More Positive News on Treating Blood Cancers Through the Immune System Instead of Chemotherapies

A good weekend for news on progress against blood cancers. The news is coming out now because the weekend and first part of this week are the dates for the annual meeting of ASH (the American Society of Hematology), the major national group of researchers and doctors focused on blood diseases, including cancers arising in the blood system. 

One new approach rejects chemotherapy in favor of taking steps to activate the immune system in ways that will let it destroy the cancer. The work has been ongoing for for some time, and another success was formally released this weekend. It's a story of using a modified version of the HIV virus to invade and then destroy B cells. The B cells are targeted because they are the aberrant cells in various blood cancers. 

The results create hope and excitement. The most recent instance involves the first use of this method to treat a child. Here, that child is Emma, a 7 year old. For her, science had run out of answers, and hope was dwindling. Today, she is in complete remission. It's too early to say the remission will remain, but for now, she is a kid with a future. The story is told well in this NYT article by Denise Grady. The first person treated with this therapy was treated over two years ago, and remains in remission, as described last year by Ms. Grady. 

How does it work? Conceptually, it's simple - train T cells to recognize, enter and destroy B cells through use of a modified strain of HIV, and make sure they stay around. But of course, hitting a hole in one also is conceptually simple. The longer, real world version is described in this excerpt from the story last year after a year of success with the first patient, Mr. Ludwig. Note the length of the journey - 30 years (or more), depending on where one starts counting, and that the "war on HIV" produced these collateral benefits. It's hard to overstate the value of learning the real inner workings of our many types of cells. 

_________________

"Hitting a Genetic Jackpot

To make T-cells search out and destroy cancer, researchers must equip them to do several tasks: recognize the cancer, attack it, multiply, and live on inside the patient. A number of research groups have been trying to do this, but the T-cells they engineered could not accomplish all the tasks. As a result, the cells’ ability to fight tumors has generally been temporary.

The University of Pennsylvania team seems to have hit all the targets at once. Inside the patients, the T-cells modified by the researchers multiplied to 1,000 to 10,000 times the number infused, wiped out the cancer and then gradually diminished, leaving a population of “memory” cells that can quickly proliferate again if needed.

The researchers said they were not sure which parts of their strategy made it work — special cell-culturing techniques, the use of H.I.V.-1 to carry new genes into the T-cells, or the particular pieces of DNA that they selected to reprogram the T-cells.

The concept of doctoring T-cells genetically was first developed in the 1980s by Dr. Zelig Eshhar at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel. It involves adding gene sequences from different sources to enable the T-cells to produce what researchers call chimeric antigen receptors, or CARs — protein complexes that transform the cells into, in Dr. June’s words, “serial killers.”

Mr. Ludwig’s disease, chronic lymphocytic leukemia is a cancer of B-cells, the part of the immune system that normally produces antibodies to fight infection. All B-cells, whether healthy or leukemic, have on their surfaces a protein called CD19. To treat patients with the disease, the researchers hoped to reprogram their T-cells to find CD19 and attack B-cells carrying it.

But which gene sequences should be used to reprogram the T-cells, from which sources? And how do you insert them?

Various research groups have used different methods. Viruses are often used as carriers (or vectors) to insert DNA into other cells because that kind of genetic sabotage is exactly what viruses normally specialize in doing. To modify their patients’ T-cells, Dr. June and his colleagues tried a daring approach: they used a disabled form of H.I.V.-1. They are the first ever to use H.I.V.-1 as the vector in gene therapy for cancer patients (the virus has been used in other diseases).

The AIDS virus is a natural for this kind of treatment, Dr. June said, because it evolved to invade T-cells. The idea of putting any form of the AIDS virus into people sounds a bit frightening, he acknowledged, but the virus used by his team was “gutted” and was no longer harmful. Other researchers had altered and disabled the virus by adding DNA from humans, mice and cows, and from a virus that infects woodchucks and another that infects cows. Each bit was chosen for a particular trait, all pieced together into a vector that Dr. June called a “Rube Goldberg-like solution” and “truly a zoo.”

“It incorporates the ability of H.I.V. to infect cells but not to reproduce itself,” he said.

To administer the treatment, the researchers collected as many of the patients’ T-cells as they could by passing their blood through a machine that removed the cells and returned the other blood components back into the patients’ veins. The T-cells were exposed to the vector, which transformed them genetically, and then were frozen. Meanwhile, the patients were given chemotherapy to deplete any remaining T-cells, because the native T-cells might impede the growth of the altered ones. Finally, the T-cells were infused back into the patients.

Then, Dr. June said, “The patient becomes a bioreactor” as the T-cells proliferate, pouring out chemicals called cytokines that cause fever, chills, fatigue and other flulike symptoms.

The treatment wiped out all of the patients’ B-cells, both healthy ones and leukemic ones, and will continue to do for as long as the new T-cells persist in the body, which could be forever (and ideally should be, to keep the leukemia at bay). The lack of B-cells means that the patients may be left vulnerable to infection, and they will need periodic infusions of a substance called intravenous immune globulin to protect them.

So far, the lack of B-cells has not caused problems for Mr. Ludwig. He receives the infusions every few months. He had been receiving them even before the experimental treatment because the leukemia had already knocked out his healthy B-cells."

 

Sponsored Research and Disclosure of Funding Sources - The Conversation Moves to the Higher Level of Meta -Analyses

Lives can hang in the balance when reports are written to summarize the results of medical studies.  Sadly, some scientists do commit fraud, and others allow their conclusions to be skewed.  

A prime example of scientific fraud became public in 2000. Sadly, the fraud arose in the scientific literature on breast cancer treatments. In an editorial letter by  Dr. George W. Sledge, Jr., he explained the facts, and why "big lies" do indeed matter. He said:

"The facts of the case are straightforward. Werner Bezwoda is a South African clinical investigator who has in recent years presented 2 randomized trials comparing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation with standard-dose chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer. Both trials suggested a striking benefit of high-dose chemotherapy for both lymph node-positive and metastatic breast disease. One of these trials was considered sufficiently important to earn Dr. Bezwoda a plenary session lecture at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Because of the importance of these results, their striking positivity, and because of differences in the way in which transplant therapy was delivered, American investigators wished to examine Dr. Bezwoda's work before launching a confirmatory trial. Dr. Bezwoda's work was (after some delay) audited by a group of American physicians. The audit team discovered significant failings in Dr. Bezwoda's records, sufficient to raise the question of academic fraud. Dr. Bezwoda, in a letter, has admitted committing this fraud."

See Sledge GW. Why Big Lies Matter: Lessons From the Bezwoda Affair. MedGenMed 2(1), 2000. [formerly published in Medscape Women's Health eJournal 5(1), 2000]. Available at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/408908.

In view of past fraud, scholars continue to worry about disclosures of financial interest information when scientific research projects and papers are sponsored by private usiness. A new article,  reported in ScienceDaily,  and published in the AMA Journal,  focuses the discussion on meta-analyses. Meta studies are in esssence massive studies created by combining data from individual studies. The researchers found that financial linterest disclosures from the individual are not being reported in many meta-analyses.

In this age of cheap information creation and storage, it seems unfortunate that disclosure are not routinely made and tracked. One hopes the funding source has no impact on the research outcome or the form of the report. But it seems unwise to depend only on hope, and better  to provide the disclosures as matter of routine. In the past, the AMA has been out in front in terms if requiring dislcosure for articles it publishes in JAMA, as is illustrated by this 2001 statement of its policy. Perhaps this new article will have a further, positive impact on disclosures.

Set out below are key excerpts from the disheartening story in the ScienceDaily summary:

 " More and more, policy decisions and what medications doctors prescribe for their patients are being driven by large "studies of studies," called meta-analyses, which statistically combine results from many individual drug trials.

Led by Dr. Brett Thombs and McGill graduate student Michelle Roseman, the team found that important declarations of financial conflicts-of-interest in individual drug trials disappeared when those studies were combined in meta-analyses. Their results will be published in the March 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

Roseman, the study's first author, and the rest of the team reviewed 29 recent meta-analyses on a range of drug treatments published in high-impact medical journals. Those 29 meta-analyses, or "studies of studies," included results from 509 drug trials. The team documented the funding sources and author-industry financial ties of all 509 trials and whether or not the meta-analyses noted who had funded the trials.

"Only 2 of the 29 meta-analyses even mentioned the issue of who funded the original drug trials, and even those 2 did it in very obscure places in the published articles," said Thombs, a psychologist and assistant professor in the Department of Psychiatry at McGill University. "Not one of the meta-analyses mentioned whether researchers who conducted the trials were employed by industry or personally received money from industry."

Mesothelioma - Will the JBIR Molecule Help Slow Tumours ?

While mesothelioma continues to kill, researchers continue to look for ways to slow or manage the disease. This BBC article reports on one man's ongoing efforts to raise research money despite his own mesothelioma tumor. The effort is focused on on the JBIR-23 molecule, which is isolated from strains of the Streptomyces bacteria.  A more technical explanation of the work (by Dr. Dobbs) is included in this paper seeking research assistants.  Even more technical information is here.

"Enlisting the Dying for Clues to Save Others"

The latest article in Amy Harmon's continuing NYT series on cancer research is a wrenching article she titles:   Enlisting the Dying for Clues to Save Others.  The article focuses on doctors using tumor tissue samples to test theories on why cancer relapses occur. The article deserves reading for many reasons. One is to understand the promising science. Another reason is to understand that science sometimes is being stymied by the absence of funding for expenses as littile as $5,000 for a tumor biopsy. 

Science, the Journal, and the Profession, Once Again Indict Tobacco Smoke for Lung Diseases

Science long ago indicted  tobacco smoke for causing multiple diseases.  But scientist could not explain exactly how the harms were caused. Today, there are increasing insights into the cellular mechanisms at work.  This September 2, 2010  article from ScienceDaily summarizes a September 2, 2010 article from Science, one of the world''s best professional journals for science.

The bottom line ?  One of the many ways that tobacco smoke causes harm appears to be  by inhibiting  cellular level lung functions that seek to clear hazardous proteins that are triggered by the body's efforts to fend off other harmful aspects of smoking.  Said more technically, it appears to inhibit an enzyme that helps to clear neutrophils that are summoned by the body to clear infections.

One has to ask: why do world governments continue to allow smoking ?  The answer of course is: money in the form of sales tax revenue. In the US, that bond was tightened by the tobacco settlement.  And, in the US, the tobacco industry also created the process of seeking federal immunity from civil liability. That absurd outcome is surely one of the world's best examples of an industry externalizing the financial and human costs of its miserable actions.  Happily, the same result was not obtained all around the globe.  

Tobacco Wars Continue: California Secretary of State Certifies Ballot Initiative to Raise Tobacco Tax by $ 1 per pack, with Funds to Benefit Cancer Research

Tobacco sales continue today thanks to "big tobacco" long ago obtaining federal law preemption against most product liability claims. The industry strategy was both brilliant and deadly. Then, when litigation risks were closing in from cost recovery lawsuits by the states, the tobacco settlement kept the industry moving ahead as it locked states into enjoying the tax revenue being used to fund state budgets.

So, industry won a couple of times, and therefore people keep smoking and dying. In that light, it's good to see some potential offset ahead from a California ballot initiative to raise tobacco taxes by $ 1 per pack, with proceeds to fund cancer research. The initiative’s website is here

The initiative was officially certified on August 24, 2010 by the California Secretary of State, as described here. The net result is that the initiative will be on the ballot for the 2012 national election.

 

The organizers of the initiative would love financial support for the battle ahead to get the initiative passed. Set out below are key excerpts from the Secretary of State’s website:

 

The Attorney General’s official title and summary of the initiative is as follows:

IMPOSES ADDITIONAL TAX ON CIGARETTES FOR CANCER RESEARCH. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Imposes additional five cent tax on each cigarette distributed ($1.00 per pack), and an equivalent tax increase on other tobacco products, to fund cancer research and other specified purposes. Requires tax revenues be deposited into a special fund to finance research and research facilities focused on detecting, preventing, treating, and curing cancer, heart disease, emphysema, and other tobacco-related diseases, and to finance prevention programs. Creates nine-member committee charged with administering the fund. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Increase in new cigarette tax revenues of about $855 million annually by 2011-12, declining slightly annually thereafter, for various health research and tobacco-related programs. Increase of about $45 million annually to existing health, natural resources, and research programs funded by existing tobacco taxes. Increase in state and local sales taxes of about $32 million annually. (09-0097.)