2007

Presenter: Art Coury, Ph.D.
Vice President Biomaterials Research- Genzyme

Topic: Tissue Engineering, Regenerative Medicine: Perceptions, Realities and Implications

Abstract: As commonly reported in the public media and even among its practitioners, the field of tissue engineering is not thriving commercially.  Investment in tissue engineering ventures, market capitalization and staffing in United States corporations are claimed to have peaked around the year 2000.1 Most such start-ups reported in the 1990s have not survived in their original form.  These results have led to pessimistic evaluations of the field and its potential, which, unfortunately, are widely accepted currently.  Evaluation of these reports reveals a very narrow perception of tissue engineering (for example, involving cells in scaffolds). However, most definitions such as “Teaching the body to heal itself, achieved by the delivery to the appropriate site of cells, biomolecules and supporting structures.”2 allow a broad interpretation, which, in sum, provide for the systematic control of the body’s cells, matrices and fluids. This allows many profitable commercial products such as surgical sutures, staples, sealants and adhesives, wound dressings, adhesion prevention products, drug delivery systems and others to fall within its scope. In this interpretation, regenerative medicine comprises one component of tissue engineering.  Tissue engineering therapies are not all-inclusive.  Excluded from the definition are replacement devices such as orthopedic, cardiovascular, ophthalmic and dental products which command a large percentage of non-pharmaceutical therapeutic revenues.   However, by my estimate, some 20-30% percent of such revenues, approaching $50 billion in annual sales, can be attributed to tissue engineering, providing a much more positive picture of the field.  This interpretation, for which examples will be given for its justification, provides both psychological and economic value, encouraging investment in public, corporate and educational programs, and providing attractive career choices to assure future growth. 
1Lysaght, M. et al, Tissue Engineering: 10(1), 2004, 309-320; 7(5), 2001, 485-493; 4(3), 1998, 231-238.
2 Williams, D. F., “The Williams Dictionary of Biomaterials,” Liverpool University Press, Liverpool, (1999).

Presenter: Nicholas Peppas, Sc.D.
-Fletcher Pratt Chair of Chemical Engineering, Biomedical Engineering and Pharmaceutics at the  
 University of Texas at Austin
-Director of Center on Biomaterials, Drug Delivery, Bionanotechnology and Molecular
 Recognition
-Director of National Science Foundation Program on Cellular and Molecular Imaging for 
 Diagnostics and Therapeutics

Topic: Nanostructured biomaterials and surfaces for biological recognition

Abstract: Engineering the molecular design of intelligent biomaterials by controlling recognition and specificity is the first step in coordinating and duplicating complex biological and physiological processes. We address design and synthesis characteristics of artificial molecular structures capable of specific molecular recognition of biological molecules. Molecular imprinting and microimprinting techniques, which create stereo-specific three-dimensional binding cavities based on a biological compound of interest, can lead to preparation of biomimetic materials for intelligent drug delivery, drug targeting, and tissue engineering. We have been successful in synthesizing novel glucose- and protein-binding molecules based on non-covalent directed interactions formed via molecular imprinting techniques within aqueous media.

Presenter: TBA

Topic: TBA

Presenter: Douglas Lauffenburger, PhD
Dept. of Biological and Chemical Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Topic: What Are Cells Thinking?—An Engineering Approach to Understanding Signaling Networks Governing Cell Behavior
Moleculart Artist: Ruben Zamora, MD

Seminar announcement for distribution and posting