perspectives, Previews, and Editorial pieces on issues that impact the field and our members. Since the first issue in June 2013, the journal has published more than 1,250 articles, and online access last year showed a 37% increase over 2017. The ISSCR communicates society news and policy statements, along with developments in the field and advances in science, via interviews with reporters and outreach to the public on our website, in social media, and through other channels. Our website A Closer Look at Stem Cells, with basic information about cells types and how science is translated to medicine, is a reliable source for patient and public audiences. A monthly blog on the site highlights promising research and developments in the field. The site was visited by more than 300,000 people in 2018. In recent months, the Clinical Translation Committee has developed fact sheets for physicians on disease areas that are hosted on ISSCR.org and these are also being translated for public audiences to be hosted on A Closer Look at Stem Cells. Additional plans for content are underway for both websites in 2019 and beyond. As the field continues to evolve, so does the ISSCR. We look forward to implementing the recommendations coming out of our recent strategic planning and the next steps for the society and the field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".