Ratcliffe, Anthony

ABSTRACTThere is a clear discrepancy between the growth of cell therapy and tissue engineering research in orthopaedics over the last two decades and the number of approved clinical therapies and products available to patients. At the 2015 annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society, a workshop was held to highlight important considerations from the perspectives of an academic scientist, clinical researcher, and industry representative with the aim of helping researchers to successfully translate their ideas into clinical and commercial reality. Survey data acquired from workshop participants indicated an overall positive opinion on the future potential of cell‐based therapies to make a significant contribution to orthopaedic medicine. The survey also indicated an agreement on areas requiring improvement in the development of new therapies, specifically; increased support for fundamental research and education and improved transparency of regulatory processes. This perspectives article summarises the content and conclusions of the workshop and puts forward suggestions on how translational success of cell‐based therapies in orthopaedics may be achieved. © 2015 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 34:17–21, 2016.

AbstractThe “Workshop on Standards & Measurements for Tissue Engineering Scaffolds” was held on May 21, 2013 in Indianapolis, IN, and was sponsored by the ASTM International (ASTM). The purpose of the workshop was to identify the highest priority items for future standards work for scaffolds used in the development and manufacture of tissue engineered medical products (TEMPs). Eighteen speakers and 78 attendees met to assess current scaffold standards and to prioritize needs for future standards. A key finding was that the ASTM TEMPs subcommittees (F04.41‐46) have many active “guide” documents for educational purposes, but few standard “test methods” or “practices.” Overwhelmingly, the most clearly identified need was standards for measuring the structure of scaffolds, followed by standards for biological characterization, including in vitro testing, animal models and cell‐material interactions. The third most pressing need was to develop standards for assessing the mechanical properties of scaffolds. Additional needs included standards for assessing scaffold degradation, clinical outcomes with scaffolds, effects of sterilization on scaffolds, scaffold composition, and drug release from scaffolds. Discussions highlighted the need for additional scaffold reference materials and the need to use them for measurement traceability. Workshop participants emphasized the need to promote the use of standards in scaffold fabrication, characterization, and commercialization. Finally, participants noted that standards would be more broadly accepted if their impact in the TEMPs community could be quantified. Many scaffold standard needs have been identified and focus is turning to generating these standards to support the use of scaffolds in TEMPs. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 103B: 949–959, 2015.