6 ms·

One Drug to Shrink All Tumors

64 points by mynd 13y ago

wwwtyro 13y ago
"Although macrophages also attacked blood cells expressing CD47 when mice were given the antibody, the researchers found that the decrease in blood cells was short-lived; the animals turned up production of new blood cells to replace those they lost from the treatment" That's great -- does anyone know if any other cells in the body express CD47? Especially ones that can't be replaced so easily?
- viraptor 13y ago
  No specific answer from me, but I guess digging through some top entries from pubmed can answer that. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene?term=%28cd47[gene]%29%20AND%20%28Homo%20sapiens[orgn]%29%20AND%20alive[prop]%20NOT%20newentry[gene]&sort=weight http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene?term=%28cd47[gene]%29%20AND... may be a good start.
wwwtyro 13y ago
Some heart-wrenching comments from the page: "Husband and father of 3, age 31, high grade spindle cell sarcoma, stage 4 with mets- help! nuclearcouple@hotmail.com or find me (spouse) on fb, Heather Cimino in Fort Myers, Fl, willing to travel anywhere, just save my husband!" "my wife has tumor that are killing her will you hurry up and get this sorted - is there anyway one can volunteer for a trial tim.parry@xtra.co.nz" There has got to be a way to address this need.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  There is, "expanded access" or "compassionate use". http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/AccesstoInvestigationalDrugs/ucm176098.htm http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocat...
  - maxharris 13y ago
    How many months or years does that process take? Morally speaking, the judgement of a patient (and the physician he has chosen) must not be impeded even for an instant. The FDA renders individual judgement on these matters irrelevant, and the result is often death and slowed medical progress.
    - wwwtyro 13y ago
      I imagine these people are desperate enough to find other means to acquire an antibody that blocks CD47. I wonder what quasi- or il- legal means are available to them? Care to speculate? Edit: perhaps a set of crowd-sourced, extremely explicit instructions about how to manufacture, purify, and test such antibodies would be a start. With such a set of instructions, they might be able to find experts to help them under the table.
      - maxharris 13y ago
        Well, you could try ordering from Fischer or any of the usual research supply places out there, but they will not ship to a non-institutional address. Even theft isn't an option here, unless you're somehow certain that a particular lab has exactly the right antibody. (In my lab, we often have trouble keeping track of that for ourselves...) And don't forget that you need to be able to maintain sterile conditions, and have whatever other reagents you need to dilute things, etc.
        wwwtyro 13y ago
        Wait - are you saying people could (were it legal) simply order this stuff from a company? Can you give me some kind of reference for this? If so, I could see people reaching out and finding others capable of placing the order.
        maxharris 13y ago
        Here's CD47, conjugated to a fluorophor (when you have a cell covered in a conjugated antibody, it fluoresces when exposed to laser light - this is done so that an instrument called a flow cytometer can identify cells). http://www.biolegend.com/percp-cy55-anti-human-cd47-4338.html http://www.biolegend.com/percp-cy55-anti-human-cd47-4338.htm... Of course, to get CD47 depletion, you'd probably want an antibody that isn't conjugated (functional grade): http://www.ebioscience.com/resources/in-vivo-use-of-antibodies.htm http://www.ebioscience.com/resources/in-vivo-use-of-antibodi... Also, some more help on the terminology: CD47 (and most, if not all molecules that fall under the Cluster of Differention [CD] nomenclature) vary on a per-species basis. So an antibody that targets CD47 in mice is not going to stick to human CD47. "Anti-" in this context means that the antibody in question will stick to specific molecule in the species that comes after the "anti-". Note what it says on the bottom of the page. That's there because of regulations.
- maxharris 13y ago
  There has got to be a way to address this need. Yes, there is. Fight for the right of each individual to follow his best judgement in regard to all matters pertaining to his own life. (If someone doesn't know enough to make the call, he knows enough to choose a physician who can.) Right now, timely experimental treatments are basically outlawed. What good is it to say that there's an FDA procedure to get around the controls if you're treated too late? What right does anyone have to deprive anyone else of what might be their only shot at life?
  - wwwtyro 13y ago
    Didn't know it was this bad, but couldn't agree more. It should be entirely up to an individual what they put in their body. Monumentally frustrated right now.
  - roc 13y ago
    The problem is that lay people have essentially no ability to distinguish between potential 'last shots'. And exemptions will invite snake-oil salesmen. It can be frustrating, but the rules weren't created in some blind bureaucratic power-grab. They're responses to actual problems that existed in their absence. They aren't without their downsides, but they remain better than the alternative on balance.
    - wwwtyro 13y ago
      They aren't without their downsides, but they remain better than the alternative on balance. That's not a credible claim. Tell that to either of the two people that left those comments. Sure, there's risks inherent with experimental drugs, but these people are dying or losing loved ones. They don't give a damn, and none of us has any right to stop them from taking those risks with their own persons. Their bodies are their own, they are not yours. And frankly, the snake-oil salesman claim strikes me as little more than FUD. People can get recommendations from multiple MDs before making up their minds.
      - rubyrescue 13y ago
        The history of snake-oil salesmen is well documented. http://www.authentichistory.com/1898-1913/2-progressivism/8-quackery/ http://www.authentichistory.com/1898-1913/2-progressivism/8-...
- sunnybunny 13y ago
  Well, the treatment is moving to Stage 1 Human trials, these people should clearly get in touch and volunteer to be a part of the trials.
  - pcrh 13y ago
    Here is a link to a related trial in South Carolina currently recruiting participants to examine a role for CD47 in myeloma. It is not a trial using the antibody cited in the OP's link, but a study to examine if targeting CD47 (and some other potential targets) makes sense in a human context, rather than just in a mouse.
jasallen 13y ago
My best friend was just put into hospice for metastasized melanoma. He's 35. Where is this stuff? Nothing more useful to add to this comment. Sorry
- pcrh 13y ago
  Sorry for your friend. This is the original article: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6662 http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6662 You can actually get the antibody yourself, FTA: "The anti-hCD47 (B6H12) hybridoma was obtained from the ATCC" [http://www.lgcstandards-atcc.org/Products/All/HB-9771.aspx http://www.lgcstandards-atcc.org/Products/All/HB-9771.aspx] Purifying it is easy, if you have a lab. However... you can't use that antibody directly in humans, since it is a mouse antibody, which the human immune system will recognize as foreign. So, even if this treatment were to work, it is necessary is to first "humanize" the antibody so it won't be rejected, and then you can see what effect you get in a clinical trial. I imagine this is what the $20mil funding is for. You can find clinical trials for new drugs here: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ http://clinicaltrials.gov/
  - wwwtyro 13y ago
    Can you use this one directly in humans? Both humans and mice are mentioned, and I do not know how to interpret the nomenclature: http://www.biolegend.com/biotin-anti-human-cd47-antibody-3706.html http://www.biolegend.com/biotin-anti-human-cd47-antibody-370...
    - pcrh 13y ago
      That is a mouse antibody (viz, Isotype: Mouse IgG1, κ) targeted to the human CD47 protein, the same problem exists as for the one mentioned in the above article.
kmtrowbr 13y ago
Here is a longer, more recent, (more obscure), article: http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2012summer/article7.html http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2012summer/article7.html
- wwwtyro 13y ago
  Thanks for this.
traughber 13y ago
It bothers me to continuously see articles with headlines like this. Just look at the comments—it gives false hope to patients and their families. As the author mentioned later in the article, there is a big difference between seeing cancer cells die in a petri dish or reduction in size of a transplanted tumor in mice and it being safe and effective in humans. I hope this succeeds, but it is a long way from a Phase 2/3 clinical trial. Cancer research is too important to use misleading, link bait headlines to attract attention.
blaabjerg 13y ago
This was linked to by The New York Post yesterday, but the article itself is a year old.
johntb86 13y ago
I would expect that human tissue put in mice would normally be rejected by the mouse's immune system, so this treatment would just allow that to happen in the special case of cancer tissue (which has mechanisms to prevent that). I'm worried that the human immune system wouldn't be as interested in attacking its own cells that became cancerous, even with this treatment.
ttrreeww 13y ago
White blood cell transplant is proven to shrink (cure) cancer. However you won't see it in the USA for the next XX years. Some doctors in China is already doing it though, so if you can travel, that is an option. See http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/jul2010_Life-Extension-Funds-Study-of-Therapy-That-Cured-Cancer-in-Mice_01.htm http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/jul2010_Life-Extension-F... Also, I believe there is an organization that helps cancer victims by arranging travels outside of USA for innovative treatments, LEF can refer you to them.
jakubmal 13y ago
The article is from 26 March 2012, over a year ago. Would be great to hear on developments that happened over last year. May this be another 'lost' case, appeared once and never again?
guard-of-terra 13y ago
Cancer evolve. In this sense it is like a new species (and it can occasionally become one). That's why fighting it is so difficult. I highly doubt there ever can be one chemical substance that reliably fights all sorts of cancer. And you can't really cure cancer anyway. Our only hope at this point is genetic engineering.
bitwize 13y ago
... and in the darkness bind them? Let's hope so.

64 points by mynd 13y ago

"Although macrophages also attacked blood cells expressing CD47 when mice were given the antibody, the researchers found that the decrease in blood cells was short-lived; the animals turned up production of new blood cells to replace those they lost from the treatment" That's great -- does anyone know if any other cells in the body express CD47? Especially ones that can't be replaced so easily?

viraptor 13y ago
No specific answer from me, but I guess digging through some top entries from pubmed can answer that. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene?term=%28cd47[gene]%29%20AND%20%28Homo%20sapiens[orgn]%29%20AND%20alive[prop]%20NOT%20newentry[gene]&sort=weight http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene?term=%28cd47[gene]%29%20AND... may be a good start.

wwwtyro 13y ago

Some heart-wrenching comments from the page: "Husband and father of 3, age 31, high grade spindle cell sarcoma, stage 4 with mets- help! nuclearcouple@hotmail.com or find me (spouse) on fb, Heather Cimino in Fort Myers, Fl, willing to travel anywhere, just save my husband!" "my wife has tumor that are killing her will you hurry up and get this sorted - is there anyway one can volunteer for a trial tim.parry@xtra.co.nz" There has got to be a way to address this need.

ceejayoz 13y ago
There is, "expanded access" or "compassionate use". http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/AccesstoInvestigationalDrugs/ucm176098.htm http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocat...
- maxharris 13y ago
  How many months or years does that process take? Morally speaking, the judgement of a patient (and the physician he has chosen) must not be impeded even for an instant. The FDA renders individual judgement on these matters irrelevant, and the result is often death and slowed medical progress.
  - wwwtyro 13y ago
    I imagine these people are desperate enough to find other means to acquire an antibody that blocks CD47. I wonder what quasi- or il- legal means are available to them? Care to speculate? Edit: perhaps a set of crowd-sourced, extremely explicit instructions about how to manufacture, purify, and test such antibodies would be a start. With such a set of instructions, they might be able to find experts to help them under the table.
    - maxharris 13y ago
      Well, you could try ordering from Fischer or any of the usual research supply places out there, but they will not ship to a non-institutional address. Even theft isn't an option here, unless you're somehow certain that a particular lab has exactly the right antibody. (In my lab, we often have trouble keeping track of that for ourselves...) And don't forget that you need to be able to maintain sterile conditions, and have whatever other reagents you need to dilute things, etc.
      - wwwtyro 13y ago
        Wait - are you saying people could (were it legal) simply order this stuff from a company? Can you give me some kind of reference for this? If so, I could see people reaching out and finding others capable of placing the order.
        maxharris 13y ago
        Here's CD47, conjugated to a fluorophor (when you have a cell covered in a conjugated antibody, it fluoresces when exposed to laser light - this is done so that an instrument called a flow cytometer can identify cells). http://www.biolegend.com/percp-cy55-anti-human-cd47-4338.html http://www.biolegend.com/percp-cy55-anti-human-cd47-4338.htm... Of course, to get CD47 depletion, you'd probably want an antibody that isn't conjugated (functional grade): http://www.ebioscience.com/resources/in-vivo-use-of-antibodies.htm http://www.ebioscience.com/resources/in-vivo-use-of-antibodi... Also, some more help on the terminology: CD47 (and most, if not all molecules that fall under the Cluster of Differention [CD] nomenclature) vary on a per-species basis. So an antibody that targets CD47 in mice is not going to stick to human CD47. "Anti-" in this context means that the antibody in question will stick to specific molecule in the species that comes after the "anti-". Note what it says on the bottom of the page. That's there because of regulations.
maxharris 13y ago
There has got to be a way to address this need. Yes, there is. Fight for the right of each individual to follow his best judgement in regard to all matters pertaining to his own life. (If someone doesn't know enough to make the call, he knows enough to choose a physician who can.) Right now, timely experimental treatments are basically outlawed. What good is it to say that there's an FDA procedure to get around the controls if you're treated too late? What right does anyone have to deprive anyone else of what might be their only shot at life?
- wwwtyro 13y ago
  Didn't know it was this bad, but couldn't agree more. It should be entirely up to an individual what they put in their body. Monumentally frustrated right now.
- roc 13y ago
  The problem is that lay people have essentially no ability to distinguish between potential 'last shots'. And exemptions will invite snake-oil salesmen. It can be frustrating, but the rules weren't created in some blind bureaucratic power-grab. They're responses to actual problems that existed in their absence. They aren't without their downsides, but they remain better than the alternative on balance.
  - wwwtyro 13y ago
    They aren't without their downsides, but they remain better than the alternative on balance. That's not a credible claim. Tell that to either of the two people that left those comments. Sure, there's risks inherent with experimental drugs, but these people are dying or losing loved ones. They don't give a damn, and none of us has any right to stop them from taking those risks with their own persons. Their bodies are their own, they are not yours. And frankly, the snake-oil salesman claim strikes me as little more than FUD. People can get recommendations from multiple MDs before making up their minds.
    - rubyrescue 13y ago
      The history of snake-oil salesmen is well documented. http://www.authentichistory.com/1898-1913/2-progressivism/8-quackery/ http://www.authentichistory.com/1898-1913/2-progressivism/8-...
sunnybunny 13y ago
Well, the treatment is moving to Stage 1 Human trials, these people should clearly get in touch and volunteer to be a part of the trials.
- pcrh 13y ago
  Here is a link to a related trial in South Carolina currently recruiting participants to examine a role for CD47 in myeloma. It is not a trial using the antibody cited in the OP's link, but a study to examine if targeting CD47 (and some other potential targets) makes sense in a human context, rather than just in a mouse.

jasallen 13y ago

My best friend was just put into hospice for metastasized melanoma. He's 35. Where is this stuff? Nothing more useful to add to this comment. Sorry

pcrh 13y ago
Sorry for your friend. This is the original article: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6662 http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6662 You can actually get the antibody yourself, FTA: "The anti-hCD47 (B6H12) hybridoma was obtained from the ATCC" [http://www.lgcstandards-atcc.org/Products/All/HB-9771.aspx http://www.lgcstandards-atcc.org/Products/All/HB-9771.aspx] Purifying it is easy, if you have a lab. However... you can't use that antibody directly in humans, since it is a mouse antibody, which the human immune system will recognize as foreign. So, even if this treatment were to work, it is necessary is to first "humanize" the antibody so it won't be rejected, and then you can see what effect you get in a clinical trial. I imagine this is what the $20mil funding is for. You can find clinical trials for new drugs here: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ http://clinicaltrials.gov/
- wwwtyro 13y ago
  Can you use this one directly in humans? Both humans and mice are mentioned, and I do not know how to interpret the nomenclature: http://www.biolegend.com/biotin-anti-human-cd47-antibody-3706.html http://www.biolegend.com/biotin-anti-human-cd47-antibody-370...
  - pcrh 13y ago
    That is a mouse antibody (viz, Isotype: Mouse IgG1, κ) targeted to the human CD47 protein, the same problem exists as for the one mentioned in the above article.

kmtrowbr 13y ago

Here is a longer, more recent, (more obscure), article: http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2012summer/article7.html http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2012summer/article7.html

wwwtyro 13y ago
Thanks for this.

traughber 13y ago

It bothers me to continuously see articles with headlines like this. Just look at the comments—it gives false hope to patients and their families. As the author mentioned later in the article, there is a big difference between seeing cancer cells die in a petri dish or reduction in size of a transplanted tumor in mice and it being safe and effective in humans. I hope this succeeds, but it is a long way from a Phase 2/3 clinical trial. Cancer research is too important to use misleading, link bait headlines to attract attention.

blaabjerg 13y ago

This was linked to by The New York Post yesterday, but the article itself is a year old.

johntb86 13y ago

I would expect that human tissue put in mice would normally be rejected by the mouse's immune system, so this treatment would just allow that to happen in the special case of cancer tissue (which has mechanisms to prevent that). I'm worried that the human immune system wouldn't be as interested in attacking its own cells that became cancerous, even with this treatment.

ttrreeww 13y ago

White blood cell transplant is proven to shrink (cure) cancer. However you won't see it in the USA for the next XX years. Some doctors in China is already doing it though, so if you can travel, that is an option. See http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/jul2010_Life-Extension-Funds-Study-of-Therapy-That-Cured-Cancer-in-Mice_01.htm http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/jul2010_Life-Extension-F... Also, I believe there is an organization that helps cancer victims by arranging travels outside of USA for innovative treatments, LEF can refer you to them.

jakubmal 13y ago

The article is from 26 March 2012, over a year ago. Would be great to hear on developments that happened over last year. May this be another 'lost' case, appeared once and never again?

guard-of-terra 13y ago

Cancer evolve. In this sense it is like a new species (and it can occasionally become one). That's why fighting it is so difficult. I highly doubt there ever can be one chemical substance that reliably fights all sorts of cancer. And you can't really cure cancer anyway. Our only hope at this point is genetic engineering.

bitwize 13y ago

... and in the darkness bind them? Let's hope so.