BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  1


          SENATE THIRD READING
          SB 1260 (Ortiz)
          As Amended August 21, 2006
          Majority vote 

           SENATE VOTE  :39-0  
           
           HEALTH              12-0        APPROPRIATIONS      18-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Chan, Aghazarian, Berg,   |Ayes:|Chu, Sharon Runner, Bass, |
          |     |Frommer, Jones, Lieu,     |     |Berg,                     |
          |     |Montanez, Nakanishi,      |     |Calderon, De La Torre,    |
          |     |Negrete McLeod, Richman,  |     |Emmerson,                 |
          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Strickland |     |Haynes, Karnette, Klehs,  |
          |     |                          |     |Leno,                     |
          |     |                          |     |Nakanishi, Nation, Laird, |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Saldana,   |
          |     |                          |     |Walters, Yee              |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Deletes sunset dates of certain provisions in existing  
          law relating to the derivation or use of human embryonic stem  
          (hES) cell research.  Establishes guidelines relating to egg  
          donation for stem cell research funded outside of Proposition  
          71.  Specifically,  this bill  :   

          1)Deletes the January 1, 2007 sunset date of the following  
            requirements for research projects involving the derivation or  
            use of hES cells in California:

             a)   The requirement that an institutional review board (IRB)  
               review and approve research projects;

             b)   The requirement for an IRB to annually report to the  
               Department of Health Services (DHS) the number of hES cell  
               research projects that the IRB has reviewed; and,

             c)   The requirement that DHS submit biennial reports to the  
               Legislature.

          2)Requires DHS to consider the Guidelines for Human Embryonic  








                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  2


            Stem Cell Research issued by the National Research Council and  
            Institute of Medicine of the National Academies in 2005 in  
            developing the guidelines, as specified.

          3)Deletes existing requirement for an IRB on research involving  
            hES cell and transfers IRBs current functions to a stem cell  
            research oversight committee (SCRO).  Allows an SCRO to  
            provide scientific and ethical review of such research.

          4)Requires an SCRO to be established, substantially in  
            accordance with the Guidelines for hES Cell Research issued by  
            the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine of  
            the National Academies in 2005.

          5)Requires an SCRO to be established in accordance with  
            standards issued by the California Institute for Regenerative  
            Medicine (CIRM), as specified.  States that legislative intent  
            is to avoid inconsistencies on an SCRO established pursuant to  
            this bill and other existing standards for research conducted  
            in California.

          6)Replaces existing annual requirement for DHS to report to the  
            Legislature on hES cell research activity with biennial  
            reviews.  

          7)Defines the following terms:

             a)   Assisted oocyte production (AOP) is the surgical  
               extraction of oocytes following pharmaceutically induced  
               manipulation of oocyte production through the use of  
               ovarian stimulation;

             b)   Oocyte is a female egg or egg cell of a human female;  
               and,

             c)   Alternate method of oocyte retrieval means a method of  
               oocyte retrieval that does not involve the pharmaceutically  
               induced manipulation of oocyte production.

          8)Requires a physician and surgeon, prior to obtaining informed  
            consent from a subject for AOP or any alternative method of  
            ovarian retrieval for procuring oocytes for research or  
            development of medical therapies, to do the following:









                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  3


             a)   Provide to the subject a standardized medically accurate  
               written summary of health and consumer issues associated  
               with AOP and any alternative methods of oocyte retrieval;  
               and,

             b)   Obtain written and oral informed consent for the  
               procedure from the subject.

          9)Makes any failure to provide the written summary and obtain a  
            written consent from the subject, unprofessional conduct, as  
            specified.  

          10)Requires the summary specified in # 8) a) to include  
            medically accurate disclosures concerning the potential risks  
            of AOP or any alternative method of oocyte retrieval, as  
            specified.

          11)Defines "written summary of health and consumer issues" as  
            the guide published and updated by the American Society for  
            Reproductive Medicine entitled, "Assisted Reproductive  
            Technology: A Guide for Patients" or an alternative document.   
            Allows this alternative document to be one that has been  
            approved by DHS, as specified, and requires that it adhere to  
            the following:

             a)   Simplified reading standards, written in layperson's  
               language, and be made available in languages spoken by  
               subjects in the study if their proficiency is a language  
               other than English; and,

             b)   Include additional resources for, or list additional  
               sources of, medical information on health and safety issues  
               surrounding oocyte retrieval.

          12)Requires the consent specified in # 8) b) above to comply  
            with the informed consent requirements of the Protection of  
            Human Subjects in Medical Experimentation Act.

          13)States this bill does not affect the suitability or  
            availability of oocytes procured for research before January  
            1, 2006, if the oocytes were donated pursuant to protocols or  
            standards that are generally recognized and accepted by  
            national or international scientific bodies.









                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  4


          14)Requires an IRB to require any research program that involves  
            AOP or any alternative method of oocyte retrieval to do all of  
            the following:

             a)   Include a written summary with information on the health  
               risks and potential adverse consequences of the procedure,  
               and describe the manner in which the subject will receive  
               and review this written summary; 

             b)   Obtain informed consent, as specified;

             c)   Provide an objective and accurate statement about the  
               existing state of the research for which the subject is  
               providing oocytes;

             d)   Perform psychological and physical screening, in  
               accordance with the appropriate standard of care, for all  
               subjects prior to the oocyte retrieval procedure;

             e)   Ensure that after an AOP or any alternative method of  
               oocyte retrieval on a subject, a postprocedure medical  
               examination is conducted on the subject, as specified.   
               Require that the subject be informed of the right to a  
               second opinion if there are any medical concerns;

             f)   Ensure that the subject has access to and coverage for  
               medically appropriate medical care that is required as a  
               direct result of the procedure.  Require the research  
               program or project to ensure that payment or coverage of  
               resulting medical expenses be provided at no cost to the  
               subject;

             g)   Provide a summary informing the subject that oocytes may  
               not be sold or transferred for valuable consideration  
               except as specified; and,

             h)   Disclose if the physician and surgeon and his or her  
               immediate family members has any professional interest in  
               the outcome of the research or of the oocyte retrieval  
               procedure, as specified.

          15)Requires a research program or project that involves AOP or  
            any alternative method of oocyte retrieval to ensure that a  
            written record is established and maintained.  Specifies the  








                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  5


            information that must be maintained in the written record.   
            Requires the information collected to protect personally  
            identifiable information and remain confidential.  Requires  
            the information to be reported to the branch, which shall  
            aggregate the data and make it publicly available, while  
            protecting personally identifiable information. 

          16)Requires DHS to provide public access to information to which  
            it is required to release pursuant to the California Public  
            Records Act.  Requires DHS to disseminate the information to  
            the general public, as specified.  

          17)Prohibits any employee or relative of an employee of a  
            research organization conducting stem cell research involving  
            human oocytes from being a subject in the research.

          18)Prohibits a physician and surgeon performing the AOP or any  
            alternative method of oocyte retrieval from having any  
            financial interest in the outcome of the research.

          19)Requires any procedures for procuring oocytes in this state  
            for research or the development of medical therapies to meet  
            all of the standards for subjects included in this bill.   
            Requires all eggs procured outside of this state for research  
            taking place in this state meet these same standards.   
            Requires all egg extractions for research to be approved by an  
            IRB.

          20)Prohibits any human oocyte or embryo from being acquired,  
            sold, offered for sale, or transferred for valuable  
            consideration for the purposes of medical research or  
            development of medical therapies. 

          21)States that "valuable consideration" excludes reasonable  
            payment for the removal, processing, disposal, preservation,  
            quality control, and storage of oocytes or embryos.

          22)Prohibits payment in excess of the amount of reimbursement of  
            direct expenses made to any research subject to encourage her  
            production of human oocytes for the purposes of medical  
            research.

          23)Prohibits construing this bill to amend Proposition 71.









                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  6


          24)Encourages the Independent Citizen's Oversight Committee  
            (ICOC), established pursuant to Proposition 71, to review  
            existing studies concerning the health risks and benefits of  
            ovarian stimulation drugs used for assisted oocyte production,  
            identify gaps in existing knowledge concerning health risks  
            and benefits, and undertake further research as the ICOC deems  
            necessary to characterize the risks and benefits of those  
            drugs.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, on-going General Fund costs to DHS of approximately  
          $200,000.  Minor and absorbable special fund costs (Medical  
          Board Contingent Fund) to the Medical Board of California. 

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, the purpose of this bill is  
          to ensure adequate safeguards for research subjects who are  
          donating eggs for stem cell research, given that this is an area  
          not currently addressed specifically and thoroughly in state  
          law.  The author state that these provisions will not impact  
          projects that are funded by Proposition 71, but projects that  
          occur outside of CIRM-funded research, where there are no  
          specified guidelines in law about the requirements for this type  
          of research.  The author also point out that this bill ensures  
          that women considering undergoing AOP for the purposes of  
          donating eggs for medical research are fully informed of the  
          potential risks.  Stem cell research is moving into the realm of  
          somatic cell transfer, also known as therapeutic cloning, a  
          field of research that will enable scientists to study the  
          progression of diseases and disorders.  One source of the eggs  
          needed for this important line of research will be donations  
          from women who volunteer to take fertility drugs or ovarian  
          stimulation drugs to develop multiple eggs.  According to  
          available research, there is a 1% risk of development of serious  
          ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) among women who take  
          ovarian stimulation drugs, which is associated with serious  
          health problems such as pulmonary complications, blood clotting,  
          and kidney impairment.  In severe cases OHSS can require  
          hospitalization and lead to death.  In addition, scientists have  
          not been able to rule out a link between fertility drugs and  
          ovarian cancer.  For women considering in vitro fertilization  
          for reproductive purposes, the offsetting benefit is clear; in  
          contrast, for women considering donating eggs for research  
          purposes, the offsetting benefit is less clear.  This bill  
          ensures that women considering undergoing AOP for the purposes  








                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  7


          of donating eggs for medical research are fully informed of the  
          potential risks before electing to do so. 

          The Center for Genetics and Society (Center) states that as a  
          supporter of embryonic stem cell research, it believes that the  
          research will be best served if it is conducted in a manner that  
          promotes the health and well-being of all research subjects.  In  
          addition, the Center states that this bill will prevent the  
          emergence of a market that would unduly influence women's  
          decisions to provide their eggs for research and that  
          compensation beyond direct expenses would inappropriately create  
          financial incentives, especially by economically vulnerable  
          women, who may put themselves at risk in exchange for payment.   
          The Pro-Choice Alliance states that the bill demonstrates  
          respect and dignity for women for recognizing that in order to  
          give fully informed consent, women must be given accurate and  
          unbiased information, that the information must be  
          understandable and accessible to women of limited English  
          proficiency or literacy, and that women's wishes about the  
          research in which they are participating will be respected

          In their opposition, the American College of Obstetricians and  
          Gynecologists and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine  
          state that while they support the intent of the bill, they  
          believe this bill in its current form is unfair to women and  
          will stall stem cell research.  They specifically state that  
          oocyte donors, like other research subjects, must be compensated  
          for their time and trouble and that professional guidelines can  
          be used to determine the reasonable amounts to avoid  
          exploitation.  In addition, they state that out-of-pocket  
          reimbursements should include lost wages. 

          DHS' Human Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee (committee),  
          created pursuant to SB 322 (Ortiz), Chapter 506, Statutes of  
          2003, writes that it has concerns with this bill.  The committee  
          states that it is concerned with the designation of the IRBs as  
          regulatory bodies of stem cell research, the breadth of the  
          requirement for provision of medical care for adverse medical  
          consequences of donating oocytes for research purposes, and the  
          broad and ambiguous restrictions on who may be a research oocyte  
          donor.   


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Rosielyn Pulmano / HEALTH / (916)  








                                                                  SB 1260
                                                                  Page  8


          319-2097 


                                                                FN: 0016484