Leukemia Breakthrough - Serial Killer T Cells Wipe Out Tumors In Small Trial

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by iJohnHenry, Aug 17, 2011.

  1. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #1
    I'm surprised none of this smart group has started a thread yet, about this achievement.

    So I will. ;)

    T-Bots to the rescue?? One can but hope. :cool:

    This could put the whole Cancer "industry" right on it's ear.
     
  2. Daffodil macrumors 6502

    Daffodil

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Location:
    In a sunny state of mind
    #3
    :D Haha, I was just about to post it. "Are you sure you're a doctor?"
     
  3. iJohnHenry thread starter macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #4
    Republicans?? :p
     
  4. Daffodil macrumors 6502

    Daffodil

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Location:
    In a sunny state of mind
    #5
    :eek: ;) Not at all. The science is brilliant, but I love how confusing it might seem with only a limited understanding...
     
  5. mobilehaathi macrumors G3

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #6
    Here is the abstract from the actual publication:

    Chimeric Antigen Receptor–Modified T Cells in Chronic Lymphoid Leukemia
    David L. Porter, M.D., Bruce L. Levine, Ph.D., Michael Kalos, Ph.D., Adam Bagg, M.D., and Carl H. June, M.D.

    We designed a lentiviral vector expressing a chimeric antigen receptor with specificity for the B-cell antigen CD19, coupled with CD137 (a costimulatory receptor in T cells [4-1BB]) and CD3-zeta (a signal-transduction component of the T-cell antigen receptor) signaling domains. A low dose (approximately 1.5×105 cells per kilogram of body weight) of autologous chimeric antigen receptor–modified T cells reinfused into a patient with refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) expanded to a level that was more than 1000 times as high as the initial engraftment level in vivo, with delayed development of the tumor lysis syndrome and with complete remission. Apart from the tumor lysis syndrome, the only other grade 3/4 toxic effect related to chimeric antigen receptor T cells was lymphopenia. Engineered cells persisted at high levels for 6 months in the blood and bone marrow and continued to express the chimeric antigen receptor. A specific immune response was detected in the bone marrow, accompanied by loss of normal B cells and leukemia cells that express CD19. Remission was ongoing 10 months after treatment. Hypogammaglobulinemia was an expected chronic toxic effect.
     
  6. Shrink macrumors G3

    Shrink

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #7
    I read some articles about this. Looks exciting, but important to note the study had an N=3.

    Two patients into total remission, one improved. Question is how long will the effect last. Similar techniques have been used in the past, but the cells have died out quickly.

    Nevertheless, this is certainly interesting.

    Would be wonderful if it worked. :D
     
  7. iJohnHenry thread starter macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #8
    True, but apparently they were all "advanced" cases, and were willing to take part in the limited trial.

    If the T-bots draw their growth 'energy' from only cancer cells, they would eventually die in their absence. This would ideally prevent them from unlimited growth.

    A remission failure could be readdressed, ad infinitum.

    NOTE: The above idiot is not a micro-biologist.
     
  8. Shrink macrumors G3

    Shrink

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #9
    But I play one on TV. :rolleyes:
     
  9. velocityg4 macrumors 68040

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #10
    Don't really see the need for the double blind trial. The results are objective rather than subjective, like a pain killer or anti-depressant. Just because someone thinks it is working will not change the results of a biopsy.
     
  10. darklyt macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    #11
    I thought the FDA required a p < .001 for treatments, or at least I was told so in my Design of Experiments course. Is there something different about this case given the group the treatment is meant for?
     
  11. Dr Kevorkian94 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    SI, NY
    #12
    Ah I can understand, thank you bio class. This is a nice achievement, one step foward.
     
  12. Shrink macrumors G3

    Shrink

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #13
    Considering your user name, this could be wonderful for all of us - but bad for your business. :rolleyes: :p
     

Share This Page