Monthly Archives: January 2010

Defeating diseases of the developing world: tuberculosis and Chikungunya fever

Helicobacter pylori, the bacterium that causes stomach ulcers and stomach cancer, may also play a protective role against tuberculosis, according to studies in both humans and monkeys by a team from Stanford University, UC Davis, the University of Pittsburgh and Aga Khan University in Pakistan (1).

Scanning electron micrograph of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, courtesy of the CDC Public Health Image Library

One-third of the world’s population is infected with TB, although most infections are latent and only one in ten progress to active disease.

The presence of H. pylori in the stomach may boost immunity to the TB bacterium, Mycobacterium tuberculosis. H. pylori infection is still almost universal in developing countries.

The researchers studied people with latent tuberculosis in California, Pakistan and the Gambia over a two-year period. They found that people who were also infected with H. pylori mounted a stronger immune response against TB and were less likely to advance to clinical tuberculosis than those who were not infected with the stomach bug.

They also carried out complementary studies with cynomolgous macaques at the California National Primate Research Center at UC Davis. Like humans, many monkeys naturally carry H. pylori in their stomachs. This study used tissues and samples from monkeys that had already been infected with tuberculosis for other experiments.

Of 41 monkeys, 30 carried H. pylori and only five of these developed active tuberculosis. Six of 11 monkeys that were negative for H. pylori developed tuberculosis. This finding supports the observations made in the human studies and indicates these monkeys are a good experimental model in which further studies can be performed. Already they plan to test whether experimental infection of H. pylori can protect monkeys from TB, and whether it can enhance the protective effect of immunization with current TB vaccines, which are only partially effective.   If these experiments are successful, they will test a genetically modified H. pylori strain developed by Ondek Biologic Delivery Systems that expresses TB antigens as a possible new and more effective vaccine against TB.

A paper describing the results was published Jan. 20 in the open access journal PloS (Public Library of Science) One. The work was funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Of course TB is only one of many infectious diseases that scientists wish to prevent, and another report this week shows what can be achieved when you have a good animal model for a disease. You may not have heard of Chikungunya fever, but outbreaks of this mosquito transmitted illness have blighted the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in Africa and Asia in recent years.

As yet there is no vaccine available, but this week the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) announced an important step towards a vaccine for Chikungunya fever (2).  Scientists at the NIAID Vaccine Research Center developed an experimental vaccine that employs non-infectious virus-like particles and found it to confer complete protection against Chikungunya fever in rhesus macaques. Antibody-containing serum from these monkeys also protected immunodeficient mice against otherwise lethal doses of Chikungunya virus.  Clinical trials to evaluate the safety of this vaccine and its ability to prevent Chikungunya fever in humans are now being planned.

Regards

Andy Fell, UC Davis

1) Perry S, de Jong BC, Solnick JV, Sanchez MdlL, Yang S, et al. (2010) Infection with Helicobacter pylori is associated with protection against tuberculosis. PLoS ONE 5(1): e8804. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008804

2) Akahata W., Yang Z.-Y, Andersen H., Sun S. et al. “A virus-like particle vaccine for epidemic Chikungunya virus protects nonhuman primates against infection” Nature Medicine Published online: 28 January 2010 doi:10.1038/nm.2105

Pompe disease – a starring role for animal research

The new Harrison Ford film, Extraordinary Measures, hitting US cinemas from 22 January, is a fictionalised account of the development of a treatment for Pompe disease, a rare genetic disorder. Pompe disease (glycogen storage disease type 2, acid maltase deficiency) is an enzyme deficiency with devastating effects – progressive muscle weakness and, in the severe infantile form, gross enlargement of the heart. Until fairly recently, the infantile form of the disease was invariably fatal within the first year of life. Now, however an effective treatment is in place.

Extraordinary Measures

While the increased awareness that the film’s fictional account brings is very welcome, the real story of how that treatment came about is a fascinating one (1) and laboratory animals play a starring role. The long road to a treatment started in 1932 with the first observation of the disease by Dr JC Pompe, after whom it is named. Pompe described accumulation of glycogen in muscle tissue, which was a puzzle, as the enzymes involved in the usual metabolism of glucose and glycogen were all present and correct.  The solution to this puzzle had to wait until Christian de Duve’s 1974 Nobel Prize-winning discovery of lysosomes in 1955. These cellular compartments or organelles are the ‘recycling units’ of animal cells. They have an acid environment and their own specific set of enzymes for breaking down cellular components.

De Duve was carrying out ‘blue skies’ research, with no thought of direct medical application.   However, as so often in research, a breakthrough in our basic understanding of biology led to medical applications. In this case, de Duve’s colleague Henri Hers realised that the deficiency of a lysosomal enzyme (alpha glucosidase) for the breakdown of glycogen would explain the symptoms of Pompe disease. This proved to be the case, and Hers established the principle of lysosomal storage diseases, of which around 40 have now been described, in 1965.  Before moving on, let us note the role of laboratory animals in this breakthrough. I wrote to Professor de Duve and asked what part the use of animals had played in his work and he replied that “We would not have been able to make the discoveries we made without an extensive use of laboratory animals.”(2)  – a statement confirmed by his Nobel Prize lecture.

Having discovered the basis of Pompe disease, the next milestone was to develop a treatment. This proved to be very difficult, largely due to the lack of animal models.  A recurring refrain from the animal rights lobby is that if the humane use of animals in medical research was banned, scientists would soon find other ways to ensure medical progress. That comforting belief is belied by the series of attempts, some of them pretty desperate, to treat terminally ill children over the next 25 years. None of them worked.

The next great leap forward came from The Netherlands in 1990 and relied on the use of laboratory mice.  Enzyme replacement therapy (ERT)  had long been suggested as a potential treatment for lysosomal storage diseases but had never succeeded. In the case of Pompe disease, where large amounts of enzyme were needed in the muscle, introduced enzyme was simply soaked up by the liver. Two Dutch scientists, Arnold Reuser and Ans van der Ploeg, had the idea that phosphorylated enzyme would be taken via by the mannose-6-phosphate receptors in lysosomes, allowing the enzyme to be targeted.

However the supply of phosphorylated enzyme was small – nowhere near enough to treat a sick child. How could efficacy be demonstrated, in the absence of an animal model? In an ingenious experiment (3), they used specific monoclonal antibodies to demonstrate that when bovine phosphorylated alpha glucosidase was introduced to mice, it was taken up by heart and skeletal muscle lysosomes and caused a significant increase in enzyme activity – a 43% increase in skeletal muscle and 70% in the heart. An increase that, if repeated in humans, would result in the level of enzyme found in the healthy population.  With characteristic understatement, van der Ploeg et al concluded “…we think that the original idea of enzyme replacement therapy for treatment of lysosomal storage diseases deserves new attention.” At last, thanks to this ground-breaking work, a treatment for Pompe disease was a real possibility.

Now that there had been ‘proof of principle’ all that was needed was for a pharmaceutical company to spend millions of dollars in developing a treatment. Understandably perhaps, given the rarity of the disease and the inability to demonstrate actual efficacy, there was no immediate rush.   Fortunately, at this point two animal models became available that allowed scientists to demonstrate that not only did the phosphorylated alpha glucosidase make its way to the lysosomes, it also had a beneficial effect.

From 1998 onwards, transgenic mice with Pompe disease, developed in Rotterdam and elsewhere, were used to demonstrated the efficacy of alpha-glucosidase enzyme.  At the same time the potential of ERT was also illustrated, more dramatically perhaps, by YT Chen at Duke University, using quail. The quail had the same enzyme deficiency as found in humans, resulting in muscle weakness. After injection with the enzyme, they recovered to the extent of one subject actually flying around the lab (4). The evidence was therefore now pretty convincing – it was time for human trials.

The big problem was in producing enough enzyme for humans, even for babies. This required substantial industry investment. Two rival approaches were tried. A Dutch company, Pharming, produced the enzyme in the milk of transgenic animals for use in a trial led by Ans van der Ploeg, whose PhD research had led to the original breakthrough. The transgenic animal used was the rabbit, on the grounds that a human alpha-glucosidase-producing line could be established quite quickly. This work was used in a successful clinical trial, the results of which were published in The Lancet in July 2000 (5).

Another trail was carried out by YT Chen, using enzyme produced via Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cell culture, by Synpac, a Taiwan-based company. This trial was also successful.

What follows next is a slightly convoluted story. The short version is that a third company, Genzyme, with an existing enzyme replacement therapy for Gaucher disease, bought out both Pharming and Synpac. In the end, they didn’t use either of the enzymes produced by these companies but developed their own, in-house CHO product, now marketed as Myozyme. This was a difficult decision – how could they decide which of the competing products should be invested in to produce a commercial treatment? The answer was what Genzyme called “The mother of all experiments” which compared the different products in transgenic Pompe mice. The result led to the availability of the treatment we have today.

However, the eventual production system is a technicality that need not concern today’s patients. Their concern is that an untreatable, terminal illness is now treatable. If you go and see Extraordinary Measures do bear in mind the starring role that doesn’t appear in the cast list – that of the mice and quail that made this treatment possible.

Kevin O’Donnell

Edinburgh

1. http://pompestory.blogspot.com
2. Letter from Christian de Duve to Kevin O’Donnell, 4 March 1997
3. Intravenous Administration of Phosphorylated Acid Alpha-Glucosidase Leads to Uptake of Enzyme in Heart and Skeletal Muscle of Mice http://www.jci.org/articles/view/115025
4.  Clinical and metabolic correction of pompe disease by enzyme therapy in acid maltase-deficient quail http://www.jci.org/articles/view/1722/pdf
5. Recombinant human alpha-glucosidase from rabbit milk in Pompe patients http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(00)02533-2/fulltext#article_upsell (free registration required)

Biographical note.

I should declare an interest. I am a professional scientist, however my involvement with Pompe disease dates from the diagnosis of our first child, Calum, with infantile Pompe disease in 1993. At that time the disease was still untreatable and Calum died at 8 months of age. Following that I had the great privilege of participating in an international community of patients and scientists that championed the development of a treatment for Pompe disease. They don’t appear in the cast list of the film either, or the book on which it is based The Cure by Geeta Anand. This prompted me to write the real story down – I think it’s a better story than either rthe book or the film though not, sadly, as well written. Your comments welcome at http://pompestory.blogspot.com You can find out more about Pompe disease from the following sites:

International Pompe Association www.worldpompe.org
Acid Maltase Deficiency Association www.amda-pompe.org
UK Pompe Group www.pompe.org.uk
Genzyme www.pompe.com

Addiction Research as an Example of Translational Biomedical Research

In science, “translation” embodies the concept that data gathered in one situation is meaningful for data gathered in another. Applied biomedical research seeks to translate laboratory research into effective treatments or cures. It spans many levels of study. In oncology (the field of cancer biology), some individuals study how cancerous cells grown in a dish operate and grow and how best you can destroy them. Others study tumor growth in animal models; they do this because the behavior of cells in a dish does not always fully predict how cancer will grow in a living body. Because we want to understand how cancer occurs and progresses in humans, yet other scientists use epidemiological or imaging techniques to directly study cancer patients. Information gained at one level informs and fosters the understanding of information gathered at other levels. No single experiment or scientist answers everything – it’s the collective work of the larger group of researchers working at all levels that pushes things forwards. This is how translation is made possible.

A hotly debated question in translational research is whether data gathered in animals 1) always, 2) often, 3) rarely or 4) never is meaningful for our understanding of human biology. Though most scientists and clinical practitioners feel strongly that it is often predictive, explicit examples are required to convince the broader public.  Clear evidence of translational value is found in research on the biology of drug addictions – something that I study in my laboratory. A large number of both rats and humans find drugs of abuse (cocaine, heroin methamphetamine, nicotine, etc.), when ingested, to be incredibly rewarding and will engage in significant drug-seeking behaviors to obtain it. In that sense, the study of these drugs’ effects on rats translates well (though not perfectly) to its effects on humans. Importantly, it translates “well enough” to make the rat a useful model organism in which to explore how drugs of abuse take control of some individuals by altering their brain chemistry. We have made excellent progress in this area over the last 15 years.

Of all areas of biomedical research, the study of the brain poses the biggest challenge for translational research because it is this organ that differs most across species. There is no doubt that a mouse’s brain is dramatically different from that of a monkey which is still different from that of a human. But do those superficial differences matter? Not as much as you might think! Let’s go back to the earlier example of drug abuse. Addictive drugs are chemicals that, when ingested, make their way into the brain where they alter the activity of brain cells, consequently changing the function of circuits in the brain that mediate reward. This is why they make people experience euphoria, relaxation and a sense of well-being after they take them. Remarkably, despite obvious differences in the brain, rats also very much enjoy the effects of these drugs. When offered an opportunity, they will take them voluntarily (e.g., press a button to trigger an injection of the drug). Even more impressively, even fish find addictive drugs rewarding. So, actually, despite the superficial differences, there is a huge amount going on in the brain that is similar across model organisms. This is because the anatomical differences between rat and human brains are actually much smaller than what is shared between them: common sets of circuits with similar functions.

This point is crucial. If fish and rats can be used to predict some of the responses of humans to addictive drugs, they can be used in translational research to explore the therapeutic effects of drugs used to treat brain disorders, such as addictions, as well.

It is important, however, to distinguish between what an animal model can reveal and what it cannot. In the case of chemical addictions, animal models can help you to understand the physiological and basic behavioral processes that drugs act on to alter the body. Again, studying the effects of an addictive drug in rats can help us to understand how it alters the reward circuit and how that relates to drug seeking. Here, translation is excellent. At the same time, it does not fully recapitulate the psychosocial consequences of drug taking in people. Because the drug is available for free, rats do not have to steal to get money to buy it. Because they are not expected to show up to work on time and be productive, drug use does not cause them to get fired from their jobs. Because they do not get married, they are not at risk of divorce when their drug-taking behavior gets out of control. Because they do not share needles, they are not at risk of hepatitis C or HIV infection. So, from a biological perspective, study of addiction can be modeled well in rats, but the psychosocial consequences are not. Rat researchers have revealed the neural mechanisms by which addictive drugs act in exquisite detail, and all modern, FDA-approved treatments for drug dependence arose from basic, mechanistic studies in animals (examples include Revia for the treatment of alcohol dependence and Chantix for smoking cessation). Clinical researchers then are able to tell us whether and how these treatments affect psychosocial functions in drug users. In that sense, like our colleagues who study cancer, we integrate study from many levels together to fully understand the biology and psychosocial consequences of drug abuse and its treatment.

It is because research at many levels integrates so well that providers of clinical intervention often closely study and attend to studies conducted in animals. An international society called the College on the Problems of Drug Dependence brings together scientists, physicians and social workers who are particularly interested in solving problems relating to addiction. Here, each attendee carefully studies the results of the other researchers – with studies in humans designed based upon clinical observations, and clinical tests being spurred by rat studies.  There is little doubt in the group – whether one consults patient-oriented researchers or people that examine cells growing in a dish – that studies of living animals are a critical part to the overall translational effort to stem the impact of addictions on affected individuals. Though animal research will not solve all of the mysteries of addiction, or of any complex human disease process, it is a foundational part of most areas of biomedical research and patients, patient advocacy groups and treatment providers overwhelmingly support it.

Regards

David Jentsch

Understanding migraines: The blind leading the…err…rats

Chances are that you have either suffered from migraine yourself or have a family member or close friend who have, after all about 1 in 8 of us will suffer from migraine at some stage in our lifetime, and some sufferers experience repeated debilitating episodes over many years . While headache on one side of the brain is typical other symptoms such as nausea are very common, indeed in some migraine victims nausea is the primary symptom of the disorder.  Through a combination of studies in animals and clinical research using techniques such as fMRI and PET scans scientists have learned a lot in recent years about what happens before and during migraine episodes but we do not yet fully understand what ultimately causes the attacks, and debate rages over the relative importance of some mechanisms originating deep in brain regions such as the hypothalamus and others that start in membranes that surround the brain, (1,2).  Current treatments can help prevent migraine, reduce suffering and hasten recovery they do not work for all patients, and a better understanding of what exactly is happening before and during a migraine attack will aid the development of really effective treatments and preventative measures.  A study published in Nature Neuroscience combines clinical research with studies of rats to provide clues about a key characteristic of migraines that has until now remained unexplained, the exacerbation of the pain experienced by sufferers by light (3).

The team, lead by Rami Burnstein of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre in Boston, decided to concentrate of the role of a particular subset of nerve cells in the retina known as intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) which they knew from previous mouse research to be involved in eye functions that are not image forming, such as setting the biological clock to the day night cycle.  The ipRGCs are stimulated by light both indirectly via the rods and cones and directly through a pigment called melanopsin that they themselves contain.  In order to discover if the ipRCGs are important to light sensitivity in migraine they performed a very neat clinical study involving 20 blind patients who also suffered from migraine. Six of these patients lacked any light perception due to removal of their eyes or damage to the optic nerve, while in the remaining 14 the damage to the eyes was less total, affecting the rods and cones but not ipRGCs, so that while they were unable to see images they could detect light. The results were clear, blue and grey light made the headaches of those who retained light sensitivity worse, while having no effect on the six blind individuals who lacked light perception.

Determining that the ipRGCs are involved in the exacerbation of migraine headaches by light is of course only part of the story, and Professor Burnstein’s team next turned to tracing the nerve pathways that are responsible for the increased pain, knowledge that might help to develop new treatments.  This they could not do in human subjects because the available imaging techniques do not have the precision to determine the connections between individual neurons.  In a series of studies they injected labels including Green Fluorescent Protein into particular areas of the eyes and brain, and in some cases even individual nerve cells, of anesthetized rats with and followed the path of the neurons.  They were also able to use tiny electrodes to record the effect of light on the firing of individual nerves in the brain, something that cannot yet be done in human subjects. An exciting observation was that the ipRCGs connected to cells in a region of the brain known as the posterior thalamus, itself part of the trigeminovascular pathway that is strongly implicated in migraine headache through transmission of nerve signals from the irritated outer brain membranes to the deep brain. When they examined the electrical activity of these cells they discovered that the majority of the cells within the posterior thalamus that are involved in mediating migraine pain are also light sensitive.  Finally they demonstrated that the light-sensitive pain-mediating neurons of the posterior hypothalamus connect to nerve cells in several regions of the somatosensory region of the cortex, an intriguing discovery since abnormalities in this region have previously been seen in migraine patients. This discovery is likely to encourage scientists to study the role of the somatosensory cortex in migraine in more detail.

So how important is this study? Well it’s unlikely that this discovery will lead to any treatment breakthrough in the immediate future, though the discovery that grey light can exacerbate migraine headache is new and may help patients to avoid it.  Despite a perhaps natural tendency for the news media to look for “breakthroughs” the majority of scientific papers published are like this one, providing valuable new insights into biology that contribute to our overall understanding of how biological systems work and happens when they go awry but not indicating an easy fix.  I’ve no doubt that this and many similar basic science studies will contribute to better treatments for migraine in the future, but perhaps not tomorrow!

Regards

Paul Browne

1)      Olesen J. et al “Origin of pain in migraine:evidence for peripheral sensitization” The Lancet Neurology Volume 8, Issue 7, Pages 679-690 (2009) doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70090-0

2)      Alstadhaug K.B.  “Migraine and the hypothalamus” Cephalalgia Volume 29, Issue 8, Pages 809-817 doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2008.01814.x

3)      Noseda R. et al. “A neural mechanism for exacerbation of headache by light” Nature neuroscience Advance Publication Online 10 January 2010 doi: 10.1038/nn.2475

Panel Discussion on Animal Research at UCLA

Save the date!

Perspectives on the Science and Ethics of Animal-Based Research

UCLA, Covel Commons, 6pm-8:30pm, February 16th, 2010

With the goal of opening an on-going dialogue between individuals who are in favor or opposed to the use of animals in biomedical research, Bruins for Animals and Pro-Test for Science will be hosting a panel discussion on this complex topic. The event is open to those who want to engage in a civil, intellectually honest discussion on issues about which people hold passionate, differing opinions.

Three panelists on each side will briefly present their personal views on the topic, followed by moderator-driven discussion that will be responsive to questions submitted by the audience. The event will be moderated by David Lazarus of the Los Angeles Times.

The panel participants are:

  • Janet D. Stemwedel, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Philosophy, San Jose State University. Professor Stemwedel will discuss her views about the ethical issues around animal use in scientific research.
  • Ray Greek, M.D., President of Americans for Medical Advancement Dr. Greek will address the use of animals in basic research, specifically the cost benefit ratio.
  • Colin Blakemore, FMedSci FRS, Professor of Neuroscience, Oxford University Professor Blakemore will discuss his views on the role of animal research in medicine and public health.
  • Niall Shanks, Professor of History and Philosophy of Science, Wichita State University Professor Shanks the “prediction problem” in biomedical research.
  • Dario L. Ringach, Ph.D., Professor of Neurobiology and Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles Professor Ringach will present is views on the role of basic science in driving medical advancement and knowledge.
  • Robert Jones, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, California State University, Chico Professor Jones will discuss the philosophical and ethical implications of using nonhuman animals as subjects in medical and scientific research.

Admission is open to ticketed individuals only.

For information on requesting tickets, please go to http://www.pro-test-for-science.org