http://v3.espacenet.com/results?sf=q&DB=EPODOC&IA=intercytex&PGS=10&CY=ep&LG=en&ST=quick
But it refers to TRC?
» But it refers to TRC?
I think yes… and i think that this is the famous ROBOT they was studyng for inject the cells in the scalp…
from the patent:
controlled delivery device
is an instrument to inject with precision cellular material…
» » But it refers to TRC?
» I think yes… and i think that this is the famous ROBOT they was studyng
» for inject the cells in the scalp…
» from the patent:
» controlled delivery device
» is an instrument to inject with precision cellular material… ( A TATOO GUN I BET)
» »
» Espacenet - results view
I found the patent very informative. They are talking about both Allogeneic and Autologous cells, which could mean they are close to a product they can massproduce like Vavelta. That would most likely mean no regulations either. That would be nice…
“The inductive dermal sheath cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells may be derived from a variety of sources. One source is mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow (available from Osiris, for example). Another source is bone marrow mesodermal progenitor cells (see WO01/11011-Catharine Verfaillie’s multipotent adult progenitor cells). Yet a further source is hematopoietic stem cells derived from human bone marrow. Another source of cells are pluripotent cells derived from the skin (Toma, J. G. et al., 2001, Nature Cell Biol. 3: 778-784; Aegera Therapeutices Inc. & Curis Inc [both US]). Alternatively, the inductive dermal sheath cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells may be derived from embryonic stem cells. Another source is embryonic carcinoma cells which have been suitably differentiated towards a DP phenotype for hair using known methods. (Teratomas from which embryonic carcinoma cell lines can be derived have hair and teeth-like structures: embryonic carcinoma cells are commercially available from Layton Biosciences [US], for example.) A further source is reprogrammed cells, for example, autologous cells such fibroblasts which have been “reprogrammed” by dermal papilla cells or embryonic carcinoma cells to induce hair formation (for reprogramming of cells, see WO00/49138).”
It seems like they have solved the direction issue as well:
“A growing hair follicle will not necessarily automatically orientate itself properly. According to the invention the inductive dermal sheath cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells may be delivered in a track (or channel) formed by the controlled delivery device and oriented towards an outer surface. The track may be contiguous with the host epidermis. A track provides a pathway which allows a nascent hair follicle to grow in the correct direction towards the surface of the skin and connect with the surface epidermis surrounding the track. In addition, the angle of the track can be varied, allowing the nascent hair follicle to grow at an appropriate angle relative to the outer surface. This achieves a good cosmetic result because hair follicles grow at different angles in different regions of the scalp and a more robust hair follicle. In one embodiment, the controlled delivery device used to generate the track has a needle with blunt end and an orifice on the lateral side near the tip (for example, an orifice approximately 0.5 mm from the tip), allowing cells to be implanted along the needle track.”
» » »
» »
» Espacenet - results view
»
» I found the patent very informative. They are talking about both
» Allogeneic and Autologous cells, which could mean they are close to a
» product they can massproduce like Vavelta. That would most likely mean no
» regulations either. That would be nice…
»
» “The inductive dermal sheath cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells
» may be derived from a variety of sources. One source is mesenchymal stem
» cells derived from bone marrow (available from Osiris, for example).
» Another source is bone marrow mesodermal progenitor cells (see
» WO01/11011-Catharine Verfaillie’s multipotent adult progenitor cells). Yet
» a further source is hematopoietic stem cells derived from human bone
» marrow. Another source of cells are pluripotent cells derived from the
» skin (Toma, J. G. et al., 2001, Nature Cell Biol. 3: 778-784; Aegera
» Therapeutices Inc. & Curis Inc [both US]). Alternatively, the inductive
» dermal sheath cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells may be derived
» from embryonic stem cells. Another source is embryonic carcinoma cells
» which have been suitably differentiated towards a DP phenotype for hair
» using known methods. (Teratomas from which embryonic carcinoma cell lines
» can be derived have hair and teeth-like structures: embryonic carcinoma
» cells are commercially available from Layton Biosciences [US], for
» example.) A further source is reprogrammed cells, for example, autologous
» cells such fibroblasts which have been “reprogrammed” by dermal papilla
» cells or embryonic carcinoma cells to induce hair formation (for
» reprogramming of cells, see WO00/49138).”
»
»
»
» It seems like they have solved the direction issue as well:
»
» “A growing hair follicle will not necessarily automatically orientate
» itself properly. According to the invention the inductive dermal sheath
» cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells may be delivered in a track
» (or channel) formed by the controlled delivery device and oriented towards
» an outer surface. The track may be contiguous with the host epidermis. A
» track provides a pathway which allows a nascent hair follicle to grow in
» the correct direction towards the surface of the skin and connect with the
» surface epidermis surrounding the track. In addition, the angle of the
» track can be varied, allowing the nascent hair follicle to grow at an
» appropriate angle relative to the outer surface. This achieves a good
» cosmetic result because hair follicles grow at different angles in
» different regions of the scalp and a more robust hair follicle. In one
» embodiment, the controlled delivery device used to generate the track has
» a needle with blunt end and an orifice on the lateral side near the tip
» (for example, an orifice approximately 0.5 mm from the tip), allowing
» cells to be implanted along the needle track.”
This is more like it! Good find, lots of interestin info here. There’s also a picture of the delivery device (the gun) on the first patent document if you click the ‘Original Document’ tab.
When they refer to the ‘track’ do they mean the chemcial signalling generated by the injected cells or the actual physical placement of the cells?
» » “A growing hair follicle will not necessarily automatically orientate
» » itself properly. According to the invention the inductive dermal sheath
» » cells and/or inductive dermal papilla cells may be delivered in a track
» » (or channel) formed by the controlled delivery device and oriented
» towards
» » an outer surface. The track may be contiguous with the host epidermis.
» A
» » track provides a pathway which allows a nascent hair follicle to grow
» in
» » the correct direction towards the surface of the skin and connect with
» the
» » surface epidermis surrounding the track. In addition, the angle of the
» » track can be varied, allowing the nascent hair follicle to grow at an
» » appropriate angle relative to the outer surface. This achieves a
» good
» » cosmetic result because hair follicles grow at different angles in
» » different regions of the scalp and a more robust hair follicle. In one
» » embodiment, the controlled delivery device used to generate the track
» has
» » a needle with blunt end and an orifice on the lateral side near the tip
» » (for example, an orifice approximately 0.5 mm from the tip), allowing
» » cells to be implanted along the needle track.”
This is a nice step forward! Direction was one of the most problem of the TRC… and now is solved! …
I think same. Sorry I´m new in this forum and i don´t speak English well. For me is a problem read in this language, but I work hard!!!
This is not a new patent but a revision of thier older filing from 2003 (Cell delivery device). The only difference is that they cancelled some claims, I’m assuming because they were two vague, far reaching and not specific enough to HM.
Its good that they are reviewing their legal work but no new news…