backtop


Print 27 comment(s) - last by JW.C.. on Jun 23 at 5:14 AM


  (Source: nlm.nih.gov)
Clinical trials to begin in two years

A team of international researchers has used a human vaccine to cure prostate tumors in mice without side effects. 

Richard Vile, Ph.D., study leader and Mayo Clinic immunologist, along with Alan Melcher, Ph.D., and Peter Selby, Ph.D., both from the Cancer Research UK Clinical Centre at St. James' University Hospital, have developed a cure for prostate cancer in mice that also shows promise for other cancers and melanoma as well. 

Scientists have attempted to accomplish this in the past, but were hindered by the inability to isolate a diverse collection of antigens in tumor cells. This then causes tumors to mutate and survive the body's immune system. 

But Vile and his team were able to overcome this by first piecing together parts of genetic code from human prostate tissue into a complementary DNA (cDNA) library. The cDNA were then placed into a mob of vesicular stomatitis viruses (VSV), which were cultured. They were then given to the mice as a vaccine through several intravenous injections. 

Tumors have a unique "fingerprint" called an antigen, which triggers an immune system response through a molecular protein tag. By releasing the human vaccine prostate cancer antigens into the mutated VSV vector, the mice's T-cells were able to launch an attack. The animals' immune systems then became familiar with the antigens expressed in the virus after being exposed to the mutated virus, and created a potent immune response. This attacked the prostate tumors. 

Vile's immunotherapy research differed from others because it made use of viruses as vectors for cDNA libraries. This eliminates the challenge of isolating antigens in tumor cells because it offers an in-depth profile of the cancer. 

"Nobody really knows how many antigens the immune system can really see on tumor cells," said Vile. "By expressing all of these proteins in highly immunogenic viruses, we increased their visibility to the immune system. The immune system now thinks it is being invaded by the viruses, which are expressing cancer-related antigens that should be eliminated."

Clinical trials are expected to begin in two years.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By Dropmachine on 6/20/2011 10:06:16 PM , Rating: 3
How stupid is our society that it will take TWO GODDAM YEARS for them to start trials? I know its legalities and red tape and blah blah, but seriously COME ON. Get your asses moving and start already!




RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By MrBlastman on 6/21/2011 1:29:23 AM , Rating: 3
It's called government agencies... the FDA in this case. They tend to get larger and larger and their rulebooks get thicker and thicker, thus lengthening the girth of time required to fight cancers in sticky areas such as the prostate.

I know, it sucks, but, that's how our system is right now.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By silverblue on 6/21/2011 2:34:29 AM , Rating: 3
I don't want to sound a little silly here (for once) but as this is a British trial, I'm not sure what the FDA have to do with it.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By jimhsu on 6/21/2011 2:00:05 AM , Rating: 5
I think it's called "side effects". The thing to watch out for in future trials will be autoimmunogenicity -- in other words, if the tumor antigens look "too much" like normal cells ... well, you'll have a lot of problems on your hands. All sorts of horrible things with long names like rheumatoid disease, Wegener's granulomatosis, glomerulonephritis, etc etc...

Killing tumors is a balance between a) the tumor itself, b) immunoreactivity, and c) drug toxicity. When any of those things get out of whack, bad things happen, like your patient dying. Hence the need for more studies before this goes to clinical trials.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By nstott on 6/21/2011 1:23:14 PM , Rating: 2
...and given the choice between rheumatoid arthritis and tumors, it's best to stick with the devil you know...

While I'm admittedly making light of your reasonable point, a more balanced approach would be to hold off on patients that have other viable treatment options while giving the new, untested option to patients that are likely to die anyway and have no other options available after they sign release forms acknowledging the risks.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By jimhsu on 6/21/2011 2:35:06 PM , Rating: 2
That is true, and that is why we have fast track drug programs (e.g. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/449551_3 ). I don't know if similar things exist for clinical procedures such as this that are not drugs per se, but have the same set of benefits and risks.

All in all, informed consent is going to be a necessity here, as with any other drug program.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By nstott on 6/22/2011 10:22:24 AM , Rating: 2
I've heard of the fast track program, but it did little to help my dad who died of multiple myeloma after the doctors refused to allow him to take drugs still in the experimental phase. It was well-understood that he would die without a new drug since the approved drugs lose effectiveness over time.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By someguy123 on 6/21/2011 5:06:01 AM , Rating: 2
Well, if you want to take a nice injection into your prostate and drop dead a year later, be my guest.

Not everything kills humans or rats immediately. These types of vaccines do need the years of testing before trials can begin.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By JW.C on 6/23/2011 5:14:19 AM , Rating: 2
For some people that ARE going to die because of the cancer it is more than worth the risk.


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By FaceMaster on 6/21/2011 10:42:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Get your asses moving


...lol


RE: LKAJFLK:SDJFS
By geddarkstorm on 6/21/2011 2:18:35 PM , Rating: 2
Medical science requires careful deliberation. Yes, patience is bitter, but the fruit is sweet. If we rush things, we run the ricks of unintended consequences popping up that completely ruin that medicine in the eyes of the public, and whatever company/doctors were spearheading its use. There are plenty of drugs every year that go through full testing and -still- have unintended consequences pop up in the broader population that leads to recalls or those really long winded side effect speeches in commercials.

This isn't a game. These are lives, present and -future-, that are at risk. We must take all due diligence.

None the less, this is an immense breakthrough. Completely curing a cancer by this method has opened the door to being able to target many other cancers through a similar way. We just have to see if it'll work the same for humans as it did for mice. Remember, it was -human- antigens used in the mice, which vastly lowered the chance for autoimmune disease. Human antigens in humans greatly increases that risk, so we'll just have to see if this is feasible or not.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki