• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Stem Cells Cured HIV for a man


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Cyberbrain

  • Guest, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 12 February 2009 - 02:32 PM


Man appears free of HIV after stem cell transplant

A 42-year-old HIV patient with leukemia appears to have no detectable HIV in his blood and no symptoms after a stem cell transplant from a donor carrying a gene mutation that confers natural resistance to the virus that causes AIDS, according to a report published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

"The patient is fine," said Dr. Gero Hutter of Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin in Germany. "Today, two years after his transplantation, he is still without any signs of HIV disease and without antiretroviral medication."

The case was first reported in November, and the new report is the first official publication of the case in a medical journal. Hutter and a team of medical professionals performed the stem cell transplant on the patient, an American living in Germany, to treat the man's leukemia, not the HIV itself.

However, the team deliberately chose a compatible donor who has a naturally occurring gene mutation that confers resistance to HIV. The mutation cripples a receptor known as CCR5, which is normally found on the surface of T cells, the type of immune system cells attacked by HIV.

The mutation is known as CCR5 delta32 and is found in 1 percent to 3 percent of white populations of European descent.

HIV uses the CCR5 as a co-receptor (in addition to CD4 receptors) to latch on to and ultimately destroy immune system cells. Since the virus can't gain a foothold on cells that lack CCR5, people who have the mutation have natural protection. (There are other, less common HIV strains that use different co-receptors.)

People who inherit one copy of CCR5 delta32 take longer to get sick or develop AIDS if infected with HIV. People with two copies (one from each parent) may not become infected at all. The stem cell donor had two copies.

While promising, the treatment is unlikely to help the vast majority of people infected with HIV, said Dr. Jay Levy, a professor at the University of California San Francisco, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study. A stem cell transplant is too extreme and too dangerous to be used as a routine treatment, he said.

"About a third of the people die [during such transplants], so it's just too much of a risk," Levy said. To perform a stem cell transplant, doctors intentionally destroy a patient's immune system, leaving the patient vulnerable to infection, and then reintroduce a donor's stem cells (which are from either bone marrow or blood) in an effort to establish a new, healthy immune system.

Levy also said it's unlikely that the transplant truly cured the patient in this study. HIV can infect many other types of cells and may be hiding out in the patient's body to resurface at a later time, he said.

"This type of virus can infect macrophages (another type of white blood cell that expresses CCR5) and other cells, like the brain cells, and it could live a lifetime. But if it can't spread, you never see it-- but it's there and it could do some damage," he said. "It's not the kind of approach that you could say, 'I've cured you.' I've eliminated the virus from your body." Health.com: 10 questions to ask a new partner before having sex

Before undergoing the transplant, the patient was also found to be infected with low levels of a type of HIV known as X4, which does not use the CCR5 receptor to infect cells. So it would seem that this virus would still be able to grow and damage immune cells in his body. However, following the transplant, signs of leukemia and HIV were absent.

"There is no really conclusive explanation why we didn't observe any rebound of HIV," Hutter said. "This finding is very surprising."

Hutter noted that one year ago, the patient had a relapse of leukemia and a second transplant from the same donor. The patient experienced complications from the procedure, including temporary liver problems and kidney failure, but they were not unusual and may occur in HIV-negative patients, he said.

Researchers including Hutter agree that the technique should not be used to treat HIV alone. "Some people may say, 'I want to do it,'" said Levy. A more logical -- and potentially safer -- approach would be to develop some type of CCR5-disabling gene therapy or treatment that could be directly injected into the body, said Levy.

Less invasive options to alter CCR5 could be on the horizon within the next five years, said Levy. "It's definitely the wave of the future," he said. "As we continue to follow this one patient, we will learn a lot."

One drug that's currently on the market that blocks CCR5 is called maraviroc (Selzentry). It was first approved in 2007 and is used in combination with other antiretroviral drugs. Health.com: Who's most at risk for STDs?

In 2007, an estimated 2 million people died from AIDS, and 2.7 million people contracted HIV. More than 15 million women are infected worldwide. HIV/AIDS can be transmitted through sexual intercourse, sharing needles, pregnancy, breast-feeding, and/or blood transfusions with an infected person. Health.com:What should I do if the condom breaks?

"For HIV patients, this report is an important flicker of hope that antiretroviral therapy like HAART [highly active antiretroviral therapy] is not the endpoint of medical research," Hutter said.



#2 Dmitri

  • Guest
  • 841 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Houston and Chicago

Posted 28 March 2009 - 10:27 AM

That's great news. I don’t think people have replied because from what I read on some other thread it appears that many here don’t believe HIV causes AIDS.

Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 nowayout

  • Guest
  • 2,946 posts
  • 439
  • Location:Earth

Posted 28 March 2009 - 11:53 AM

... it appears that many here don't believe HIV causes AIDS.


Every online forum has its kooky characters. These denialists do themselves no credit. This is not a harmless meme. In South Africa, the willful refusal on the part of the government to accept the overwhelming evidence that HIV causes AIDS and to provide antivirals is estimated to have caused about 400,000 preventable deaths over the past decade. This borders on genocide. Duesberg and his ilk were directly involved in this and should be held responsible.

Edited by andre, 28 March 2009 - 12:00 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 28 March 2009 - 04:07 PM

That's great news. I don?t think people have replied because from what I read on some other thread it appears that many here don?t believe HIV causes AIDS.


What? Someone said HIV doesn't cause aids? Its wise not to have discussions with such people

#5 Dmitri

  • Guest
  • 841 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Houston and Chicago

Posted 28 March 2009 - 08:44 PM

That's great news. I don?t think people have replied because from what I read on some other thread it appears that many here don?t believe HIV causes AIDS.


What? Someone said HIV doesn't cause aids? Its wise not to have discussions with such people


Yes, here's the link : http://www.imminst.o...o...267&hl=AIDS

It dates back to 2002, even Mind (an executive director here) was a bit skeptic about the HIV=AIDS hypothesis. I bumped the thread a few weeks ago in order to get feedback and learn if those people still had the same ideas. However, no one replied.

#6 NR2(x)

  • Guest
  • 253 posts
  • -56
  • Location:USA

Posted 30 September 2010 - 11:35 AM

don’t believe HIV causes AIDS

I have seen noble laurets saying this, so there must be some truth in it somewhere.
Could it be a politically correct method of impling something far more sinister.....
I have a hypothesis that 'causes' is being ascribed a meaning other than the meaning of causlaity in science. In Law causation requires choice, therefore the bullet doesnt kill the man, rather the shoot kills the man. It requires a human actor who made choices. Could the statement be interpruted as follows Group X created HIV therefore they caused it and to ascribe cause to a mindless virus is false.

Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#7 Solarclimax

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • -62

Posted 30 September 2010 - 01:22 PM

Technically, it's certain people associated with government that cause aids, as it is a virus that was created in a lab so that certain people could profit from the sale of treatments, same with cancer and same with the upcoming swine flue pandemics. It's actually illegal to claim that you can cure cancer unless you have some type of high up clearance,, hmm wonder why that is.... Just like all things, making money is vastly more important than saving life. If you could buy a cure for these diseases then big pharma stops making money from selling people drugs etc that mask the problem.

Donald Rumsfeld himself makes a killing from the swine flue vaccine. A vaccine that does more harm than the actual swine flue. I thought some on this site would be more clued up.

Edited by Solarclimax, 30 September 2010 - 01:25 PM.

  • dislike x 5

#8 Luna

  • Guest, F@H
  • 2,528 posts
  • 66
  • Location:Israel

Posted 30 September 2010 - 06:02 PM

AIDS not from HIV, government people spreading cancer, swine flu and AIDS.. ok..

On topic again, yay good job :) I want to see it applied to people who need it now.

#9 NR2(x)

  • Guest
  • 253 posts
  • -56
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 October 2010 - 04:11 AM

Why not harness the bodies own signal transduction pathways to signal an increase in stem cells production. Erythrpoietin and GM CSF are already being used for this with moderate curative effect. One could go further and find more eg activators.

Its not money but rather power that drives the world. Its not profiting from treatments its utility maximisation, considering such things as scarce resources, political desent etc

#10 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 01 October 2010 - 04:45 AM

Why not harness the bodies own signal transduction pathways to signal an increase in stem cells production. Erythrpoietin and GM CSF are already being used for this with moderate curative effect. One could go further and find more eg activators.

Its not money but rather power that drives the world. Its not profiting from treatments its utility maximisation, considering such things as scarce resources, political desent etc


Did you read the article ?
It was a transplant from someone who was immune to HIV, so the new immune cells would not be reinfected.

#11 NR2(x)

  • Guest
  • 253 posts
  • -56
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 October 2010 - 05:27 AM

wopps to busy being a know it all, wow thats a superb idea

#12 Ambidestrian

  • Guest
  • 27 posts
  • 5
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 April 2011 - 04:22 AM

This sounds like a great idea initially; this man was genuinely cured of HIV due to a genetic fluke in the stem cell transplant he received that rendered his new immune system immune to infection by the HIV.

The problem is that the procedure involved full-body irradiation of an extent sufficient to destroy his existing immune system, which has SEVERE side effects, and this procedure is a last effort to cure leukemia and not always successful. This is simply not an effective HIV cure.
[edit]
I guess the article said that. I read several other articles that touted it as a workable cure; this seems to have a more reasonable perspective.
That said, I do not really see any workable cures being derived from this either. Maybe once large scale genetic modification of somatic cells in mammals is possible without causing cancer or death in most cases... At this point, technology really only allows germ line genetic modifications.

Edited by Ambidestrian, 09 April 2011 - 04:25 AM.


Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#13 1kgcoffee

  • Guest
  • 737 posts
  • 254

Posted 09 April 2011 - 02:59 PM

Technically, it's certain people associated with government that cause aids, as it is a virus that was created in a lab so that certain people could profit from the sale of treatments, same with cancer and same with the upcoming swine flue pandemics. It's actually illegal to claim that you can cure cancer unless you have some type of high up clearance,, hmm wonder why that is.... Just like all things, making money is vastly more important than saving life. If you could buy a cure for these diseases then big pharma stops making money from selling people drugs etc that mask the problem.

Donald Rumsfeld himself makes a killing from the swine flue vaccine. A vaccine that does more harm than the actual swine flue. I thought some on this site would be more clued up.


Mystical thinking. In primitive times we blamed the gods. Nowadays we create elaborate conspiracies involving government and corporations. Same shit.

Anyways, haven't they recently found another very effective way of treating aids?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users