Slashdot Mirror


Nanoparticles Stop Multiple Sclerosis In Mice

HangingChad writes "Scientists have used nanoparticles covered in proteins to trick the immune system to stop attacking myelin and halt the progression of multiple sclerosis in mice. The nanoparticles, about 200 times thinner than a human hair, are made from the same material as dissolving stitches. Scientists compare the process an immune system 'reboot'. The process keeps the immune system from treating myelin as an alien invader and to stop attacking it."

20 of 50 comments (clear)

  1. Not quite by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Informative

    "We administered these particles to animals who have a disease very similar to relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis and stopped it in its tracks"

    The article does not claim that this works for MS, just diseases similar to MS.

    1. Re:Not quite by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      "We administered these particles to animals who have a disease very similar to relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis and stopped it in its tracks"

      The article does not claim that this works for MS, just diseases similar to MS.

      Given that the research is in a mouse model, you can be assured from the get-go that it isn't 100% identical. Model organisms are always a compromise between accuracy, availability, speed, cost, and not getting sent to jail for experimenting on orphans...

    2. Re:Not quite by craigminah · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let's hope this doesn't prompt a huge influx of mice moving into the Chicago area since they seem to have the best lab-rat health care in the nation.

    3. Re:Not quite by interkin3tic · · Score: 2

      MS can take years to progress, especially with treatments already available, so I think this does in fact provide possible hope for current MS sufferers. Preliminary results are more promising than no progress. Current sufferers might also be interested in participating in the clinical trials.

    4. Re:Not quite by interkin3tic · · Score: 2

      My mistake, thank you. But if you were going to do a clinical trial in humans, you'd be even more foolish to try using children with MS, as the number of diagnosed children with MS is so much smaller than adults.

    5. Re:Not quite by reverseengineer · · Score: 3, Informative

      The researchers involved used a disease called experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE). This is a disease with many general similarities with multiple sclerosis (being autoimmune responses against myelin), but there are differences in the course of the disease versus MS. EAE is considered to be closer to a rarer human disease, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) than to MS. Nevertheless, EAE has been used for decades as a model for autoimmune diseases, as it has the major advantage of being able to be reliably induced in animals. The method of immune system modulation used in this study seems general enough to apply to similar autoimmune disorders, but that has not been actually established with studies yet.

      --
      "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
  2. You probably don't know much about MS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good for you. Don't dwell on diseases you don't have.

    Let me explain it a little bit:

    Everything you know of the world comes through your nerves. Every way that you can interact through the world also runs through those same nerves.

    Imagine being unable to trust that.

    Your symptoms vary. Perhaps you can't tell if your foot is on the floor, or if you're urinating or not. Perhaps hot doesn't feel hot anymore, or cold feels hot also. Perhaps it's just pins and needles pains racing up your extremities at random and frequent times.

    There are multiple types of MS. People don't have the same symptoms; it depends on where the lesions in your nervous system are. If they're on a part of the brain that controls motion, expect to be unable to do things that regular people can. You may be in a wheelchair or suddenly fall down a lot. If they're on a part of the brain that controls speech, expect to be unable to communicate, and to forget or misuse common words. If they're on a part of the brain that controls emotion, expect people to treat you like you're crazy when you break down crying in public.

    Some people have the "progressive" MS that gets worse and worse until they are left in a special electric wheelchair, unable to do much more than manipulate a joystick to move and communicate.

    Some die, especially those who get it later in life or are male.

    For all, there is a sense of helplessness. The part of you that you think is you, the brain and the nerves that construct all you know of the world, is itself corrupt.

    Expect helplessness, rage and perhaps hatred of any deities you once believed in.

    Science has so far been unable to do anything about this disease.

    The day they can will be a day of joy.

    1. Re:You probably don't know much about MS. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      Replying due to lack of mod points, but with good karma which will hopefully lead more people to the parent until it gets probably modded up.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:You probably don't know much about MS. by JackieBrown · · Score: 4, Informative

      My wife has progressive MS. Taking Tysabri helped slow it down a whole lot but she had to stop since she tested at risk for PML.

      It has been a frustrating and traumatic 15 years for her but she has managed to stay more upbeat than I would have and her faith in God and in her family is stronger than anyone I know.

      It is an difficult disease to explain to people for the very reasons you posted. The treatments are also rapidly changing so it is important to find a doctor that specializes in MS. Us switching doctors is probably the reason my wife can still walk.

    3. Re:You probably don't know much about MS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Some die, especially those who get it later in life or are male.

      ...

      Science has so far been unable to do anything about this disease.

      They have been able to do quite a bit. They haven't cured it but depending on how aggressive your doctor is, it really slowdown the progression. I've had MS since 1998. My primary physician, initially thought I was making up the symptoms, or maybe it was a spinal injury.

      The first neurologist basically said that I COULD go on Avonex, but it was up to me. My wife, being a nurse, said to get on it immediately. So I started with avonex once a week. She also started looking for a doctor that was going to be more aggression with treatment, since, as you pointed out, can be much worse in males.

      My second neurologist, increase the avonex to every 5 days, and also put me on Imuran (a medicine typically used after transplants to help prevent rejection). I think it was a few years later, when there was some research about steroids, when he put me on a high dosage of steroids once every 3 months (160mg orally - talk about roid-rage, the littlest things would set me off for a week or so after the medicine).

      I've had some relapses, but nothing serious, with is great after 14 years. If something like these nanoparticles work out, that would be even better.

  3. Promising but years from rollout by Fencepost · · Score: 4, Informative

    So far they've only done a Phase 1 trial which is to prove that it's not harmful, and the researchers called it "hideously expensive" at $1 million for 10 patients. If it shows clinical promise in Phase 2 and beyond, that price is likely to drop quite a bit and quite frankly the available MS treatments are also very expensive - if a single treatment is $100,000 but works for 5+ years, it may still be cheaper than what's currently available.

    More information in an NBC News article: http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/18/15246299-new-approach-could-treat-ms-other-autoimmune-diseases?lite

    And the original article (for those willing to cough up $32 for a single article or with a subscription to the Nature Biotechnology journal): http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nbt.2434.html

    --
    fencepost
    just a little off
    1. Re:Promising but years from rollout by brianerst · · Score: 2

      That $1 million for 10 patients was for the live cell test on humans. The PLG (poly-lactide-co-glycolide, used in resorbable sutures) version tested on mice would be orders of magnitude cheaper.

      Sounds like they just take some bits of myelin, soak them in nano-structured PLG which latches on to them and then inject that into the bloodstream, where it migrates to the spleen and reeducates the next generation of T-cells. Very promising.

  4. Any immunologists about? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What puzzles me(admittedly a layman) is that this procedure reduces rather than exacerbates the autoimmune response. If the organism has MS, the immune system is already getting jumpy about myelin, and then they inject something that(at first glance) sounds more like a myelin vaccine than anything else, but in this case the reaction to myelin is shut down.

    Is it just a matter of being attacked by macrophages in the spleen, rather than elsewhere, or are there specific properties that the nanoparticles have to posses in order to be coded as harmless debris, rather than pathogens, during their destruction by macrophages(on a different note, I wonder if there are any viruses or bacteria capable of down-regulating immune responses to themselves by sending suitably modified cells into this spleen breakdown process? That would be sneaky...)?

    1. Re:Any immunologists about? by gatesstillborg · · Score: 2

      If I am not mistaken, and others please correct me if I am wrong, the essential trick here is that the particles are mobile, and thus can make it to the spleen, which is the key to making the spleen think that they (containing myelin antigens) are just debris from dead blood cells and thus not suitable for encoding (antibody) attack. Apparently, the spleen is able to inactivate the encoding of antibodies for materials it contacts directly?

    2. Re:Any immunologists about? by More+Trouble · · Score: 3, Informative

      Immature B-cells are trained in the spleen:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_cell

      Immature T-cells are trained in the thymus. Defects in these self-tolerance processes probably lead to all autoimmune disorders.

    3. Re:Any immunologists about? by Joe+Torres · · Score: 3, Informative

      I only glanced through the paper and I have a fellowship application to finish, so I'll be quick with this response.

      The process the researchers are trying to take advantage of is immune tolerance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_tolerance). The authors state that the decrease in symptoms is partially due to the activity of regulatory T cells (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_T_cell). Regulatory T cells are a type of T cell that inhibits the immune response to certain types of antigens (foreign things that aren't harmful or parts of your self that your immune system shouldn't have responded to in the first place).

      Viruses and bacteria (as well as cancer) can and do take advantage of immune tolerance (I'm not sure about this specific mechanism) in an attempt to avoid immune destruction and this is thought as a possible mechanism for the induction of autoimmune disease.

  5. Any other uses? by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 2

    I'm not a scientist, but would this have any use for other autoimmune disorders like type 1 diabetes, celiacs, and hell even organ and tissue transplants?

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  6. "Medical News Today" Unreliable by guttentag · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The article in "Medical News Today" reads like the stuff I used to get from freshman journalism students, not like a professionally-written article. In the first paragraph the article claims managed to halt MS in mice, but then in the third paragraph she quotes one of the authors of the original article in Nature (behind a paywall so we can't read what it actually says unless someone here has a subscription or wants to pay $32). The second paragraph, which should be giving you more information about the subject of the article, throws so much titular crap at you it's hard to figure out who she's talking about, or what relation they have to the work that's being discussed:

    Corresponding author Stephen Miller is the Judy Gugenheim Research Professor of Microbiology-Immunology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago in the US. He says in a statement:

    It reads more like a transcript of a TV news segment. When you're watching TV they throw these titles at you before the person says anything to give them credibility, so you won't even notice that they never told you whether this guy actually had anything to do with the research. It doesn't work in print because people have the time to read it and realize she's not telling us key info.

    The nanoparticles and Miller and colleagues used are made of a polymer called Poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLG), which...

    The nanoparticles and Miller and colleagues? What? And why are random paragraphs in bold? As you scroll through the article there are four different paragraphs that are in bold for no apparent reason. Does she edit her work or just churn it out and post it?

    Slashdot editors should start giving articles from Medical News Today more scrutiny. It seems like it's an office with about 5 people who pay this Catharine Paddock PhD to summarize articles in paywalled journals to drive advertising dollars. The other employees are two CEOs, a marketing director and a "Web Manager." Their other businesses are a database of hospitals, a medical abbreviation glossary, and a medical site ad service. Paddock's PhD is in "Business Administration." Summarizing the paywalled articles to raise awareness is fine, but she seems to be their only author and she can't get her facts straight. If she's contradicting herself in the first three paragraphs and we can't read the source material to verify, then reading MNT articles does nothing but drive ad dollars for MNT. Wait for some more reputable source to sum up the paywalled article and link to that instead.

  7. HolyGrail candidate... by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...this treatment's ability to selectively target specific immune intolerances and isolated reset-response within host immune systems promises a way forward to enable immune system regulation for a host of autoimmunity diseases, such as: Coeliac disease, diabetes mellitus type 1 (IDDM), Sarcoidosis, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Sjögren's syndrome, Churg-Strauss Syndrome, Hashimoto's thyroiditis, Graves' disease, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, Addison's Disease, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and allergies.

  8. Re:Nanoparticles? by reverseengineer · · Score: 2

    True, the particles used are an inert support for the proteins, not a treatment in themselves. The idea was to present the proteins as if they were cell-surface proteins which the immune system would recognize and build tolerance for. The original paper's authors performed earlier work with the same proteins attached to white blood cells. This was successful, but in terms of developing a clincal treatment, manufacturing engineered cells presents far more complexity, risk, stability issues, and cost than the manufacture of polymer microparticles coated with the protein. Microparticles, rather than nanoparticles, is the term consistently used throughout the paper, coincidentally. The particles are 500 nanometers in diameter, which is larger than what are usually considered nanoparticles 100 nm).

    --
    "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."