quote:Doctors in Germany say a patient appears to have been cured of Aids by a bone marrow transplant from a donor who had a genetic resistance to HIV.
quote:He had been infected with the human immunodeficiency virus that causes Aids for more than a decade and also had leukaemia.
The clinic said since the transplant, tests on his bone marrow, blood and other organ tissues have all been clean.
"More than 20 months after the successful transplant, no HIV can be detected in the patient," the clinic said in a statement.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
It's too early. You'll jinx it.
Posted by All4Nothing (Member # 11601) on :
When I saw this pop up on my AOL welcome screen earlier, I believe it said the scientist thought it could possibly be a fluke and wanted more testing to see if it would work on everyone.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
William Gibson suggested a cure for AIDS coming from something similar in one of his novels... I hope the tests prove fruitful. It would be huge.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
For those who haven't read the article, essentially roughly 1 in 1,000 people have a natural genetic resistance to the AIDS virus in all its form. Bone marrow was taken from one of these people, and transplanted into someone who have both AIDS and Leukemia. All signs are, 20 month later, that he is cured of AIDS and Leukemia.
It is too early to tell if this can be done consistently.
But the one underlying and all important question is, how do you determine WHO the 1 in 1000 individuals are who are immune?
Do they have to live a sexually promiscuous and unrestrained lifestyle to the point where it is near impossible for them to have not gotten AIDS? And does such a lifestyle make them prone to countless other unhealthy lifestyle diseases, some to the point where they can't be used as donors?
Is there a test for a genetic marker for this immunity?
Is the goal to not do transplants of bone marrow, but to find some way to induce this same immunity by some other genetic alteration? Thus a cure that does not require a second donor party.
Are people going to freak out over the idea of other people being genetically modified even if it does cure a terrible disease?
Just curious.
Steve/bluewizard
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Is there a test for a genetic marker for this immunity?
That was my understanding, though it might end up being multiple genes. But right now I think it's one gene they're looking at.
Posted by All4Nothing (Member # 11601) on :
Thanks for that BW! I tried multiple times to get the article to pop up for me, and to get back to the place where it was on the AOL Welcome Screen to no avail.
Imagine what a wonderfull effect this will have on people that have family members dying from HIV and AIDS if this proves fruitfull. I hope it does for their sakes, and isn't just another hope destroyed.
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
If true, it's a step in the right direction. Just a step, though.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlueWizard: Are people going to freak out over the idea of other people being genetically modified even if it does cure a terrible disease?
I, for one, would love to be genetically modified if it meant I no longer had this severely pesky genetic collagen defect that wreaks havoc on my life. Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlueWizard: Are people going to freak out over the idea of other people being genetically modified even if it does cure a terrible disease?
Beats dying or taking drugs all your life. I guess the problem is to identify the precise gene modification so that it will cure the disease and not cause any side effects.
Posted by All4Nothing (Member # 11601) on :
I got back to the article finally and the scientist who discovered that it works says that there is no chance this will become a common use to cure the disease. The reason being is that in order to do a bone marrow transplant you have to obliterate the persons original bone marrow which could be deadly.
And he also gives the impression that there is a definite genetic test for the 1/1000 individuals who are immune. It said he searched specifically for this type of person in order to do the transplant.
I figure it'd work in a worst case scenario though.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
Wikipedia has a bit more information on the gene that provides immunity in its mutated form.
It doesn't say anything about how the immunity was discovered. However, CCR5 is used by HIV to enter cells, so it is possible that the gene was already under scrutiny before the mutated version was discovered. And given that scrutiny, it may have been that someone discovered the mutated version by accident and decided to test it. I have no idea if this is actually what happened, but it seems like a plausible way.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I doubt people would freak out about other people being genetically modified. However, the reason gene therapy isn't really being used for a variety of genetic diseases right now is because people have developed leukemia after having gene therapy.
Bone marrow transplants probably won't become a common cure for HIV because of the serious risks of the procedure. Additionally, it can be hard enough to find a good match when you don't have a 1 in 1000 restriction. I bet most people with HIV wouldn't be able to find a suitable donor.
Still, it would be pretty momentous if they really did manage to clear an HIV infection. It would be a first.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
This particular line struck me as very significant -
"So is this a viable cure for HIV? Not by a long shot. Even Huetter says that bone marrow transplants, which kill around a third of patients, are so dangerous "that they can't be justified ethically" in anything other than desperate situations like late-stage leukemia."
Apparently, bone marrow transplants are inherently dangerous in and of themselves.
Still, this might be the key that unlocks the door to a cure.
1 in 1,000 -
Certainly there IS a genetic marker, but do they know what it is and can the find it? The underlying question is, how do you determine who these magical 1-in-1000 people are?
The underlying question is, do they have a way of screening for potential bone marrow donors beyond those who live a high risk lifestyle and survive?
People Freaking out-
What I meant by this comment is that there is so much resistance to say Stem Cell research, especially by religious extremists. How are these extreme but very vocal and very powerful fringes going to react to genetic modification to cure disease? I honestly don't think they will react well. They already freak out at the idea of a genetically modified tomato, they are going to go ballistic at the idea of genetically modified humans regardless of the purpose for the modification.
Just a few random thoughts.
Steve/bluewizard
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Certainly there IS a genetic marker, but do they know what it is and can the find it? The underlying question is, how do you determine who these magical 1-in-1000 people are?
The underlying question is, do they have a way of screening for potential bone marrow donors beyond those who live a high risk lifestyle and survive?
As I said before, from articles I've read, this is my understanding. The donor was found and happened to have the gene. They tested for it. They would have done the transplant even had the gene not been present but this was a bonus. And I don't think you can live a high-risk lifestyle and be a bone marrow donor. They screen, you know.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
They were specifically looking for a match with the gene. They had potential 80 matches in the country, (Germany,) and found one with the gene. So yes, they know what to look for.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
The transplant treatment is plainly not scaleable, but if you can find the mechanism of the immunity, you could perhaps synthesize it, or inject that gene somewhere less risky.
Posted by Saephon (Member # 9623) on :
This may not be the cure we wish for, but it sounds like it could be one step closer. I really hope we get there.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
It seems like the immunity is not a soluble factor but rather a change in adhesion molecules that prevent HIV penetration.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:The transplant treatment is plainly not scaleable, but if you can find the mechanism of the immunity, you could perhaps synthesize it, or inject that gene somewhere less risky.
I'm kind of assuming that they are working on growing bone marrow cultures. They need to find a Helen Lane of bone marrow.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
But it's not donating bone marrow that's the dangerous part. It's killing off the donee's entire immune system as a preface to receiving it. Growing the cultures wouldn't help much.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
Nor would it take care of the matching issue.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Well of course donating the bone marrow is very dangerous if the innate immune system is still intact that would cause a serious immunogenic reaction.
Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phanto: Well of course donating the bone marrow is very dangerous if the innate immune system is still intact that would cause a serious immunogenic reaction.
What?
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Putting immune cells into a person with an intact immune system would cause a serious reaction where both immune systems attack each other. It's exploiting this property that allows a stem cell transplant to kill endogenous leukemia that the normal immune system ignores.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)