Adhering to Ethical Benchmarks in Neurology Clinical Trials Using iPSCs

  • Akira AkabayashiEmail author
  • Eisuke Nakazawa
  • Nancy S. Jecker
Current Perspectives


We examine the ethics of using induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) in cell transplantation treatment of neurologic diseases and the essential types of ethical benchmarks required in clinical trials in neurology using iPSCs, including embryonic pluripotent stem cells. We focus on two issues: (1) comparison and (2) criticism of the two types of neuro-hype (neuro-purism and neuro-essentialism). In order to ensure that the dialog on ethical benchmarks continues to develop in a manner that promotes trust with society and research subjects, concerns about the clinical use of pluripotent stem cells (particularly iPSCs) in neurology must be at the forefront of any ethics discussion.


Research ethics Neuroethics iPS Stem cell research Bodily integrity Personal identity 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Competing Interests

AA is the President of the Japan Association for Bioethics; this paper reflects the author’s personal academic analyses and opinions and does not represent JAB’s official position. EN and NSJ have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Supplementary material

13311_2019_728_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (498 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 498 kb)


  1. 1.
    Center for iPS Cell Research and Application (CiRA) News. Announcement of physician-initiated clinical trials for Parkinson’s disease. Accessed 24 March 2019.
  2. 2.
    Nikkei Shimbun. iPS treatment: core of ‘regenerative medicine,’ challenge for recovery from spinal cord injury: Keio University protocol has been approved. February 19, 2019.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tabata Y et al. T-type calcium channels determine the vulnerability of dopaminergic neurons to mitochondrial stress in familial Parkinson disease. Stem Cell Reports 2018; 11(5):1171-1184. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Doi D, Morizane A, Kikuchi T, et al. Prolonged maturation culture favors a reduction in the tumorigenicity and the dopaminergic function of human ESC-derived neural cells in a primate model of Parkinson’s disease. Stem Cells 2012; 30: 935–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mandai M, Watanabe A, Kurimoto Y, et al. Autologous induced stem-cell-derived retinal cells for macular degeneration. N Engl J Med 2017; 376:1038–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cyranoski D. Reprogrammed stem cells approved to mend hearts. Nature 2018; 557: 619–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bretzner F, Gilbert F, Baylis F, Brownstone RM. Target populations for first-in-human embryonic stem cell research in spinal cord injury. Cell Stem Cell 2011 8(5):468–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Akabayashi A, Nakazawa E, Jecker NS. Endangerment of the iPSC stock project in Japan: on the ethics of public funding policies. Journal of Medical Ethics 2018; 44: 700–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morizane A, Doi D, Kikuchi T, et al. Direct comparison of autologous and allogeneic transplantation of iPSC-derived neural cells in the brain of a nonhuman primates. Stem Cell Reports 2013; 1: 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biomedical Ethics, Faculty of MedicineThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Division of Medical EthicsNew York University School of MedicineNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Bioethics and HumanitiesUniversity of Washington School of MedicineSeattleUSA
  4. 4.African Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of ScienceUniversity of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations