GENE THERAPY COULD END AIDS SOONER RATHER THAN LATER

Gene therapy and stem cell research are two of the most exciting and fastest growing sciences in the world today. Their applications are becoming more and more far-reaching with every passing day.

In fact, either or both of two different avenues of research in gene therapy alone could very well prove to have yielded the most important discoveries ever made in the seemingly endless battle against HIV/AIDS.

For decades now, scientists have known that some people who have been repeatedly exposed to the HIV virus through unprotected sex, never developed the disease. They've been baffled and frustrated by this phenomena because they weren't able to figure out why. Until now.

In a February 3rd posting at Wired.com, Aaron Rowe reported:

Most people have a gene called CCR5, which makes them vulnerable to HIV infections. The naturally resistant people have mutant CCR5 genes that inhibit HIV.

Previously, scientists found that by cutting the CCR5 gene out of white blood cells involved in the immune response known as T-cells, they could protect a tube full of human cells from the virus. The gene editing technique relies on proteins called zinc finger nucleases that can delete any gene from a living cell.

In theory, zinc finger nucleases could give that immunity to anyone.

When this story first broke, I decided not to cover it on my blog because I didn't want to, once again, get people's hopes up. I wanted to wait until there was at least a little more concrete proof that this was more than just another interesting theory.

Well, it seems that things really are "closer than they appear in your rearview mirror." In a February 18th story by Andy Coghlan in NewScientist magazine:

The story begins with a man in Germany who last week was reported to be free of HIV following a bone marrow transplant. The donor was known to have two copies of a gene that prevents HIV from invading white blood cells. For the first time, it may be possible to eliminate the virus from the body, as opposed to simply keeping it in check with antiretroviral therapies (ART).

The story went on to say:

Word first surfaced last November that a man had been "cured" of HIV through a bone marrow transplant, but this wasn't confirmed until last week, when the full results were published in The New England Journal of Medicine (vol 360, p 692). "It's now almost exactly two years ago that we treated him, and the virus is nowhere to be seen," says Gero Hütter of the Charité University of Medicine in Berlin, head of the team that treated the man.

Hütter exploited a finding a decade ago that some individuals naturally defy HIV. It turned out that they had inherited two copies of a "delta32" mutation in a gene called CCR5, one from each parent. That mutation means CD4 white blood cells can't make a protein on their surface that HIV uses as a "door handle" to invade the cells, so the virus can't get in.

Then, when a man with HIV developed leukaemia and needed a bone marrow transplant, Hütter reasoned that it might be possible to treat his cancer and also give him an HIV-resistant immune system, since his own would be destroyed by chemotherapy anyway. The hunt was on to find a donor with two delta32 mutations. From 80 potentials, he found one. After the transplant, HIV-resistant cells took over the man's immune system, "curing" him of HIV. "Every new immune cell that grew thereafter in the bone marrow had these deletions, and so was resistant," says Hütter.

Now, although these are very dramatic results, the reality of being able to find people with the CCR5 variant who would also be compatible bone marrow donors with each individual HIV/AIDS patient would be, to say the least, a challenge. That's where gene therapy, a way of mimicking the same result without a donor, comes in.

Sangamo Biosciences of Richmond, California, began the first human trial of a promising gene therapy last week. "The German patient is the definitive proof that if you replace patients' immune cells, it's sufficient to protect the patient," says Philip Gregory of Sangamo.

Sangamo makes artificial versions of natural enzymes called zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), which zero in on and disrupt any genes you choose - in this case the CCR5 gene, so that it stops making the HIV door-handle protein.

The company plans to take blood samples from 12 patients and extract the CD4 cells. It will then add a harmless virus to the cell carrying genes that code for the ZFNs. The altered CD4 cells produce the ZFNs, which sabotage the CCR5 gene. The ZFNs and the virus are then washed away and the genetically modified cells injected back into the patient.

There are, of course, many other trials and tests that would have to be done but this whole avenue of research could finally be the real light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel we've all be waiting for and not just another fleeting reflection of our hopes.

The NewScientist article is a somewhat lengthy, in-depth piece that would be worth a few minutes of your time. If you would like to read the full report, go to: NewScientist.com

BTW - the report also talks about the possibility of using stem cells to accomplish the same result.

HIV Cases Undercounted By At Least 40%!

According to a Sunday New York Times article the CDC (Centers For Disease Control) figures released last Saturday show that the annual HIV infection rates have been underreported by at least 40%.

Dr. Kevin A. Fenton, who directs H.I.V. prevention efforts at the agency, said, “C.D.C.’s new incidence estimates reveal that the H.I.V. epidemic is and has been worse than previously known.”

This is a very important discrepancy because accurate and timely data about HIV transmission rates are used for planning and evaluating basic prevention efforts and the monies that are spent on those efforts. The study found that 56,300 people became newly infected with H.I.V in 2006. For the last 15 plus years, the estimated figure of 40,000 new annual infections has been used by the government in determining funding for HIV/AIDS programs here in the United States.

Dr. Philip Alcabes, an epidemiologist at Hunter College in Manhattan said that if this new report is accurate that means that new HIV infection rates have been undercounted by about 15,000 per year for 15 years. "Therefore," Dr Alcabes said "there are roughly 225,000 more people living with H.I.V. in the U.S. than previously suspected.”

This administration has been severely criticized worldwide for not allocating sufficient funds to fight HIV in this country and many professionals are very upset that the CDC didn't release this study much sooner.

This is obviously another case of this administration attempting to withhold scientific research studies it deemed uncomfortable or unprofitable for them and/or their friends. Knowing that this is one study that they couldn't keep under-wraps indefinitely and that Bush is only months away from leaving the White House and that the congress has adjourned for this session, making any kind of funding increases for this year impossible, they apparently felt that now would be a good time for them to release it.

This has been the sleaziest, most dishonest and most corrupt administration in the history of this country. I hope that someone will pursue legal actions against as many of them as possible after they're out of office.

To read the full NY Times article go to: New York Times


UPDATE...

Speaking at an AIDS conference in Mexico city, former President Bill Clinton said that the just released report by the CDC (above), has spurred him into action. He said that “For Americans, this should be a wake up call. Even as we keep working globally, we need to do much more to fight AIDS at home, and I intend to do so with my foundation.”

Imagine what might have been done already had the CDC released that report in a much more timely manner.

Thank you Bill Clinton and shame on the CDC for putting politics ahead of people's health and well being.

US Virtually Ignores AIDS In Black Community

When was the last time you saw an AIDS prevention ad that targeted the black community? Can't think of any? That's because just about everyone in this country is virtually ignoring the alarming statistics that were released by the CDC (Center For Disease Control).

According to a Black AIDS Institute Report, AIDS in segments of Black America is as severe as in many African countries, but receives much less attention here. The CDC has said that blacks account for 50 percent of the new HIV/AIDS diagnoses “in the United States in the 33 states with long-term, confidential name-based HIV reporting.”

Phill Wilson, CEO of the Black AIDS Institute and one of the author’s of the recently published book “Left Behind! Black America: A Neglected Priority in the Global AIDS Epidemic” said:

“More Black Americans are infected with HIV than the total populations of people living with HIV in seven of the 15 countries served by PEPFAR [President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief]. Were Black America a separate country, it would elicit major concern and extensive assistance from the U.S. government. Instead, the national response to AIDS among Black Americans has been lethargic and often neglectful."

The book "Left Behind..." stated that there is:

A clear and startling gap between the U.S. government’s appropriate concern about AIDS overseas, and its ongoing denial of the epidemic at home – despite the fact that, in areas of the United States such as Detroit, Newark, New York, Washington D.C. and the Deep South, HIV levels among segments of the Black community approach those of many severely affected countries in Africa. For example, HIV prevalence among middle-aged Black men in Manhattan is almost as high as overall prevalence in South Africa, home to the world’s largest population of people living with HIV

"Left Behind..." also points out that:

While the U.S. government requires countries receiving PEPFAR support have a national AIDS strategy in place, the United States itself has no strategy for its own epidemic, and was one of 40 countries that failed to fulfill its commitment to report to the Joint United Nations program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) on its response to AIDS at home. At the same time that the United States has dramatically, and appropriately scaled up funding for AIDS overseas, it has simultaneously cut real spending for domestic HIV prevention and care initiatives – even as HIV caseloads in Black America have risen sharply.

What's wrong with this picture?

My two sources for this posting were: Blackaids.org and an article written by James Withers at 365Gay Blog