from the another-small-potential-victory dept.
An international team of scientists including from the University of Adelaide have identified potential inhibitors of specific cell membrane proteins, which are involved in the spread of cancer to other parts of the body (metastasis) and in the progression of autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis.
The newly identified molecules strongly inhibit the action of the two 'chemokine receptors' CXCR4 and ACKR3 which work together to regulate cell migration, important in both cancer metastasis and autoimmune disease.
The findings of the research team from University of California, San Diego, and the Chemokine Biology Laboratory in the University of Adelaide's Centre for Molecular Pathology, published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, are an important step towards the development of new therapeutic treatments for these diseases.
One of the new molecules, the variant which bound most strongly to the CXCR4 receptor, inhibited multiple sclerosis in a laboratory study.
"Scientists around the world are looking for ways of blocking the CXCR4 and ACKR3 receptors as a means of preventing or at least slowing down the cell migration that underlies the progression of these diseases," says Professor Shaun McColl, Director of the Centre for Molecular Pathology at the University of Adelaide.
Related Stories
Stem cell transplant 'game changer' for MS patients
Doctors say a stem cell transplant could be a "game changer" for many patients with multiple sclerosis. Results from an international trial show that it was able to stop the disease and improve symptoms. It involves wiping out a patient's immune system using cancer drugs and then rebooting it with a stem cell transplant.
Louise Willetts, 36, from Rotherham, is now symptom-free and told me: "It feels like a miracle." A total of 100,000 people in the UK have MS, which attacks nerves in the brain and spinal cord.
There are just a few problems, however: The experimental procedure is under scrutiny from regulators, the experiment's web site may have overstated the effectiveness of the not-yet-proven treatment, and patients have to foot the bill. Oh, and no one has seen the study yet.
[...] The results reported in the BBC piece are just the preliminary findings. And that leaves a number of questions still unanswered — are these results permanent? What are the risks? Who isn't suited to have their immune system wiped out through aggressive chemo?
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has also flagged some serious issues in the study's protocol. If that sounds boring and bureaucratic, think of it this way: for a few months, the lead investigator somehow forgot to report a number of nasty side effects of the treatment, including chest infection and the worsening of conditions as diverse as vertigo, narcolepsy, stuttering, and hyperglycemia, among others.
One thing we know for sure? It's real expensive. The BBC noted it cost patients £30,000 ($42,000) to receive the experimental treatment, but biomedical scientist and science writer Paul Knoepfler, who has been following the trial since last year, says it ran some patients between $100,000 and $200,000.
Related: Low Vitamin-D Genes Linked to Multiple Sclerosis
Scientists Identify Potential Inhibitors of Cancer Metastasis and MS
Risky Stem Cell Treatment Reverses MS in 70% of Patients in Small Study
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 16 2015, @01:55PM
Paper won't load
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday October 16 2015, @02:06PM
maybe your printer is empty: paper loaded fine for me :)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 16 2015, @02:22PM
Here is how they monitored the multiple scelerosis model:
I've actually seen this done before, the mice were marked as to treatment group and if one "seemed to be getting better yesterday" then that was used to bias the current day's score. These researchers also do not report blinding themselves. I think that was just an afterthought to this study though, which is primarily about getting peptides that bind CXCR4.
The bigger problem here is that these types of studies are motivated by others that used questionable animal testing. Imagine, the reason they chose to study CXCR4 rather than something else is because people previously did a bunch of those unblinded mouse experiments.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 16 2015, @02:38PM
Not Soylented. Soyled (pronounced soiled).
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 16 2015, @02:42PM
The molecules were identified using phage display. This means that they are peptides and will not likely cross the blood-brain barrier and will be basically useless for MS therapy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_display [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 16 2015, @02:46PM
That is not an insurmountable obstacle, at least not in principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrathecal_pump [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Friday October 16 2015, @02:48PM
With a known peptide it is possible to design chemical analogues that will capture the same functionality, and be small enough to diffuse across the BBB.
The crystal structure for CXCR4 has been experimentally determined (http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore.do?structureId=3ODU) , making computational methods possible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 16 2015, @03:15PM
Piracetam crosses the BBB and is speculated to increase BBB permeability. Maybe it can help.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 17 2015, @12:00AM
There is also this Analysis of focused ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier permeability.. [nih.gov] (requires Javascript, or deleting the obscuring element).