Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Gene Regulation’ Category

Heroes in Basic Medical Research – Robert J. Lefkowitz

Author & Curator: Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP

Robert J. Lefkowitz, MD

Robert J. Lefkowitz MD, a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator who has spent his entire 39-year research career at the Duke University Medical Center, is sharing the 2012 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Brian K. Kobilka of Stanford University School of Medicine, who was a post-doctoral fellow in Lefkowitz’s lab in the 1980s.

They are being recognized for their work on a class of cell surface receptors that have become the target of prescription drugs, including antihistamines, ulcer drugs and beta blockers to relieve hypertension, angina and coronary disease.

The receptors catch chemical signals from the outside and transmit their messages into the cell, providing the cell with information about changes occurring within the body. These particular receptors are called seven-transmembrane G protein-coupled receptors, or just “G-coupled receptors” for short. Serpentine in appearance, G-coupled receptors weave through the surface of the cell seven times.

The human genome contains code to make at least 1,000 different forms of these trans-membrane receptors, all of which are quite similar. The receptors also bear a strong resemblance to receptors that detect light in the eyes, smells in the nose and taste on the tongue. (See playlist of Lefkowitz science videos here.)

“Bob’s seminal discoveries related to G-protein coupled receptors ultimately became the basis for a great many medications that are in use today across many disease areas,” said Victor J. Dzau, MD, Chancellor for Health Affairs and CEO, Duke University Health System.  “He is an outstanding example of a physician-scientist whose impact can be seen in the lives of the countless patients who have benefited from his scientific discoveries. We are very proud of his magnificent achievements and grateful for his many contributions to Duke Medicine.”

After attending public elementary and junior high schools I entered The Bronx High School of Science (10th grade) in the autumn of 1956, graduating at age 16 in 1959. “Bronx Science” is one of several public high schools in New York City which admits students on the basis of a competitive examination. The student body, representing approximately the top 5% based on the exam, are gifted and interested in science and math. The accomplishments of graduates of this high school are quite remarkable. For example, I am the 8th Nobel Laureate to have graduated from this school, the 7 previous ones having received their prizes in Physics. For me, attending this school was a formative experience. Whereas in elementary and junior high school I was not greatly challenged, here I was among a group of remarkably bright, interesting and stimulating classmates. The curriculum featured many advanced classes at the college level. I was particularly drawn to chemistry and, as a result of taking these college level classes, I was able to receive full credit for two years of chemistry when I entered Columbia College in 1959. Thus I began as a college freshman with organic chemistry, a course generally taken by juniors.

The level of scholarship maintained by the student body was such that even with an average of about 94% my final class rank was about 100th out of 800. A classmate and friend at the time and at present, the famous geneticist David Botstein, had an almost identical average, a fact we tease each other about to this day.

Along with dozens of classmates, I moved on to Columbia University where I enrolled as a pre-medical student majoring in chemistry. The two year core curriculum in “Contemporary Civilization” was required of all students. With an emphasis on reading classic texts in history, philosophy, sociology and the political sciences and discussing these in small seminars, it was for me an opening to a whole new world. In addition, I took courses with and was exposed to, such intellectual giants as the literary critic Lionel Trilling, the cultural historian Jacques Barzun and the sociologist Daniel Bell, among others. I have very fond memories from this period of spending many hours in the public reading room at the 42nd Street New York Public Library, researching papers for those classes.

I also studied advanced Organic Chemistry with Cheves Walling and Physical Chemistry in a department which was strongly influenced by the then recently retired prominent physical organic chemist, Louis Hammett. However, the chemistry professor who had the most profound influence on me was actually a young Assistant Professor of Chemistry, Ronald Breslow. As a college senior I took an advanced seminar in biochemistry which he taught single handedly. This introduction to the chemistry of processes in living organisms really excited me in part, I suspect, because of his very lively teaching style. None of this, however, in any way diverted me from my goal of studying to become a practicing physician.

I greatly enjoyed my four years in medical school. I had dreamed about becoming a physician since grade school and now I was finally doing it. As a freshman immersed in the basic medical sciences I was able to deepen my interest in, and fascination with, biochemistry. Our biochemistry professors included a remarkable array of scholars (not that any of us appreciated that at the time). We heard lectures on metabolism from David Rittenberg, Chair of the Department; from David Shemin on porphyrins; from Irwin Chargaff on nucleic acids; and from David Nachmansohn on cholinergic neurotransmission.

One young professor left a lasting impression on me. Paul Marks was then a young academic hematologist who taught the Introduction to Clinical Medicine course in which we studied clinical problems for the first time, examined case histories, and looked at blood specimens. Not only was he a good clinician but he assigned readings from the basic science literature that were relevant in a very meaningful way to the cases we studied. This showed me how scientific information could be brought to bear on clinical problems. Among my classmates and friends in medical school was Harold Varmus, who was the co-recipient of the 1989 Nobel Prize for the discovery of oncogenes.

On July 1, 1968 I moved my family (now including the recently born Cheryl) to Rockville, Maryland to begin my research career at the NIH in nearby Bethesda, Maryland. I had been assigned, through a matching program, to work with Drs. Jesse Roth and Ira Pastan in the Clinical Endocrinology Branch of the National Institute of Arthritis and Metabolic Diseases (NIAMD), now known as NIDDK, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. I was a Clinical Associate, meaning that in addition to doing full time research ten months out of the year, for two months I also supervised a clinical endocrinology in-patient service. Because of this, I gained a remarkable exposure to unusual endocrine diseases which were under study at the time. An example of this was acromegaly.

It was the heyday of interest in second messenger signaling after the discovery of cAMP by Earl Sutherland. He would receive the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology for this in 1971. One hormone after another was being shown to stimulate the enzyme adenylate cyclase thus increasing intracellular levels of cAMP. The idea that these different hormones might work through distinct receptors was talked about but was controversial. Moreover, at the time there were no direct methods for studying the receptors. I was assigned the challenging task of developing a radioligand binding method to study the putative receptors for adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) in plasma membranes derived from an ACTH responsive adrenocortical carcinoma passaged in nude mice.

Recently, two Nobel Laureates, Mike Brown and Joe Goldstein, published a brief essay discussing the remarkable number of Nobel Laureates (9 so far) who have in common the fact that they came to the NIH as physicians during the brief space between 1964–1972 for postdoctoral research training. (1)

They dissect the unique convergence of circumstances which may have been responsible for this extraordinary result, including the quality of basic science mentors on the full time NIH staff, the competitiveness of “the best and the brightest” to obtain these positions during the Vietnam War years, and the now bygone emphasis on teaching of basic sciences in medical schools in the 1960s.

Lineages among Nobel Laureates are often commented upon. In my case, Jesse Roth had trained with Solomon Berson and Rosalyn Yalow whose development of radioimmunoassay led to the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology to Yalow (1977) after Berson’s untimely death in 1972. Moreover, training in Ira Pastan’s laboratory contemporaneously with me was my medical school and house staff classmate and future Nobel Laureate, Harold Varmus. Ira had himself trained in the lab of another NIH career scientist, Earl Stadtman, who also trained a future Nobel Laureate, Mike Brown.

Dr. Edgar Haber, the Chief of Cardiology and a prominent immunochemist, allowed me to begin working in his lab. I was fascinated by receptors and what I saw as their potential to form the basis for a whole new field of research just waiting to be explored. I spent a great deal of time analyzing which receptor I should attempt to study. As an aspiring academic cardiologist I wanted to work on something related to the cardiovascular system. I also wanted a receptor known to be coupled to adenylate cyclase. I initially focused on two models, the cardiac glucagon and β-adrenergic receptors. However, my attention quickly became focused on the latter, for very practical reasons. Unlike the case for peptide hormones such as glucagon or ACTH, literally dozens, if not hundreds of analogs of adrenaline and noradrenaline, as well as their antagonists were available which could be chemically modified to develop the types of new tools which would need to be developed to study the receptors. These would include radioligands, photoaffinity probes, affinity chromatography matrices and the like. Moreover, the first β-adrenergic receptor blocker (“β-blocker”) had recently been approved for clinical use in the United States, adding further to the attractiveness of this target to me.

So in the early months of 1971 I began the quest to prove the existence of β-adrenergic receptors, to study their properties, to learn about their chemical nature, how they were regulated and how they functioned. This work has consumed me for the past forty years. Over the next several years in Boston, working mostly with membrane fractions derived from canine myocardium, I sought to develop radioligand binding approaches to tag the β-adrenergic receptors. I focused initially on the use of [3H]labeled catecholamines such as norepinephrine, which are agonists for the receptor. Specific saturable binding could be demonstrated, and I thought initially that we had developed a valid approach to label the receptors. However, it became increasingly clear over the next few years that the sites being labeled lacked many of the properties that would be expected for true physiological receptor binding sites. Coming to this realization was difficult.

During this time I also published some of the very first studies demonstrating GTP regulation of β-adrenergic receptor stimulated adenylate cyclase following after the work of Martin Rodbell on GTP regulation of glucagon sensitive adenylate cyclase. I was now a cardiology fellow. As at the NIH, nights on call were often spent in the lab doing experiments while hoping that my on call beeper would remain quiet. During these years, I had many stimulating and profitable discussions with Geoffrey Sharpe, a faculty member in the Nephrology Division with an interest in cell signaling and adenylate cyclase.

In work with postdoc Marc Caron in the spring of 1974, we succeeded in developing [3H]dihydroalprenolol. Contemporaneously, Gerald Aurbach at the NIH, and Alex Levitzki at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem also developed similar approaches using different radioligands. This was a watershed event because it finally opened the door to direct study of the receptors. Together with M.D./Ph.D. student Rusty Williams we developed comparable assays for the α-adrenergic receptors shortly thereafter.

Brian Kent Kobilka is an American physiologist and a corecipient of the 2012 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Robert Lefkowitz for discoveries that reveal the inner workings of an important family G protein-coupled receptors.

Read Full Post »

Proteins that control neurotransmitter release

Author & Curator: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP

Richard H. Scheller, PhD

The sec6/8 Complex Is Located at Neurite Outgrowth and Axonal Synapse-Assembly Domains

Christopher D. Hazuka, Davide L. Foletti, Shu-Chan Hsu, Yun Kee, F. Woodward Hopf, and Richard H. Scheller
Department of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305-5428

The Journal of Neuroscience, February 15, 1999, 19(4):1324–1334   http://www.jneurosci.org/content/19/4/1324.full.pdf

The molecules that specify domains on the neuronal plasma membrane for the delivery and accumulation of vesicles during neurite outgrowth and synapse formation are unknown. We investigated the role of the sec6/8 complex, a set of proteins that specifies vesicle targeting sites in yeast and epithelial cells, in neuronal membrane trafficking. This complex was found in layers of developing rat brain undergoing synaptogenesis. In cultured hippocampal neurons, the sec6/8 complex was present in regions of ongoing membrane addition: the tips of growing neurites, filopodia, and growth cones. In young axons, the sec6/8 complex was also confined to periodic domains of the plasma membrane. The distribution of synaptotagmin, synapsin1, sec6, and FM1–43 labeling in cultured neurons suggested that the plasma membrane localization of the sec6/8 complex preceded the arrival of synaptic markers and was downregulated in mature synapses. We propose that the sec6/8 complex specifies sites for targeting vesicles at domains of neurite outgrowth and potential active zones during synaptogenesis. Key words: synaptogenesis; neurotransmission; secretion; exocytosis; synaptic vesicle; vesicle targeting

Targeting of vesicles to synaptic sites during development may use similar mechanisms as those involved in vesicle fusion underlying membrane outgrowth. Before contact with a postsynaptic target, axons possess mobile vesicle clusters bearing synaptotagmin, which fuse with the plasma membrane after stimulation (Matteoli et al., 1992; Kraszewski et al., 1995; Dai and Peng, 1996). Thus, growing axons must contain the molecular machinery required for constitutive exocytosis, endocytosis, and activitydependent vesicle release. However, it is unclear how vesicles become clustered at synapses. Although vesicle fusion in axons might occur anywhere along the plasma membrane, there must be membrane targets that signal the clustering of vesicles for synapse formation. Furthermore, it is unclear how sites of vesicle exocytosis are modified as the neuron forms stable contacts with postsynaptic partners.

Identification of a Novel Rab11/25 Binding Domain Present in Eferin and Rip Proteins

Rytis Prekeris*, Jason M. Davies*, and Richard H. Scheller#
JBC Papers in Press. Published on July 31, 2001 as Manuscript M106133200
http://www.jbc.org/content/early/2001/07/31/jbc.M106133200.full.pdf

Rab11, a low molecular weight GTP binding protein, has been shown to play a key role in a variety of cellular processes, including endosomal recycling, phagocytosis, and transport of secretory proteins from the TGN. In this study we describe a novel Rab11 effector, EF hands containing Rab11 interacting protein (eferin). In addition, we identify a 20 amino acid domain that is present at the C-terminus of eferin and other Rab11/25 interacting proteins, such as Rip11 and nRip11. Using biochemical techniques we demonstrate that this domain is necessary and sufficient for Rab11 binding in vitro and that it is required for localization of Rab11 effector proteins in vivo. The data suggest that various Rab effectors compete with each other for the binding to Rab11/25 possibly accounting for the diversity of Rab11 functions.

Members of the Rab/Ypt GTPase family have emerged as important regulators of vesicular trafficking (1). Rab proteins have been proposed to mediate a variety of functions, including vesicle translocation and docking at a specific fusion sites. Like all small GTPases, Rabs cycle between active (GTP bound) and inactive (GDP bound) conformations (2). In the GTP bound state, Rab proteins can bind a variety of downstream effector proteins, while GTP hydrolysis leads to a conformational change in the “switch” region that renders the Rab GTPase unrecognizable to its effector proteins (3,4). A key question in understanding the interactions between Rabs and their effectors concerns the mechanisms by which Rab GTPases specifically bind a diverse spectrum of effectors and how this is regulated by the common structural motif used as a GTP switch. Biochemical and genetic studies have identified several hypervariable regions that might be involved in determining Rab specificity, including N- and C-termini, as well as α3/β5 by guest on September 6, 2015 http://www.jbc.org/ Downloaded from loop (5,6). Indeed, the recently reported structure of Rab3a bound to a putative effector, rabphillin-3a, revealed that Rab3a/rabphillin-3a complex interacts through two main regions (7). The first consists of conformationally sensitive “switch” regions of Rab3a bound to the a1 helix and the C-terminal part of rabphillin-3a. The second involves the SGAWFF domain of rabphillin-3a which fits into a pocket formed by the three hypervariable complementary determining regions (CDRs) of Rab3a, corresponding to the N- and C-termini and α3/β5 loop. Thus, it appears that the hypervariable RabCDR are involved in determining the specificity of effector binding, while the conserved “switch” regions impart GTP dependency and binding. It remains to be determined, however, whether this paradigm also applies to other Rab/effector complexes. Rab11a, -11b, and -25 are closely related members of Rab GTPase family that have been implicated in regulating a variety of different post-Golgi trafficking pathways, such as protein recycling (8), phagocytosis (9), insulin-stimulated Glut4 insertion in the plasma membrane (10), and membrane trafficking from early endosomes to the transGolgi network (11). During the last few years several Rab11/25 interacting proteins have been identified, including Rab11BP/Rabphilin-11, Rip11, nRip11, and myosin Vb (12- 15). However, the mechanisms of their function, as well as molecular aspects of their interactions with Rab11, remain to be fully understood. In the present study, we report the identification of EF-hands containing Rab11/25 interacting protein (eferin). Furthermore, we characterized a Rab binding domain (RBD11) which is present at the Cterminus of eferin as well as other Rab11/25 binding proteins, such as Rip11 and nRip11. Using biochemical techniques we demonstrated that RBD11 is the region which encodes the specificity for Rab11/25, but is distinct from the region interacting with Rab “switch” domain, since its interactions with the Rab11/25 are not GTP-dependent.

The functional significance of the differences in Rip and eferin interactions with Rab11/25 remains to be determined. One possibility is that additional cellular factors can regulate the affinity of Rab11/25 binding to its effectors. Indeed, the recombinant full length Rip11 binds poorly to Rab11a in pull down and yeast-two hybrid assays as compared to full length endogenous Rip11 from cellular TX-100 extracts (data not shown). Furthermore, it has been previously shown that Rip11 can also interact with γSNAP and cytoskeleton (13,24). Thus, the interactions of Rips and eferin with different factors could be used as a means of differentially regulating Rab11/25 binding. Alternatively, the Rab11/25 binding motif in eferin and Rip11 might be conformationlly hidden and require activation before binding to Rab11/25. We have previously demonstrated that phosphorylation of Rip11 plays an important role in its trafficking (13). Thus, differential phosphorylation on Rab11/25 binding motifs could also play a role in regulating the binding of Rip11 and eferin to Rab GTPases. Despite to recent progress in understanding the roles of Rabs and their effectors in regulating membrane trafficking, we are only beginning to unravel the structural determinants of their function. Identification and characterization of the Rab11/25 binding regions in Rip and Eferin proteins will be of a crucial importance in understanding the molecular mechanisms involved in differential regulation of the variety of Rab11-dependent trafficking pathways.

J. Immunol. Methods
J Immunol Methods 2008 Mar 14;332(1-2):41-52. Epub 2008 Jan 14.
Genentech Inc., 1DNA Way, South San Francisco, California, 94080, United States. jagath@gene.com
Cysteines with reactive thiol groups are attractive tools for site-specific labeling of proteins. Engineering a reactive cysteine residue into proteins with multiple disulfide bonds is often a challenging task as it may interfere with structural and functional properties of the protein. Here we developed a phage display-based biochemical assay, PHESELECTOR (Phage ELISA for Selection of Reactive Thiols) to rapidly screen reactive thiol groups on antibody fragments without interfering with their antigen binding, using trastuzumab-Fab (hu4D5Fab) as a model system

Antibody-drug conjugates enhance the antitumor effects of antibodies and reduce adverse systemic effects of potent cytotoxic drugs. However, conventional drug conjugation strategies yield heterogenous conjugates with relatively narrow therapeutic index (maximum tolerated dose/curative dose). Using leads from our previously described phage display-based method to predict suitable conjugation sites, we engineered cysteine substitutions at positions on light and heavy chains that provide reactive thiol groups and do not perturb immunoglobulin folding and assembly, or alter antigen binding.

Neuron
Neuron 2008 Nov;60(3):400-1

Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) combine the ideal properties of both antibodies and cytotoxic drugs by targeting potent drugs to the antigen-expressing tumor cells, thereby enhancing their antitumor activity. Successful ADC development for a given target antigen depends on optimization of antibody selection, linker stability, cytotoxic drug potency, and mode of linker-drug conjugation to the antibody. Here, we systematically examined the in vitro potency as well as in vivo preclinical efficacy and safety profiles of a heterogeneous preparation of conventional trastuzumab-mcc-DM1 (TMAb-mcc-DM1) ADC with that of a homogeneous engineered thio-trastuzumab-mpeo-DM1 (thioTMAb-mpeo-DM1) conjugate.

Sensory and signaling pathways are exquisitely organized in primary cilia. Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) patients have compromised cilia and signaling. BBS proteins form the BBSome, which binds Rabin8, a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) activating the Rab8 GTPase, required for ciliary assembly.

The reactive thiol in cysteine is used for coupling maleimide linkers in the generation of antibody conjugates. To assess the impact of the conjugation site, we engineered cysteines into a therapeutic HER2/neu antibody at three sites differing in solvent accessibility and local charge. The highly solvent-accessible site rapidly lost conjugated thiol-reactive linkers in plasma owing to maleimide exchange with reactive thiols in albumin, free cysteine or glutathione.

The intracellular pathogenic bacterium Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium (Salmonella) relies on acidification of the Salmonella-containing vacuole (SCV) for survival inside host cells. The transport and fusion of membrane-bound compartments in a cell is regulated by small GTPases, including Rac and members of the Rab GTPase family, and their effector proteins. However, the role of these components in survival of intracellular pathogens is not completely understood.

Nat. Med.
Nat Med 2013 Oct;19(10):1232-5
Genentech Research and Early Development, 1 DNA Way, San Francisco, California, USA.
MAbs
MAbs 2014 Jan-Feb;6(1):95-107
Multi-transmembrane proteins are especially difficult targets for antibody generation largely due to the challenge of producing a protein that maintains its native conformation in the absence of a stabilizing membrane. Here, we describe an immunization strategy that successfully resulted in the identification of monoclonal antibodies that bind specifically to extracellular epitopes of a 12 transmembrane protein, multi-drug resistant protein 4 (MRP4). These monoclonal antibodies were developed following hydrodynamic tail vein immunization with a cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter-based plasmid expressing MRP4 cDNA and were characterized by flow cytometry.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have a significant impact toward the treatment of cancer, as evidenced by the clinical activity of the recently approved ADCs, brentuximab vedotin for Hodgkin lymphoma and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (trastuzumab-MCC-DM1) for metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. DM1 is an analog of the natural product maytansine, a microtubule inhibitor that by itself has limited clinical activity and high systemic toxicity. However, by conjugation of DM1 to trastuzumab, the safety was improved and clinical activity was demonstrated.

Richard H Scheller, PhD

Published on 16 Sep 2014

The Keck School of Medicine of USC is the first medical school in the nation to host the Lasker Lectures, featuring recipients of the prestigious 2013 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award. In this installment, Richard H. Scheller, PhD, executive vice president of Genentech research and early development, discusses breakthoughs in drug development that are turning the tide in the war against cancer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx54EVJMcxM

Kavli Prize 2015

Xenon Pharmaceuticals Appoints Dr. Richard H. Scheller to Its Board of Directors

Biopharmaceutical company Xenon Pharmaceuticals (NasdaqGM:XENE) reported on Monday the addition of Richard H. Scheller, PhD to its board of directors.

Most recently, Dr Scheller has served as chief science officer and head of Therapeutics at 23andMe.

Previously Dr Scheller was the executive vice president at Genentech Research and Early Development & a member of the Roche Corporate Executive Committee; chief scientific officer, executive vice president of Research and senior vice president of Research at Genentech; as well as a professor of Molecular and Cellular Physiology and of Biological Sciences at Stanford University Medical Center and an investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Dr Scheller is currently an adjunct professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, School of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.

He has been a Director at Xenon Pharmaceuticals Inc. since March 16, 2015 and Medrio, Inc. since November 2012. He serves as a Member of the Medical and Scientific Review Board of Evotec (US), Inc. (Renovis Inc.). In 2014, he was named a trustee of Caltech. He served as a Member of Scientific Advisory Board of Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. and Rinat Neuroscience Corporation.

He served on numerous advisory boards including the National Advisory Mental Health Council of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Scheller served as chairman of the Genentech Foundation’s board of directors. He is a globally recognized leader in biomedical research.

He has published over 200 papers in scientific journals, and worked in cell biology. He has received several additional awards for his work elucidating the molecular mechanisms governing neurotransmitter release, including the 2013 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award, the 2014 California Institute of Technology’s Caltech Distinguished Alumni Award, the 2010 Kavli Prize in Neuroscience, and the 1997 U.S. National Academy of Sciences Award in Molecular Biology. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Dr. Scheller holds a Doctorate in Chemistry from the California Institute of Technology in 1980, where he was also a Postdoctoral Fellow, Division of Biology. He was also a Postdoctoral Fellow at Columbia University, College of Physicians & Surgeons. He has Bachelor’s Degree in Biochemistry in 1975 at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Education: 1971-1975 University of Wisconsin-Madison B.S. – Biochemistry with Honors 1975-1980 California Institute of Technology Ph.D. – Chemistry – Advisor: Eric H. Davidson 1980-1981 California Institute of Technology Postdoctoral Fellow-Division of Biology Advisor: Eric H. Davidson 1981-1982 Columbia University-College of Physicians & Surgeons Postdoctoral Fellow-Molecular Neurobiology Advisors: Richard Axel and Eric R. Kandel Industry Positions: 2001-2003 Senior Vice President – Research Genentech, Inc. 2003-2009 Executive Vice President – Research Genentech, Inc. 2008-2009 Chief Scientific Officer and Executive Vice President – Research Genentech, Inc. 2009- Executive Vice President – Genentech Research and Early Development (gRED) and Member of the Enlarged Roche Corporate Executive Committee Academic Appointments: 1982-1987 Assistant Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University 1987-1990 Associate Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University 1990-1993 Associate Professor, Department of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University Associate Professor (by courtesy), Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University

Read Full Post »

Stress-response gene networks

Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Curator

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Intelligence

Series E. 2; 3.6

Nina V. Fedoroff
Evan Pugh Professor of Biology, Willaman Professor of Life Science
Ph.D., The Rockefeller University, Molecular Biology , 1972

 

After graduating from Rockefeller University she joined the faculty of the University of California, Los Angeles, where she did research into nuclear RNA.[10] She then worked on developmental biology at the Department of Embryology at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, where she pioneered DNA sequencing and worked out the nucleotide sequence of the first complete gene.[10] In 1978, she became a staff member at the Carnegie Institute and joined the faculty of Johns Hopkins University Biology Department, where she did groundbreaking work on the molecular characterization of maizetransposable elements or jumping genes (for which Barbara McClintock had been awarded a Nobel Prize in 1983).[10]

Fedoroff has been honored with the Howard Taylor Ricketts Award from University of Chicago in 1990,[4] and in 1992 she received the New York Academy of Sciences Outstanding Contemporary Women Scientist Award.[4] In 1997, Fedoroff received the John P. McGovern Science and Society Medal from Sigma Xi.[9] She was awarded in 2003 Syracuse University‘s George Arents Pioneer medal.[9]

President Bill Clinton appointed Fedoroff to the National Science Board, which oversees the National Science Foundation, in 2001.[4] The foundation administers the science awards, established by the United States Congress in 1959. Fedoroff was Science and Technology Adviser to U.S. Secretaries of State, Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton[13] and to the administrator Rajiv Shah for the United States Agency for International Development from 2007 to 2010.[14]

A major project in the laboratory is investigating the responses of plants to biotic (pathogens) and abiotic (ozone, temperature, chemicals) stresses using DNA microarray gene expression profiling and reverse genetics. We have identified more than 1,200 stress-modulated Arabidopsis genes, and we are studying their expression under various conditions. Among the genes induced by various stresses are signaling genes, transcription factors, and effector genes that include enzymes that alter the cells structure and properties in response to stress. The signaling molecules include MAP kinases and receptor-like kinases. We are suppressing and overexpressing potential regulatory genes to identify the genes under their control. We want to understand the structure of the stress-response gene networks and to explore molecular-genetic approaches to modifying the stress response (see Holter et al., 2000, 2001).

Hormone Responses

The hyl1 Arabidopsis mutant has a transposon insertion mutation in a gene that is involved in several hormonal signaling pathways, including those for abscisic acid, auxin, and cytokinin. The mutant is affected in many growth parameters, including graviperception. It is not as sensitive to exogenous auxins and cytokinins as the wildtype, but it is hypersensitive to abscisic acid. The HYL1 protein binds to double-stranded RNA and localizes to the nucleus. The mutant is described in Lu and Fedoroff (2000). We are investigating how this protein affects hormone signaling.

Transposable Elements

Transposable elements or transposons were discovered in corn (maize) plants by the famous geneticist Barbara McClintock through classical genetic analysis of unstable mutations (for a brief history, see http://www.ergito.com or Fedoroff 2001). Maize transposons were cloned in our laboratory almost 20 years ago and are now widely used for insertional mutagenesis. We have created a database of several hundred Arabidopsis transposon insertion lines using a transposon tagging system developed in the laboratory (Smith et al., 1996; Raina et al., 2001).

Epigenetic Mechanisms

The maize Suppressor-mutator (Spm) transposon is epigenetically inactivated by methylation and encodes a protein, TnpA, which is capable of reversing the inactivation (Schläppi et al., 1994; Fedoroff et al., 1995). Using an inducible promoter to express TnpA, current experiments seek to understand how TnpA demethylates the Spm promoter. Some ideas about plant transposon evolution are explored in Fedoroff (2000).

 

The World Food Prize laureates for 2013 were announced in June. They are Marc van Montagu, Mary-Dell Chilton and Rob Fraley. These scientists played seminal roles, together with the late Jeff Schell, in developing modern plant molecular modification techniques. Fraley is chief technology officer of Monsanto. Chilton is a Distinguished Science Fellow at Syngenta. Montagu founded Plant Genetic Systems (now part of Bayer CropScience) and CropDesign (today owned by BASF).

Van Montagu and Chilton independently developed the technology in the 1980s to stably transfer foreign genes into plants, a discovery that set up a race to develop tools to genetically engineer plants. It allowed other scientists to incorporate genetic traits in plants to better withstand drought, extreme heat and to fight off pests and disease. Fraley was the first to successfully transfer immunity to specific bacteria into a plant.

Fraley genetically engineered the first herbicide-resistant soybean in 1996.

The three laureates (and their colleagues) developed molecular techniques for plant genetic modification. We can now use these methods to make precise improvements by adding just a gene (or two or a few) that codes for proteins whose function we know with precision. Yet plants modified by these techniques, the best and safest we’ve ever invented, are the only ones we now call GM. Almost everyone believes we’ve never fiddled with plant genes before, as if beefsteak tomatoes, elephant garlic and corn were somehow products of unfettered nature.

If the popular mythology about farmer suicides, tumors and toxicity had an ounce of truth to it, these companies would long since have gone out of business. Instead, they’re taking more market share every year. There’s a mismatch between mythology and reality. Maybe it’s worth remembering that technology vilification is about as old as technology itself. What’s new is electronic gossip and the proliferation of organizations that peddle such gossip for a living.

Author: Nina Fedoroff is distinguished professor of biosciences at the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia and Evan Pugh professor at Penn State University. She has no material interest in Monsanto or its products.

Nina Fedoroff did her undergraduate work at Syracuse University, graduating summa cum laude with a dual major in biology and chemistry. She attended the Rockefeller University, where she earned her Ph.D. in Molecular Biology in 1972. Both her undergraduate research at Syracuse University and her graduate research on RNA bacteriophage at The Rockefeller University were supported by grants and fellowships from the National Science Foundation. Following graduation from The Rockefeller University, she joined the faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and carried out research on nuclear RNA. In 1974 Fedoroff received fellowships from the Damon Runyan-Walter Winchell Cancer Research Fund and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for postdoctoral work, first at UCLA and then in the Department of Embryology of the Carnegie Institution of Washington in Baltimore. Working in the laboratory of Donald Brown, Fedoroff pioneered in DNA sequencing, determining the nucleotide sequence of the first complete gene. In 1978, Fedoroff became a staff member of the Carnegie Institution of Washington and a faculty member in the Biology Department at Johns Hopkins University. Her research focus changed to the molecular characterization of maize transposable elements. The isolation of the maize transposons, discovered genetically by Barbara McClintock in the 1940s, was achieved in the early 1980s. In subsequent years, Fedoroff’s lab showed that the maize transposons were active in a variety of other plants, developed transposon tagging systems, and studied the epigenetic regulation of transposon activity. In 1995 Fedoroff joined the faculty of the Pennsylvania State University as Willaman Professor of Life Sciences.

Read Full Post »

Turning genetic information into working proteins

Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Curator

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Intelligence

Series 2; 3.3

James E. Darnell Jr. (1930— )
Vincent Astor Professor Emeritus
2002 Albert Lasker Award for Special Achievement in Medical Science

Responsible for the various tasks required in turning genetic information into working proteins, ribonucleic acids are one of the most essential players in the life of a cell. First discovered in 1868, RNA today remains the subject of intense scientific scrutiny. Over the course of a career dedicated to understanding the intricate workings of gene transcription, Rockefeller University scientist James E. Darnell Jr. has revealed some of RNA’s most secretive and surprising mechanisms. For his half-century of illuminating research, Dr. Darnell received the 2002 Albert Lasker Award for Special Achievement in Medical Science.

In 1963, Dr. Darnell described a phenomenon he termed “RNA processing,” a step in the process of gene transcription, which had only recently been elucidated in bacterial systems. Working with mammalian cells — which differ from bacterial cells in that they contain a nucleus, where RNA is created — Dr. Darnell observed that very long strings of RNA disappear from the cell nucleus and that subsequently, shorter RNAs resembling the absent longer ones appear in the cytoplasm. Mammalian cells, he concluded, must distill their massive, immature nuclear RNA into shorter, mature forms that are individually coded for specific purposes by specific segments of the genome.

Dr. Darnell carried the principles of his finding — which he made in ribosomal RNA, part of the construction crew that builds cellular proteins — to other long nuclear RNA, including the longest one, which he named heterogeneous nuclear RNA (hnRNA). His hypothesis, that hnRNA is the precursor of the better known messenger RNA — which carries the genetic blueprint for protein building — soon bore fruit when he found a structural correlation between the two. Certain hnRNAs and nearly all messenger RNAs have a “tail” of adenine nucleotides at one end. Dr. Darnell followed this discovery with the observation that when an hnRNA string with an adenine tail disappears from the nucleus, a messenger RNA with the same tail then appears in the cytoplasm, suggesting a causal link between the two. When he found a second similarity — a cap at the end of the string opposite the adenine tail — he faced a conundrum. Scientific dogma had it that the order of nucleotides in any RNA mirrors that of DNA, whether the RNA is modeled from somewhere in the middle of the DNA or from one of the ends. The matching of a nuclear RNA to its cytoplasmic product by two end pieces glued together was surprising, but the concept was soon proven by colleagues at other institutions and called RNA splicing.

After a brief sojourn in Paris to work in François Jacob’s lab, Darnell worked at MIT, the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and Rockefeller University on the relationship between mRNA and hnRNA. hnRNA was believed to be the precursor to mRNA, and despite making some key discoveries, Darnell admits that he could not free his imagination from the idea of colinearity and envision an hnRNA spliced to produce a smaller mRNA.

At this time, Darnell turned his attention to the question he had pondered since Paris: how were genes regulated in animal cells? This led to the discovery of the STAT and the Jak-STAT pathway of transcription control.

With the knowledge of RNA processing and splicing, Dr. Darnell next examined how cells begin the process of transcription and how they activate particular segments of DNA. Having moved to Rockefeller University in 1974, he found in the early 1980s that cells retain their specificity only in the context of their natural environment. Away from other liver cells, for example, a single liver cell stops producing liver-specific RNA, though it continues to make RNA for more generic cellular tasks. To pinpoint the signals responsible, which he believed must be coming from outside the cell, Dr. Darnell took a closer look at interferons (IFN), proteins that warn a cell when it’s time to raise its genetic defenses against harmful microbes.

Dr. Darnell’s laboratory studies how signals from the cell surface affect transcription of genes in the nucleus. Originally using interferon as a model cytokine, the Darnell group discovered that cell transcription was quickly changed by binding of cytokines to the cell surface. Introducing IFNβ into cell cultures, he watched as a particular type of mRNA accumulated in the cytoplasm, unaccompanied by any new protein synthesis. Analyzing the mRNA led him to the segment of DNA that had been activated, and the lack of new proteins told him that the cell contained its own, usually dormant, IFN-responsive transcription factor. By isolating a particular stretch of DNA from IFN-treated cells, he was able to call out of hiding the proteins that make up that factor, which, partly because they respond to signals very quickly, he called “STATs.” Dr. Darnell then traced the chemical relay that activates the STATs after IFN contact, called the Jak-Stat pathway.

The bound interferon led to the tyrosine phosphorylation of latent cytoplasmic proteins now called STATs (signal transducers and activators of transcription) that dimerize by reciprocal phosphotyrosine-SH2 interchange. They accumulate in the nucleus, bind DNA and drive transcription. This pathway has proved to be of wide importance, with seven STATs now known in mammals that take part in a wide variety of developmental and homeostatic events in all multicellular animals. Crystallographic analysis defined functional domains in the STATs, and current attention is focused on two areas: how the STATs complete their cycle of activation and inactivation, which requires regulated tyrosine dephosphorylation; and how persistent activation of STAT3 that occurs in a high proportion of many human cancers contributes to blocking apoptosis in cancer cells. Current efforts are devoted to inhibiting STAT3 with modified peptides that can enter cells.

 

Dr. Darnell received his M.D. in 1955 from the Washington University School of Medicine. His career has included poliovirus research with Harry Eagle at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, research with François Jacob at the Pasteur Institute in Paris and academic appointments at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Columbia University. In 1974 Dr. Darnell joined Rockefeller as Vincent Astor Professor, and from 1990 to 1991 he was vice president for academic affairs.

A member of the National Academy of Sciences since 1973, he has received numerous awards, including the 2012 Albany Medical Center Prize in Medicine and Biomedical Research, the 2003 National Medal of Science, the 2002 Albert Lasker Award for Special Achievement in Medical Science, the 1997 Passano Award, the 1994 Paul Janssen Prize in Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine and the 1986 Gairdner Foundation International Award.

He is the coauthor with S.E. Luria of General Virology and the founding author with Harvey Lodish and David Baltimore of Molecular Cell Biology, now in its seventh edition. His book RNA, Life’s Indispensable Molecule was published in July 2011 by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a foreign member of The Royal Society and The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.

 

Read Full Post »

CRISPR/Cas9 Finds Its Way As an Important Tool For Drug Discovery & Development

  UPDATED 6/11/2021

CRISPR Diagnostics: CRISPR-dx Comes of Age: Tool in Drug Development

The past five years has seen a rapid expansion of the ability of CRISPR based tools toward diagnostic testing. Recently, CRISPR has been used to detect SARS-CoV-2 in patients. An article in the journal Science describes the different classes of CRISPR diagnostics in use today .

Update near end of post

UPDATED 8/08/2020

Association to Causation: Using GWAS to Identify Druggable Targets

A Gen Webinar Thursday, August 6, 2020; 11:00am – 12:30pm EST

See at end of post

Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

 

2.1.2.1

CRISPR/Cas9 Finds Its Way As an Important Tool For Drug Discovery & Development, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 2: CRISPR for Gene Editing and DNA Repair

The RNA-guided Cas9 nuclease from the microbial clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) adaptive immune system can be used to facilitate efficient genome engineering in eukaryotic cells by simply specifying a 20-nt targeting sequence within its guide RNA.

CRISPR/Cas systems are part of the adaptive immune system of bacteria and archaea, protecting them against invading nucleic acids such as viruses by cleaving the foreign DNA in a sequence-dependent manner. Although CRISPR arrays were first identified in the Escherichia coli genome in 1987 (Ishino et al., 1987), their biological function was not understood until 2005, when it was shown that the spacers were homologous to viral and plasmid sequences suggesting a role in adaptive immunity (Bolotin et al., 2005; Mojica et al., 2005; Pourcel et al., 2005). Two years later, CRISPR arrays were confirmed to provide protection against invading viruses when combined with Cas genes (Barrangou et al., 2007). The mechanism of this immune system based on RNA-mediated DNA targeting was demonstrated shortly thereafter (Brouns et al., 2008; Deltcheva et al., 2011; Garneau et al., 2010; Marraffini and Sontheimer, 2008).

Jennifer Doudna, PhD Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology and Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute has recently received numerous awards and accolades for the discovery of CRISPR/Cas9 as a tool for mammalian genetic manipulation as well as her primary intended research target to understand bacterial resistance to viral infection.

A good post on the matter and Dr. Doudna can be seen below:

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2014/06/13/215-245-6132014-jennifer-doudna-the-biology-of-crisprs-from-genome-defense-to-genetic-engineering/

In Delineating a Role for CRISPR-Cas9 in Pharmaceutical Targeting inheritable metabolic disorders in which may benefit from a CRISPR-Cas9 mediated therapy is discussed. However this curation is meant to focus on CRISPR/CAS9 AS A TOOL IN PRECLINICAL DRUG DEVELOPMENT.

 

Three Areas of Importance of CRISPR/Cas9 as a TOOL in Preclinical Drug Discovery Include:

  1. Gene-Function Studies: CRISPR/CAS9 ability to DEFINE GENETIC LESION and INSERTION SITE
  2. CRISPR/CAS9 Use in Developing Models of Disease
  3. CRISPR/CAS9 Use as a Diagnostic Tool
  • Using CRISPR/Cas9 in PRECLINICAL TOXICOLOGY STUDIES

I.     Gene-Function Studies: CRISPR/CAS9 ability to DEFINE GENETIC LESION and INSERTION SITE

The advent of the first tools for manipulating genetic material (cloning, PCR, transgenic technology, and before microarray and other’omic methods) allowed scientists to probe novel, individual gene functions as well as their variants and mutants in a “one-gene-at-a time” process. In essence, a gene (or mutant gene) was sequenced, cloned into expression vectors and transfected into recipient cells where function was evaluated.

However, some of the experimental issues with this methodology involved

  • Most transfections experiments result in NON ISOGENIC cell lines – by definition the insertion of a transgene alters the genetic makeup of a cell line. Simple transfection experiments with one transgene compared to a “null” transfectant compares non-isogenic lines, possibly confusing the interpretation of gene-function studies. Therefore a common technique is to develop cell lines with inducible gene expression, thereby allowing the investigator to compare a gene’s effect in ISOGENIC cell lines.
  1. Use of CRSPR in Highthrough-put Screening of Genetic Function

A very nice presentation and summary of CRSPR’s use in determining gene function in a high-throughput manner can be found below

www.rna.uzh.ch/events/journalclub/20140429JCCaihong.pdf

  1. Determining Off-target Effects of Gene Therapy Simplified with CRSPR

In GUIDE-seq: First genome-wide method of detecting off-target DNA breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases (from This Journal’s series on Live Meeting Coverage) at a 2014 Koch lecture

Shengdar Q Tsai and J Keith Joung describe

an approach for global detection of DNA double-stranded breaks (DSBs) introduced by RGNs and potentially other nucleases. This method, called genome-wide, unbiased identification of DSBs enabled by sequencing (GUIDE-seq), relies on capture of double-stranded oligodeoxynucleotides into DSBs. Application of GUIDE-seq to 13 RGNs in two human cell lines revealed wide variability in RGN off-target activities and unappreciated characteristics of off-target sequences. The majority of identified sites were not detected by existing computational methods or chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq). GUIDE-seq also identified RGN-independent genomic breakpoint ‘hotspots’.

SOURCE http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nbt.3117.html

II. CRISPR/Cas9 Use in Developing Models of Disease

 

  1. Developing Animal Tumor Models

In a post this year I discussed a talk at the recent 2015 AACR National Meeting on a laboratories ability to use CRISPR gene editing in-vivo to produce a hepatocarcinoma using viral delivery. The post can be seen here: Notes from Opening Plenary Session – The Genome and Beyond from the 2015 AACR Meeting in Philadelphia PA; Sunday April 19, 2015

1) In this talk Dr. Tyler Jacks discussed his use of CRSPR to generate a mouse model of liver tumor in an immunocompetent mouse. Some notes from this talk are given below

  1. B) Engineering Cancer Genomes: Tyler Jacks, Ph.D.; Director, Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research
  • Cancer GEM’s (genetically engineered mouse models of cancer) had moved from transgenics to defined oncogenes
  • Observation that p53 -/- mice develop spontaneous tumors (lymphomas)
  • then GEMs moved to Cre/Lox systems to generate mice with deletions however these tumor models require lots of animals, much time to create, expensive to keep;
  • figured can use CRSPR/Cas9 as rapid, inexpensive way to generate engineered mice and tumor models
  • he used CRSPR/Cas9 vectors targeting PTEN to introduce PTEN mutations in-vivo to hepatocytes; when they also introduced p53 mutations produced hemangiosarcomas; took ONLY THREE months to produce detectable tumors
  • also produced liver tumors by using CRSPR/Cas9 to introduce gain of function mutation in β-catenin

See an article describing this study by MIT News “A New Way To Model Cancer: New gene-editing technique allows scientists to more rapidly study the role of mutations in tumor development.”

The original research article can be found in the August 6, 2014 issue of Nature[1]

And see also on the Jacks Lab site under Research

2)     In the Upcoming Meeting New Frontiers in Gene Editing multiple uses of CRISPR technology is discussed in relation to gene knockout/function studies, tumor model development and

New Frontiers in Gene Editing

Session Spotlight:
BUILDING IN VIVO MODELS FOR DRUG DISCOVERY

Genome Editing Animal Models in Drug Discovery
Myung Shin, Ph.D., Senior Principal Scientist, Biology-Discovery, Genetics and Pharmacogenomics, Merck Research Laboratories

Recent advances in genome editing have greatly accelerated and expanded the ability to generate animal models. These tools allow generating mouse models in condensed timeline compared to that of conventional gene-targeting knock-out/knock-in strategies. Moreover, the genome editing methods have expanded the ability to generate animal models beyond mice. In this talk, we will discuss the application of ZFN and CRISPR to generate various animal models for drug discovery programs.

In vivo Cancer Modeling and Genetic Screening Using CRISPR/Cas9
Sidi Chen, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Laboratories of Dr. Phillip A. Sharp and Dr. Feng Zhang, Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT and Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT

Here we describe a genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9-mediated loss-of-function screen in tumor growth and metastasis. We mutagenized a non-metastatic mouse cancer cell line using a genome-scale library. The mutant cell pool rapidly generates metastases when transplanted into immunocompromised mice. Enriched sgRNAs in lung metastases and late stage primary tumors were found to target a small set of genes, suggesting specific loss-of-function mutations drive tumor growth and metastasis.

FEATURED PRESENTATION: In vivo Chromosome Engineering Using CRISPR-Cas9
Andrea Ventura, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Member, Cancer Biology and Genetics Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

We will discuss our experience using somatic genome editing to engineer oncogenic chromosomal rearrangements in vivo. More specifically, we will present the results of our ongoing efforts aimed at modeling cancers driven by chromosomal rearrangements using viral mediated delivery of Crispr-Cas9 to adult animals.

RNAi and CRISPR/Cas9-Based in vivo Models for Drug Discovery
Christof Fellmann, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Laboratory of Dr. Jennifer Doudna, Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of California, Berkeley

Genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs) are a powerful tool to study disease initiation, treatment response and relapse. By combining CRISPR/Cas9 and “Sensor” validated, tetracycline-regulated “miR-E” shRNA technology, we have developed a fast and scalable platform to generate RNAi GEMMs with reversible gene silencing capability. The synergy of CRISPR/Cas9 and RNAi enabled us to not only model disease pathogenesis, but also mimic drug therapy in mice, providing us capability to perform preclinical studies in vivo.

In vivo Genome Editing Using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9
Fei Ann Ran, Ph.D., Post-doctoral Fellow, Laboratory of Dr. Feng Zhang, Broad Institute and Junior Fellow, Harvard Society of Fellows

The RNA-guided Cas9 nuclease from the bacterial CRISPR/Cas system has been adapted as a powerful tool for facilitating targeted genome editing in eukaryotes. Recently, we have identified an additional small Cas9 nuclease from Staphylococcus aureus that can be packaged with its guide RNA into a single adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector for in vivo applications. We demonstrate the use of this system for effective gene modification in adult animals and further expand the Cas9 toolbox for in vivo genome editing.

OriGene, Making the Right Tools for CRISPR Research
Xuan Liu, Ph.D., Senior Director, Marketing, OriGene

CRISPR technology has quickly revolutionized the scientific community. Its simplicity has democratized the genome editing technology and enabled every lab to consider its utility in gene function research. As the largest tool box for gene functional research, OriGene created a large collection of CRISPR-related tools, including various all-in-one vectors for gRNA cloning, donor vector backbones, genome-wide knockout kits, AAVS1 insertion vectors, etc. OriGene’s high quality products will accelerate CRISPR research.

  1. Transgenic Animals : Custom Mouse and Rat Model Generation Service Using CRISPR/Cas9 by AppliedStem Cell Inc. (http://www.appliedstemcell.com/)

A critical component of producing transgenic animals is the ability of each successive generations to pass on the transgene. In her post on this site, A NEW ERA OF GENETIC MANIPULATION  Dr. Demet Sag discusses the molecular biology of Cas9 systems and their efficiency to cause point mutations which can be passed on to subsequent generations

This group developed a new technology for editing genes that can be transferable change to the next generation by combining microbial immune defense mechanism, CRISPR/Cas9 that is the latest ground breaking technology for translational genomics with gene therapy-like approach.

  • In short, this so-called “mutagenic chain reaction” (MCR) introduces a recessive mutation defined by CRISPR/Cas9 that lead into a high rate of transferable information to the next generation. They reported that when they crossed the female MCR offspring to wild type flies, the yellow phenotype observed more than 95 percent efficiency.

The advantage of CRISPR/Cas9 over ZFNs or TALENs is its scalability and multiplexibility in that multiple sites within the mammalian genome can be simultaneously modified, providing a robust, high-throughput approach for gene editing in mammalian cells.

Applied StemCell, Inc. offers various services related to animal models including conventional transgenic rats, and phenotype analysis using knock-in, knock-out strategies.

Further explanation of their use of CRSPR can be found at the site below:

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2014/10/29/gene-editing-at-crispr-speed-services-and-tools/

In addition, ReproCELL Inc., a Tokyo based stem cell company, uses CRSPR to develop

· Tailored disease model cells (hiPSC-Disease Model Cells)

  • 2 types of services
  • ReproUNUS™-g:human iPS cell derived functional cells involving gene editing by CRISPR/Cas9 system
  • eproUNUS™-p:patient derived iPS cell derived functional cells

III. Using CRISPR/Cas9 in PRECLINICAL TOXICOLOGY STUDIES

As of now it is unclear as to the strategy of pharma in how to use this technology for toxicology testing however a few companies have licensed the technology to use across their R&D platforms including

A recent paper used a sister technique TALEN to generate knock-in pigs which suggest that it would be possible to generate pigs with human transgenes, especially in human liver isozymes in orer to study hepatotoxicity of drugs.

Efficient bi-allelic gene knockout and site-specific knock-in mediated by TALENs in pigs

Jing Yao, Jiaojiao Huang, Tang Hai, Xianlong Wang, Guosong Qin, Hongyong Zhang, Rong Wu, Chunwei Cao, Jianzhong Jeff Xi, Zengqiang Yuan, Jianguo Zhao

Sci Rep. 2014; 4: 6926. Published online 2014 November 5. doi: 10.1038/srep06926

UPDATED 8/08/2020

Association to Causation: Using GWAS to Identify Druggable Targets

A Gen Webinar Thursday, August 611:00am – 12:30pm

This webinar is available at https://www.genengnews.com/resources/webinars/association-to-causation-using-gwas-to-identify-druggable-target/

Speakers:

Martin Kampmann, PhD

matinkampmann ucsf

Associate Professor
UCSF
Investigator
Chan Zuckerberg Biohub

Kevin Holden, PhD

kevinholdn sythego

Head of Science
Synthego

Abhi Saharia, PhD

abhisharia sythego

VP, Commercial Development
Synthego

Human genetics provides perhaps the single best opportunity to innovate and improve clinical success rates, through the identification of novel drug targets for complex disease. Even as correlation identifies multiple genetic variants associated with disease, it is challenging to conduct requisite functional studies to identify the causal variants, especially since most association signals map to non-coding regions of the genome.

Genetic editing technologies, such as CRISPR, have enabled the modeling of associated variants at their native loci, including non-coding loci, empowering the identification of underlying biological mechanisms of disease with potential causal genes. However, genome editing is largely manual today severely limiting scale, and forcing the use of rational filters to prioritize which variants to investigate functionally.

In this GEN webinar, we will discuss several strategies enabling large-scale functional investigation of disease-associated variants in a cost- and time-effective manner, including different types of pooled CRISPR-based screens and the development of a fully automated genome engineering platform. We will also review how optimization of genome engineering on this platform enables the engineering of disease-associated variants at scale in pluripotent cells.

  • They will be presenting on use of wide scale CRSPR screens to validate druggable targets
  • The presenters will also discuss new platforms for these wide scale screens

Martin Kampmann, PhD UCSF

  • Multiple genetic variants associated with disease
  • Big gap between accumulation of genetic variant information and functions of these variants
  • CRSPRi or CRSPa (siRNA coupled or enhancer coupled CRSPR guides)
  • Arrayed screens: multiplate guide RNAs and phenotype measured (phenotype can be morphology, complex biological systems like organoids or non autonomous functions
  • Using pooled screens and use of suitable cell model critical for this strategy
  • For example in iPSC vs. neurons has different expression patterns upon same CRSPR of UBA1
  • Advantage is using CRSPR to take iPSC from diseased variant patient to make a corrected isogenic control then introduce gRNAs and use modifier screens to determine phenotypes
  • Generated a platform called CRISPRbrain.org to do bioinformatics on various experiments with different guide RNAs (CRSPRs)

Abhi Saharia, PhD Syntheco

  • Target identification with CSRSPR at Scale
  • Nature medicine paper did GWAS and found 27 SNV associated with high risk disease and a rational filter focused on 1 SNV in noncoding region but why study a single variant and if studied all 27 would they have been able to identify a more representative druggable set?
  • Goal is to reduce or eliminate these rational filters
  • HALO (scalable RNA guide), ECLIPSE platform (automated generation of modified cell lines, BIOINFORMATIC platform (integrated informatics)
  • Syntheco uses an electroporation with ribonucleic proteins (RNP) to give highest efficiency and minimizes off target as complex is only in cells for a short period of time
  • They confirm they are doing single cell cloning by using automated microscopy to confirm single cell growth in each cloning well

Kevin Holden, Head of Science at Syntheco

  • Engineering iPSc genetically modified cells at scale
  • The closer you get to your target site the more efficient your CRSPR so a big factor when making guides, especially for knock-in CRSPR
  • Adding a small molecule non homologous end joining inhibitor increases efficiency to 95%
  • Cold shocking the cells also assists in homologous repair
  • Use cleavage resistant templates

III. CRISPR/CAS9 AS A DIAGNOSTIC TOOL

     In the journal Science, Omar Abudayyeh and Jonathan Gootenberg discuss how CRISPR-based diagnostic (CRISPR-dx) tools offer a solution, and multiple CRISPR-dx products for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome have been authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  In addition they discuss the work by Jiao et al. in combining this technique to develop a rapid and sensitive SARS-CoV2 diagnostic test.

Omar O. AbudayyehJonathan S. Gootenberg. Science  28 May 2021: CRISPR Diagnostics
Vol. 372, Issue 6545, pp. 914-915; DOI: 10.1126/science.abi9335

Summary

Although clinical diagnostics take many forms, nucleic acid–based testing has become the gold standard for sensitive detection of many diseases, including pathogenic infections. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) has been widely adopted for its ability to detect only a few DNA or RNA molecules that can unambiguously specify a particular disease. However, the complexity of this technique restricts application to laboratory settings. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has underscored the need for the development and deployment of nucleic acid tests that are economical, easily scaled, and capable of being run in low-resource settings, without sacrifices in speed, sensitivity or specificity. CRISPR-based diagnostic (CRISPR-dx) tools offer a solution, and multiple CRISPR-dx products for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome have been authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On page 941 of this issue, Jiao et al. (1) describe a new CRISPR-based tool to distinguish several SARS-CoV-2 variants in a single reaction.

Although clinical diagnostics take many forms, nucleic acid–based testing has become the gold standard for sensitive detection of many diseases, including pathogenic infections. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) has been widely adopted for its ability to detect only a few DNA or RNA molecules that can unambiguously specify a particular disease. However, the complexity of this technique restricts application to laboratory settings. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has underscored the need for the development and deployment of nucleic acid tests that are economical, easily scaled, and capable of being run in low-resource settings, without sacrifices in speed, sensitivity or specificity. CRISPR-based diagnostic (CRISPR-dx) tools offer a solution, and multiple CRISPR-dx products for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome have been authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On page 941 of this issue, Jiao et al. (1) describe a new CRISPR-based tool to distinguish several SARS-CoV-2 variants in a single reaction.

There are multiple types of CRISPR systems comprising basic components of a single protein or protein complex, which cuts a specific DNA or RNA target programmed by a complementary guide sequence in a CRISPR-associated RNA (crRNA). The type V and VI systems and the CRISPR-associated endonucleases Cas12 (23) and Cas13 (45) bind and cut DNA or RNA, respectively. Furthermore, upon recognizing a target DNA or RNA sequence, Cas12 and Cas13 proteins exhibit “collateral activity” whereby any DNA or RNA, respectively, in the sample is cleaved regardless of its nucleic acid sequence (46). Thus, reporter DNAs or RNAs, which allow for visual or fluorescent detection upon cleavage, can be added to a sample to infer the presence or absence of specific DNA or RNA species (48).

Initial versions of CRISPR-dx utilizing Cas13 alone were sensitive to the low picomolar range, corresponding to a limit of detection of millions of molecules in a microliter sample. To improve sensitivity, preamplification methods, such as recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA), PCR, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), or nucleic acid sequence–based amplification (NASBA), can be used with Cas12 or Cas13 to enable a limit of detection down to a single molecule (8). This preamplification approach, applicable to both Cas12 and Cas13 (67), enabled a suite of detection methods and multiplexing up to four orthogonal targets (7). Additional developments expanded CRISPR-dx readouts beyond fluorescence, including lateral flow (7), colorimetric (9), and electronic or material responsive readouts (10), allowing for instrument-free approaches. In addition, post–collateral-cleavage amplification methods, such as the use of the CRISPR-associated enzyme Csm6, have been combined with Cas13 to further increase the speed of CRISPR-dx tests (7). As an alternative to collateral-cleavage–based detection, type III CRISPR systems, which involve large multiprotein complexes capable of targeting both DNA and RNA, have been used for SARS-CoV-2 detection through production of colorimetric or fluorometric readouts (11).

FDA-authorized CRISPR-dx tests are currently only for use in centralized labs, because the most common CRISPR detection protocols require fluid handling steps and two different incubations, precluding their immediate use at the point of care. Single-step formulations have been developed to overcome this limitation, and these “one-pot” versions of CRISPR-dx are simple to run, operate at a single temperature, and run without complex equipment, producing either fluorescence or lateral flow readouts. The programmability of CRISPR makes new diagnostic tests easier to develop, and within months of the release of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, many COVID-19–specific CRISPR tests were reported and distributed around the world.

The broader capability for Cas enzyme–enhanced nucleic acid binding or cleavage has led to several other detection modalities. Cas9-based methods for cleaving nucleic acids in solution for diagnostic purposes have been combined with other detection platforms, such as destruction of undesired amplicons for preparation of next-generation sequencing libraries (12), or selective removal of alleles for nucleotide-specific detection (13). Alternatively, the programmable cleavage event from the Cas nuclease can be used to initiate an amplification reaction (14). Cas9-based DNA targeting has also been used for nucleotide detection in combination with solid-state electronics, promising an amplification-free platform for detection. In this platform, called CRISPR-Chip, the Cas9 protein binds nucleotide targets of interest (often in the context of the native genome) to graphene transistors, where the presence of these targets alters either current or voltage (15). By utilizing additional Cas9 orthologs and specific guide designs, CRISPR-Chip approaches have been tuned for single–base-pair sensitivity (15). Because they are integrated with electronic readers, CRISPR-Chip platforms may allow facile point-of-care detection with handheld devices.

 

Different classes of CRISPR diagnostics. GRAPHIC: ERIN DANIEL


Jiao et al. use a distinct characteristic of type II CRISPR systems, which involve Cas9, to develop a new type of noncollateral based CRISPR detection. Unlike Cas12s and Cas13, Cas9-crRNA complex formation requires an additional RNA known as the trans-activating CRISPR RNA (tracrRNA). By sequencing RNAs bound to Cas9 from Campylobacter jejuni in its natural host, the authors identified unexpected crRNAs, called noncanonical crRNA (ncrRNA), that corresponded to endogenous transcripts. Upon investigation of this surprising observation, it became clear that the tracrRNA was capable of hybridizing to semi-complementary sequences from a variety of RNA sources, leading to biogenesis of ncrRNAs of various sizes. Recognizing that they could program tracrRNAs to target a transcript of interest, the authors generated a reprogrammed tracrRNA (Rptr) that could bind and cleave a desired transcript, converting a piece of that transcript into a functional guide RNA. By then creating fluorescent DNA sensors that would be cleaved by the Rptr and ncrRNAs, the sensing of RNA by Cas9 could be linked to a detectable readout. This platform, called LEOPARD (leveraging engineered tracrRNAs and on-target DNAs for parallel RNA detection), can be combined with gel-based readouts and enables multiplexed detection of several different sequences in a single reaction (see the figure).

Jiao et al. also combined LEOPARD with PCR in a multistep workflow to detect SARS-CoV-2 genomes from patients with COVID-19. Although more work is needed to integrate this Cas9-based detection modality into a single step with RPA or LAMP to create a portable and sensitive isothermal test, an advantage of this approach is the higher-order multiplexing that can be achieved, allowing multiple pathogens, diseases, or variants to be detected simultaneously. More work is also needed to combine this technology with extraction-free methods for better ease of use; alternative readouts to gel-based readouts, such as lateral flow and colorimetric readouts, would be beneficial for point-of-care detection.

In just 5 years, the CRISPR-dx field has rapidly expanded, growing from a set of peculiar molecular biology discoveries to multiple FDA-authorized COVID-19 tests and spanning four of the six major subtypes of CRISPR systems. Despite the tremendous promise of CRISPR-dx, substantial challenges remain to adapting these technologies for point-of-care and at-home settings. Simplification of the chemistries to operate as a single reaction in a matter of minutes would be revolutionary, especially if the reaction could be run at room temperature without any complex or expensive equipment. These improvements to CRISPR-dx assays can be achieved by identification or engineering of additional Cas enzymes with lower-temperature requirements, higher sensitivity, or faster kinetics, enabling rapid and simple amplification-free detection with single-molecule sensitivity.

Often overlooked is the necessity for a sample DNA or RNA preparation step that is simple enough to be added directly to the CRISPR reaction to maintain a simple workflow for point-of-care testing. In addition, higher-order multiplexing developments would allow for expansive testing menus and approach the possibility of testing for all known diseases. As these advancements are realized, innovative uses of CRISPR-dx will continue in areas such as surveillance, integration with biomaterials, and environmental monitoring. In future years, CRISPR-dx assays may become universal in the clinic and at home, reshaping how diseases are diagnosed.

References and Notes

Other related articles on CRISPR/Cas9 were published in this Open Access Online Scientific Journal, include the following:

Search Results for ‘CRISPR’

Where is the most promising avenue to success in Pharmaceuticals with CRISPR-Cas9?

CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing tool for Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 complex (SaCas9) @ MIT’s Broad Institute

Delineating a Role for CRISPR-Cas9 in Pharmaceutical Targeting

Using CRISPR to investigate pancreatic cancer

Simple technology makes CRISPR gene editing cheaper

RNAi, CRISPR, and Gene Editing: Discussions on How To’s and Best Practices @14th Annual World Preclinical Congress June 10-12, 2015 | Westin Boston Waterfront | Boston, MA

CRISPR/Cas9: Contributions on Endoribonuclease Structure and Function, Role in Immunity and Applications in Genome Engineering

CRISPR-CAS editing brings cloning of woolly mammoth one step closer to reality

GUIDE-seq: First genome-wide method of detecting off-target DNA breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases

The Patents for CRISPR, the DNA editing technology as the Biggest Biotech Discovery of the Century

CRISPR: Applications for Autoimmune Diseases @UCSF

Read Full Post »

Metabolic Genomics and Pharmaceutics, Vol. 1 of BioMed Series D available on Amazon Kindle

Metabolic Genomics and Pharmaceutics, Vol. 1 of BioMed Series D available on Amazon Kindle

Reporter: Stephen S Williams, PhD

Article ID #180: Metabolic Genomics and Pharmaceutics, Vol. 1 of BioMed Series D available on Amazon Kindle. Published on 8/15/2015

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence would like to announce the First volume of their BioMedical E-Book Series D:

Metabolic Genomics & Pharmaceutics, Vol. I

SACHS FLYER 2014 Metabolomics SeriesDindividualred-page2

which is now available on Amazon Kindle at

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B012BB0ZF0.

This e-Book is a comprehensive review of recent Original Research on  METABOLOMICS and related opportunities for Targeted Therapy written by Experts, Authors, Writers. This is the first volume of the Series D: e-Books on BioMedicine – Metabolomics, Immunology, Infectious Diseases.  It is written for comprehension at the third year medical student level, or as a reference for licensing board exams, but it is also written for the education of a first time baccalaureate degree reader in the biological sciences.  Hopefully, it can be read with great interest by the undergraduate student who is undecided in the choice of a career. The results of Original Research are gaining value added for the e-Reader by the Methodology of Curation. The e-Book’s articles have been published on the Open Access Online Scientific Journal, since April 2012.  All new articles on this subject, will continue to be incorporated, as published with periodical updates.

We invite e-Readers to write an Article Reviews on Amazon for this e-Book on Amazon.

All forthcoming BioMed e-Book Titles can be viewed at:

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/biomed-e-books/

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence, launched in April 2012 an Open Access Online Scientific Journal is a scientific, medical and business multi expert authoring environment in several domains of  life sciences, pharmaceutical, healthcare & medicine industries. The venture operates as an online scientific intellectual exchange at their website http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com and for curation and reporting on frontiers in biomedical, biological sciences, healthcare economics, pharmacology, pharmaceuticals & medicine. In addition the venture publishes a Medical E-book Series available on Amazon’s Kindle platform.

Analyzing and sharing the vast and rapidly expanding volume of scientific knowledge has never been so crucial to innovation in the medical field. WE are addressing need of overcoming this scientific information overload by:

  • delivering curation and summary interpretations of latest findings and innovations on an open-access, Web 2.0 platform with future goals of providing primarily concept-driven search in the near future
  • providing a social platform for scientists and clinicians to enter into discussion using social media
  • compiling recent discoveries and issues in yearly-updated Medical E-book Series on Amazon’s mobile Kindle platform

This curation offers better organization and visibility to the critical information useful for the next innovations in academic, clinical, and industrial research by providing these hybrid networks.

Table of Contents for Metabolic Genomics & Pharmaceutics, Vol. I

Chapter 1: Metabolic Pathways

Chapter 2: Lipid Metabolism

Chapter 3: Cell Signaling

Chapter 4: Protein Synthesis and Degradation

Chapter 5: Sub-cellular Structure

Chapter 6: Proteomics

Chapter 7: Metabolomics

Chapter 8:  Impairments in Pathological States: Endocrine Disorders; Stress

                   Hypermetabolism and Cancer

Chapter 9: Genomic Expression in Health and Disease 

 

Summary 

Epilogue

 

 

Read Full Post »

Treatment of Lymphomas [2.4.4C]

Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Author, Curator, Editor

http://pharmaceuticalinnovation.com/2015/8/11/larryhbern/Treatment-of-Lymphomas-[2.4.4C]

 

Lymphoma treatment

Overview

http://www.emedicinehealth.com/lymphoma/page8_em.htm#lymphoma_treatment

The most widely used therapies are combinations of chemotherapyand radiation therapy.

  • Biological therapy, which targets key features of the lymphoma cells, is used in many cases nowadays.

The goal of medical therapy in lymphoma is complete remission. This means that all signs of the disease have disappeared after treatment. Remission is not the same as cure. In remission, one may still have lymphoma cells in the body, but they are undetectable and cause no symptoms.

  • When in remission, the lymphoma may come back. This is called recurrence.
  • The duration of remission depends on the type, stage, and grade of the lymphoma. A remission may last a few months, a few years, or may continue throughout one’s life.
  • Remission that lasts a long time is called durable remission, and this is the goal of therapy.
  • The duration of remission is a good indicator of the aggressiveness of the lymphoma and of the prognosis. A longer remission generally indicates a better prognosis.

Remission can also be partial. This means that the tumor shrinks after treatment to less than half its size before treatment.

The following terms are used to describe the lymphoma’s response to treatment:

  • Improvement: The lymphoma shrinks but is still greater than half its original size.
  • Stable disease: The lymphoma stays the same.
  • Progression: The lymphoma worsens during treatment.
  • Refractory disease: The lymphoma is resistant to treatment.

The following terms to refer to therapy:

  • Induction therapy is designed to induce a remission.
  • If this treatment does not induce a complete remission, new or different therapy will be initiated. This is usually referred to as salvage therapy.
  • Once in remission, one may be given yet another treatment to prevent recurrence. This is called maintenance therapy.

Chemotherapy

Many different types of chemotherapy may be used for Hodgkin lymphoma. The most commonly used combination of drugs in the United States is called ABVD. Another combination of drugs, known as BEACOPP, is now widely used in Europe and is being used more often in the United States. There are other combinations that are less commonly used and not listed here. The drugs that make up these two more common combinations of chemotherapy are listed below.

ABVD: Doxorubicin (Adriamycin), bleomycin (Blenoxane), vinblastine (Velban, Velsar), and dacarbazine (DTIC-Dome). ABVD chemotherapy is usually given every two weeks for two to eight months.

BEACOPP: Bleomycin, etoposide (Toposar, VePesid), doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan, Neosar), vincristine (Vincasar PFS, Oncovin), procarbazine (Matulane), and prednisone (multiple brand names). There are several different treatment schedules, but different drugs are usually given every two weeks.

The type of chemotherapy, number of cycles of chemotherapy, and the additional use of radiation therapy are based on the stage of the Hodgkin lymphoma and the type and number of prognostic factors.

Adult Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Treatment (PDQ®)

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/adult-non-hodgkins/Patient/page1

Key Points for This Section

Adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma is a disease in which malignant (cancer) cells form in the lymph system.

Because lymph tissue is found throughout the body, adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma can begin in almost any part of the body. Cancer can spread to the liver and many other organs and tissues.

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma in pregnant women is the same as the disease in nonpregnant women of childbearing age. However, treatment is different for pregnant women. This summary includes information on the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma during pregnancy

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma can occur in both adults and children. Treatment for children, however, is different than treatment for adults. (See the PDQ summary on Childhood Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Treatment for more information.)

There are many different types of lymphoma.

Lymphomas are divided into two general types: Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This summary is about the treatment of adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma. For information about other types of lymphoma, see the following PDQ summaries:

Age, gender, and a weakened immune system can affect the risk of adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

If cancer is found, the following tests may be done to study the cancer cells:

  • Immunohistochemistry : A test that uses antibodies to check for certain antigens in a sample of tissue. The antibody is usually linked to a radioactive substance or a dye that causes the tissue to light up under a microscope. This type of test may be used to tell the difference between different types of cancer.
  • Cytogenetic analysis : A laboratory test in which cells in a sample of tissue are viewed under a microscope to look for certain changes in the chromosomes.
  • Immunophenotyping : A process used to identify cells, based on the types of antigens ormarkers on the surface of the cell. This process is used to diagnose specific types of leukemia and lymphoma by comparing the cancer cells to normal cells of the immune system.

Certain factors affect prognosis (chance of recovery) and treatment options.

The prognosis (chance of recovery) and treatment options depend on the following:

  • The stage of the cancer.
  • The type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
  • The amount of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in the blood.
  • The amount of beta-2-microglobulin in the blood (for Waldenström macroglobulinemia).
  • The patient’s age and general health.
  • Whether the lymphoma has just been diagnosed or has recurred (come back).

Stages of adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma may include E and S.

Adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma may be described as follows:

E: “E” stands for extranodal and means the cancer is found in an area or organ other than the lymph nodes or has spread to tissues beyond, but near, the major lymphatic areas.

S: “S” stands for spleen and means the cancer is found in the spleen.

Stage I adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma is divided into stage I and stage IE.

  • Stage I: Cancer is found in one lymphatic area (lymph node group, tonsils and nearby tissue, thymus, or spleen).
  • Stage IE: Cancer is found in one organ or area outside the lymph nodes.

Stage II adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma is divided into stage II and stage IIE.

  • Stage II: Cancer is found in two or more lymph node groups either above or below the diaphragm (the thin muscle below the lungs that helps breathing and separates the chest from the abdomen).
  • Stage IIE: Cancer is found in one or more lymph node groups either above or below the diaphragm. Cancer is also found outside the lymph nodes in one organ or area on the same side of the diaphragm as the affected lymph nodes.

Stage III adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma is divided into stage III, stage IIIE, stage IIIS, and stage IIIE+S.

  • Stage III: Cancer is found in lymph node groups above and below the diaphragm (the thin muscle below the lungs that helps breathing and separates the chest from the abdomen).
  • Stage IIIE: Cancer is found in lymph node groups above and below the diaphragm and outside the lymph nodes in a nearby organ or area.
  • Stage IIIS: Cancer is found in lymph node groups above and below the diaphragm, and in the spleen.
  • Stage IIIE+S: Cancer is found in lymph node groups above and below the diaphragm, outside the lymph nodes in a nearby organ or area, and in the spleen.

In stage IV adult non-Hodgkin lymphoma, the cancer:

  • is found throughout one or more organs that are not part of a lymphatic area (lymph node group, tonsils and nearby tissue, thymus, or spleen), and may be in lymph nodes near those organs; or
  • is found in one organ that is not part of a lymphatic area and has spread to organs or lymph nodes far away from that organ; or
  • is found in the liver, bone marrow, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), or lungs (other than cancer that has spread to the lungs from nearby areas).

Adult non-Hodgkin lymphomas are also described based on how fast they grow and where the affected lymph nodes are in the body.  Indolent & aggressive.

The treatment plan depends mainly on the following:

  • The type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
  • Its stage (where the lymphoma is found)
  • How quickly the cancer is growing
  • The patient’s age
  • Whether the patient has other health problems
  • If there are symptoms present such as fever and night sweats (see above)

Read Full Post »

Treatment for Chronic Leukemias [2.4.4B]

Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Author, Curator, Editor

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2015/8/11/larryhbern/Treatment-for-Chronic-Leukemias-[2.4.4B]

2.4.4B1 Treatment for CML

Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Treatment (PDQ®)

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/CML/Patient/page4

Treatment Option Overview

Key Points for This Section

There are different types of treatment for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia.

Six types of standard treatment are used:

  1. Targeted therapy
  2. Chemotherapy
  3. Biologic therapy
  4. High-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant
  5. Donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI)
  6. Surgery

New types of treatment are being tested in clinical trials.

Patients may want to think about taking part in a clinical trial.

Patients can enter clinical trials before, during, or after starting their cancer treatment.

Follow-up tests may be needed.

There are different types of treatment for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia.

Different types of treatment are available for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). Some treatments are standard (the currently used treatment), and some are being tested in clinical trials. A treatment clinical trial is a research study meant to help improve current treatments or obtain information about new treatments for patients with cancer. When clinical trials show that a new treatment is better than the standard treatment, the new treatment may become the standard treatment. Patients may want to think about taking part in a clinical trial. Some clinical trials are open only to patients who have not started treatment.

Six types of standard treatment are used:

Targeted therapy

Targeted therapy is a type of treatment that uses drugs or other substances to identify and attack specific cancer cells without harming normal cells. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors are targeted therapy drugs used to treat chronic myelogenous leukemia.

Imatinib mesylate, nilotinib, dasatinib, and ponatinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitors that are used to treat CML.

See Drugs Approved for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia for more information.

Chemotherapy

Chemotherapy is a cancer treatment that uses drugs to stop the growth of cancer cells, either by killing the cells or by stopping them from dividing. When chemotherapy is taken by mouth or injected into a vein or muscle, the drugs enter the bloodstream and can reach cancer cells throughout the body (systemic chemotherapy). When chemotherapy is placed directly into the cerebrospinal fluid, an organ, or a body cavity such as the abdomen, the drugs mainly affect cancer cells in those areas (regional chemotherapy). The way the chemotherapy is given depends on the type and stage of the cancer being treated.

See Drugs Approved for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia for more information.

Biologic therapy

Biologic therapy is a treatment that uses the patient’s immune system to fight cancer. Substances made by the body or made in a laboratory are used to boost, direct, or restore the body’s natural defenses against cancer. This type of cancer treatment is also called biotherapy or immunotherapy.

See Drugs Approved for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia for more information.

High-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant

High-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant is a method of giving high doses of chemotherapy and replacing blood-forming cells destroyed by the cancer treatment. Stem cells (immature blood cells) are removed from the blood or bone marrow of the patient or a donor and are frozen and stored. After the chemotherapy is completed, the stored stem cells are thawed and given back to the patient through an infusion. These reinfused stem cells grow into (and restore) the body’s blood cells.

See Drugs Approved for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia for more information.

Donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI)

Donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) is a cancer treatment that may be used after stem cell transplant.Lymphocytes (a type of white blood cell) from the stem cell transplant donor are removed from the donor’s blood and may be frozen for storage. The donor’s lymphocytes are thawed if they were frozen and then given to the patient through one or more infusions. The lymphocytes see the patient’s cancer cells as not belonging to the body and attack them.

Surgery

Splenectomy

What`s new in chronic myeloid leukemia research and treatment?

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/leukemia-chronicmyeloidcml/detailedguide/leukemia-chronic-myeloid-myelogenous-new-research

Combining the targeted drugs with other treatments

Imatinib and other drugs that target the BCR-ABL protein have proven to be very effective, but by themselves these drugs don’t help everyone. Studies are now in progress to see if combining these drugs with other treatments, such as chemotherapy, interferon, or cancer vaccines (see below) might be better than either one alone. One study showed that giving interferon with imatinib worked better than giving imatinib alone. The 2 drugs together had more side effects, though. It is also not clear if this combination is better than treatment with other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as dasatinib and nilotinib. A study going on now is looking at combing interferon with nilotinib.

Other studies are looking at combining other drugs, such as cyclosporine or hydroxychloroquine, with a TKI.

New drugs for CML

Because researchers now know the main cause of CML (the BCR-ABL gene and its protein), they have been able to develop many new drugs that might work against it.

In some cases, CML cells develop a change in the BCR-ABL oncogene known as a T315I mutation, which makes them resistant to many of the current targeted therapies (imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib). Ponatinib is the only TKI that can work against T315I mutant cells. More drugs aimed at this mutation are now being tested.

Other drugs called farnesyl transferase inhibitors, such as lonafarnib and tipifarnib, seem to have some activity against CML and patients may respond when these drugs are combined with imatinib. These drugs are being studied further.

Other drugs being studied in CML include the histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat and the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib (Velcade).

Several vaccines are now being studied for use against CML.

2.4.4.B2 Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Treatment (PDQ®)

General Information About Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Key Points for This Section

  1. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia is a type of cancer in which the bone marrow makes too many lymphocytes (a type of white blood cell).
  2. Leukemia may affect red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets.
  3. Older age can affect the risk of developing chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
  4. Signs and symptoms of chronic lymphocytic leukemia include swollen lymph nodes and tiredness.
  5. Tests that examine the blood, bone marrow, and lymph nodes are used to detect (find) and diagnose chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
  6. Certain factors affect treatment options and prognosis (chance of recovery).
  7. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia is a type of cancer in which the bone marrow makes too many lymphocytes (a type of white blood cell).

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (also called CLL) is a blood and bone marrow disease that usually gets worse slowly. CLL is one of the most common types of leukemia in adults. It often occurs during or after middle age; it rarely occurs in children.

http://www.cancer.gov/images/cdr/live/CDR755927-750.jpg

Anatomy of the bone; drawing shows spongy bone, red marrow, and yellow marrow. A cross section of the bone shows compact bone and blood vessels in the bone marrow. Also shown are red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and a blood stem cell.

Anatomy of the bone. The bone is made up of compact bone, spongy bone, and bone marrow. Compact bone makes up the outer layer of the bone. Spongy bone is found mostly at the ends of bones and contains red marrow. Bone marrow is found in the center of most bones and has many blood vessels. There are two types of bone marrow: red and yellow. Red marrow contains blood stem cells that can become red blood cells, white blood cells, or platelets. Yellow marrow is made mostly of fat.

Leukemia may affect red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets.

Normally, the body makes blood stem cells (immature cells) that become mature blood cells over time. A blood stem cell may become a myeloid stem cell or a lymphoid stem cell.

A myeloid stem cell becomes one of three types of mature blood cells:

  1. Red blood cells that carry oxygen and other substances to all tissues of the body.
  2. White blood cells that fight infection and disease.
  3. Platelets that form blood clots to stop bleeding.

A lymphoid stem cell becomes a lymphoblast cell and then one of three types of lymphocytes (white blood cells):

  1. B lymphocytes that make antibodies to help fight infection.
  2. T lymphocytes that help B lymphocytes make antibodies to fight infection.
  3. Natural killer cells that attack cancer cells and viruses.

Blood cell development. CDR526538-750

Blood cell development. CDR526538-750

http://www.cancer.gov/images/cdr/live/CDR526538-750.jpg

Blood cell development; drawing shows the steps a blood stem cell goes through to become a red blood cell, platelet, or white blood cell. A myeloid stem cell becomes a red blood cell, a platelet, or a myeloblast, which then becomes a granulocyte (the types of granulocytes are eosinophils, basophils, and neutrophils). A lymphoid stem cell becomes a lymphoblast and then becomes a B-lymphocyte, T-lymphocyte, or natural killer cell.

Blood cell development. A blood stem cell goes through several steps to become a red blood cell, platelet, or white blood cell.

In CLL, too many blood stem cells become abnormal lymphocytes and do not become healthy white blood cells. The abnormal lymphocytes may also be called leukemia cells. The lymphocytes are not able to fight infection very well. Also, as the number of lymphocytes increases in the blood and bone marrow, there is less room for healthy white blood cells, red blood cells, and platelets. This may cause infection, anemia, and easy bleeding.

This summary is about chronic lymphocytic leukemia. See the following PDQ summaries for more information about leukemia:

  • Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment.
  • Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment.
  • Adult Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treatment.
  • Childhood Acute Myeloid Leukemia/Other Myeloid Malignancies Treatment.
  • Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Treatment.
  • Hairy Cell Leukemia Treatment

Older age can affect the risk of developing chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Anything that increases your risk of getting a disease is called a risk factor. Having a risk factor does not mean that you will get cancer; not having risk factors doesn’t mean that you will not get cancer. Talk with your doctor if you think you may be at risk. Risk factors for CLL include the following:

  • Being middle-aged or older, male, or white.
  • A family history of CLL or cancer of the lymph system.
  • Having relatives who are Russian Jews or Eastern European Jews.

Signs and symptoms of chronic lymphocytic leukemia include swollen lymph nodes and tiredness.

Usually CLL does not cause any signs or symptoms and is found during a routine blood test. Signs and symptoms may be caused by CLL or by other conditions. Check with your doctor if you have any of the following:

  • Painless swelling of the lymph nodes in the neck, underarm, stomach, or groin.
  • Feeling very tired.
  • Pain or fullness below the ribs.
  • Fever and infection.
  • Weight loss for no known reason.

Tests that examine the blood, bone marrow, and lymph nodes are used to detect (find) and diagnose chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

The following tests and procedures may be used:

Physical exam and history : An exam of the body to check general signs of health, including checking for signs of disease, such as lumps or anything else that seems unusual. A history of the patient’s health habits and past illnesses and treatments will also be taken.

Complete blood count (CBC) with differential : A procedure in which a sample of blood is drawn and checked for the following:

The number of red blood cells and platelets.

The number and type of white blood cells.

The amount of hemoglobin (the protein that carries oxygen) in the red blood cells.

The portion of the blood sample made up of red blood cells.

Results from the Phase 3 Resonate™ Trial

Significantly improved progression free survival (PFS) vs ofatumumab in patients with previously treated CLL

  • Patients taking IMBRUVICA® had a 78% statistically significant reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with patients who received ofatumumab1
  • In patients with previously treated del 17p CLL, median PFS was not yet reached with IMBRUVICA® vs 5.8 months with ofatumumab (HR 0.25; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.45)1

Significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) with IMBRUVICA® vs ofatumumab in patients with previously treated CLL

  • In patients with previously treated CLL, those taking IMBRUVICA® had a 57% statistically significant reduction in the risk of death compared with those who received ofatumumab (HR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.79; P<0.05)1

Typical treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/leukemia-chroniclymphocyticcll/detailedguide/leukemia-chronic-lymphocytic-treating-treatment-by-risk-group

Treatment options for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) vary greatly, depending on the person’s age, the disease risk group, and the reason for treating (for example, which symptoms it is causing). Many people live a long time with CLL, but in general it is very difficult to cure, and early treatment hasn’t been shown to help people live longer. Because of this and because treatment can cause side effects, doctors often advise waiting until the disease is progressing or bothersome symptoms appear, before starting treatment.

If treatment is needed, factors that should be taken into account include the patient’s age, general health, and prognostic factors such as the presence of chromosome 17 or chromosome 11 deletions or high levels of ZAP-70 and CD38.

Initial treatment

Patients who might not be able to tolerate the side effects of strong chemotherapy (chemo), are often treated with chlorambucil alone or with a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20 like rituximab (Rituxan) or obinutuzumab (Gazyva). Other options include rituximab alone or a corticosteroid like prednisione.

In stronger and healthier patients, there are many options for treatment. Commonly used treatments include:

  • FCR: fludarabine (Fludara), cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan), and rituximab
  • Bendamustine (sometimes with rituximab)
  • FR: fludarabine and rituximab
  • CVP: cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (sometimes with rituximab)
  • CHOP: cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine (Oncovin), and prednisone
  • Chlorambucil combined with prednisone, rituximab, obinutuzumab, or ofatumumab
  • PCR: pentostatin (Nipent), cyclophosphamide, and rituximab
  • Alemtuzumab (Campath)
  • Fludarabine (alone)

Other drugs or combinations of drugs may also be also used.

If the only problem is an enlarged spleen or swollen lymph nodes in one region of the body, localized treatment with low-dose radiation therapy may be used. Splenectomy (surgery to remove the spleen) is another option if the enlarged spleen is causing symptoms.

Sometimes very high numbers of leukemia cells in the blood cause problems with normal circulation. This is calledleukostasis. Chemo may not lower the number of cells until a few days after the first dose, so before the chemo is given, some of the cells may be removed from the blood with a procedure called leukapheresis. This treatment lowers blood counts right away. The effect lasts only for a short time, but it may help until the chemo has a chance to work. Leukapheresis is also sometimes used before chemo if there are very high numbers of leukemia cells (even when they aren’t causing problems) to prevent tumor lysis syndrome (this was discussed in the chemotherapy section).

Some people who have very high-risk disease (based on prognostic factors) may be referred for possible stem cell transplant (SCT) early in treatment.

Second-line treatment of CLL

If the initial treatment is no longer working or the disease comes back, another type of treatment may help. If the initial response to the treatment lasted a long time (usually at least a few years), the same treatment can often be used again. If the initial response wasn’t long-lasting, using the same treatment again isn’t as likely to be helpful. The options will depend on what the first-line treatment was and how well it worked, as well as the person’s health.

Many of the drugs and combinations listed above may be options as second-line treatments. For many people who have already had fludarabine, alemtuzumab seems to be helpful as second-line treatment, but it carries an increased risk of infections. Other purine analog drugs, such as pentostatin or cladribine (2-CdA), may also be tried. Newer drugs such as ofatumumab, ibrutinib (Imbruvica), and idelalisib (Zydelig) may be other options.

If the leukemia responds, stem cell transplant may be an option for some patients.

Some people may have a good response to first-line treatment (such as fludarabine) but may still have some evidence of a small number of leukemia cells in the blood, bone marrow, or lymph nodes. This is known as minimal residual disease. CLL can’t be cured, so doctors aren’t sure if further treatment right away will be helpful. Some small studies have shown that alemtuzumab can sometimes help get rid of these remaining cells, but it’s not yet clear if this improves survival.

Treating complications of CLL

One of the most serious complications of CLL is a change (transformation) of the leukemia to a high-grade or aggressive type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma called diffuse large cell lymphoma. This happens in about 5% of CLL cases, and is known as Richter syndrome. Treatment is often the same as it would be for lymphoma (see our document called Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma for more information), and may include stem cell transplant, as these cases are often hard to treat.

Less often, CLL may transform to prolymphocytic leukemia. As with Richter syndrome, these cases can be hard to treat. Some studies have suggested that certain drugs such as cladribine (2-CdA) and alemtuzumab may be helpful.

In rare cases, patients with CLL may have their leukemia transform into acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL). If this happens, treatment is likely to be similar to that used for patients with ALL (see our document called Leukemia: Acute Lymphocytic).

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is another rare complication in patients who have been treated for CLL. Drugs such as chlorambucil and cyclophosphamide can damage the DNA of blood-forming cells. These damaged cells may go on to become cancerous, leading to AML, which is very aggressive and often hard to treat (see our document calledLeukemia: Acute Myeloid).

CLL can cause problems with low blood counts and infections. Treatment of these problems were discussed in the section “Supportive care in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.”

Read Full Post »

Treatments other than Chemotherapy for Leukemias and Lymphomas

Author, Curator, Editor: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP

2.5.1 Radiation Therapy 

http://www.lls.org/treatment/types-of-treatment/radiation-therapy

Radiation therapy, also called radiotherapy or irradiation, can be used to treat leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes. The type of radiation used for radiotherapy (ionizing radiation) is the same that’s used for diagnostic x-rays. Radiotherapy, however, is given in higher doses.

Radiotherapy works by damaging the genetic material (DNA) within cells, which prevents them from growing and reproducing. Although the radiotherapy is directed at cancer cells, it can also damage nearby healthy cells. However, current methods of radiotherapy have been improved upon, minimizing “scatter” to nearby tissues. Therefore its benefit (destroying the cancer cells) outweighs its risk (harming healthy cells).

When radiotherapy is used for blood cancer treatment, it’s usually part of a treatment plan that includes drug therapy. Radiotherapy can also be used to relieve pain or discomfort caused by an enlarged liver, lymph node(s) or spleen.

Radiotherapy, either alone or with chemotherapy, is sometimes given as conditioning treatment to prepare a patient for a blood or marrow stem cell transplant. The most common types used to treat blood cancer are external beam radiation (see below) and radioimmunotherapy.
External Beam Radiation

External beam radiation is the type of radiotherapy used most often for people with blood cancers. A focused radiation beam is delivered outside the body by a machine called a linear accelerator, or linac for short. The linear accelerator moves around the body to deliver radiation from various angles. Linear accelerators make it possible to decrease or avoid skin reactions and deliver targeted radiation to lessen “scatter” of radiation to nearby tissues.

The dose (total amount) of radiation used during treatment depends on various factors regarding the patient, disease and reason for treatment, and is established by a radiation oncologist. You may receive radiotherapy during a series of visits, spread over several weeks (from two to 10 weeks, on average). This approach, called dose fractionation, lessens side effects. External beam radiation does not make you radioactive.

2.5.2  Bone marrow (BM) transplantation

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003009.htm

There are three kinds of bone marrow transplants:

Autologous bone marrow transplant: The term auto means self. Stem cells are removed from you before you receive high-dose chemotherapy or radiation treatment. The stem cells are stored in a freezer (cryopreservation). After high-dose chemotherapy or radiation treatments, your stems cells are put back in your body to make (regenerate) normal blood cells. This is called a rescue transplant.

Allogeneic bone marrow transplant: The term allo means other. Stem cells are removed from another person, called a donor. Most times, the donor’s genes must at least partly match your genes. Special blood tests are done to see if a donor is a good match for you. A brother or sister is most likely to be a good match. Sometimes parents, children, and other relatives are good matches. Donors who are not related to you may be found through national bone marrow registries.

Umbilical cord blood transplant: This is a type of allogeneic transplant. Stem cells are removed from a newborn baby’s umbilical cord right after birth. The stem cells are frozen and stored until they are needed for a transplant. Umbilical cord blood cells are very immature so there is less of a need for matching. But blood counts take much longer to recover.

Before the transplant, chemotherapy, radiation, or both may be given. This may be done in two ways:

Ablative (myeloablative) treatment: High-dose chemotherapy, radiation, or both are given to kill any cancer cells. This also kills all healthy bone marrow that remains, and allows new stem cells to grow in the bone marrow.

Reduced intensity treatment, also called a mini transplant: Patients receive lower doses of chemotherapy and radiation before a transplant. This allows older patients, and those with other health problems to have a transplant.

A stem cell transplant is usually done after chemotherapy and radiation is complete. The stem cells are delivered into your bloodstream usually through a tube called a central venous catheter. The process is similar to getting a blood transfusion. The stem cells travel through the blood into the bone marrow. Most times, no surgery is needed.

Donor stem cells can be collected in two ways:

  • Bone marrow harvest. This minor surgery is done under general anesthesia. This means the donor will be asleep and pain-free during the procedure. The bone marrow is removed from the back of both hip bones. The amount of marrow removed depends on the weight of the person who is receiving it.
  • Leukapheresis. First, the donor is given 5 days of shots to help stem cells move from the bone marrow into the blood. During leukapheresis, blood is removed from the donor through an IV line in a vein. The part of white blood cells that contains stem cells is then separated in a machine and removed to be later given to the recipient. The red blood cells are returned to the donor.

Why the Procedure is Performed

A bone marrow transplant replaces bone marrow that either is not working properly or has been destroyed (ablated) by chemotherapy or radiation. Doctors believe that for many cancers, the donor’s white blood cells can attach to any remaining cancer cells, similar to when white cells attach to bacteria or viruses when fighting an infection.

Your doctor may recommend a bone marrow transplant if you have:

Certain cancers, such as leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma

A disease that affects the production of bone marrow cells, such as aplastic anemia, congenital neutropenia, severe immunodeficiency syndromes, sickle cell anemia, thalassemia

Had chemotherapy that destroyed your bone

2.5.3 Autologous stem cell transplantation

Phase II trial of 131I-B1 (anti-CD20) antibody therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation for relapsed B cell lymphomas

O.W Press,  F Appelbaum,  P.J Martin, et al.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(95)92225-3/abstract

25 patients with relapsed B-cell lymphomas were evaluated with trace-labelled doses (2·5 mg/kg, 185-370 MBq [5-10 mCi]) of 131I-labelled anti-CD20 (B1) antibody in a phase II trial. 22 patients achieved 131I-B1 biodistributions delivering higher doses of radiation to tumor sites than to normal organs and 21 of these were treated with therapeutic infusions of 131I-B1 (12·765-29·045 GBq) followed by autologous hemopoietic stem cell reinfusion. 18 of the 21 treated patients had objective responses, including 16 complete remissions. One patient died of progressive lymphoma and one died of sepsis. Analysis of our phase I and II trials with 131I-labelled B1 reveal a progression-free survival of 62% and an overall survival of 93% with a median follow-up of 2 years. 131I-anti-CD20 (B1) antibody therapy produces complete responses of long duration in most patients with relapsed B-cell lymphomas when given at maximally tolerated doses with autologous stem cell rescue.

Autologous (Self) Transplants

http://www.leukaemia.org.au/treatments/stem-cell-transplants/autologous-self-transplants

An autologous transplant (or rescue) is a type of transplant that uses the person’s own stem cells. These cells are collected in advance and returned at a later stage. They are used to replace stem cells that have been damaged by high doses of chemotherapy, used to treat the person’s underlying disease.

In most cases, stem cells are collected directly from the bloodstream. While stem cells normally live in your marrow, a combination of chemotherapy and a growth factor (a drug that stimulates stem cells) called Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) is used to expand the number of stem cells in the marrow and cause them to spill out into the circulating blood. From here they can be collected from a vein by passing the blood through a special machine called a cell separator, in a process similar to dialysis.

Most of the side effects of an autologous transplant are caused by the conditioning therapy used. Although they can be very unpleasant at times it is important to remember that most of them are temporary and reversible.

Procedure of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is the transplantation of multipotent hematopoietic stem cells, usually derived from bone marrow, peripheral blood, or umbilical cord blood. It may be autologous (the patient’s own stem cells are used) or allogeneic (the stem cells come from a donor).

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Author: Ajay Perumbeti, MD, FAAP; Chief Editor: Emmanuel C Besa, MD
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/208954-overview

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) involves the intravenous (IV) infusion of autologous or allogeneic stem cells to reestablish hematopoietic function in patients whose bone marrow or immune system is damaged or defective.

The image below illustrates an algorithm for typically preferred hematopoietic stem cell transplantation cell source for treatment of malignancy.

An algorithm for typically preferred hematopoietic stem cell transplantation cell source for treatment of malignancy: If a matched sibling donor is not available, then a MUD is selected; if a MUD is not available, then choices include a mismatched unrelated donor, umbilical cord donor(s), and a haploidentical donor.

Supportive Therapies

2.5.4  Blood transfusions – risks and complications of a blood transfusion

  • Allogeneic transfusion reaction (acute or delayed hemolytic reaction)
  • Allergic reaction
  • Viruses Infectious Diseases

The risk of catching a virus from a blood transfusion is very low.

HIV. Your risk of getting HIV from a blood transfusion is lower than your risk of getting killed by lightning. Only about 1 in 2 million donations might carry HIV and transmit HIV if given to a patient.

Hepatitis B and C. The risk of having a donation that carries hepatitis B is about 1 in 205,000. The risk for hepatitis C is 1 in 2 million. If you receive blood during a transfusion that contains hepatitis, you’ll likely develop the virus.

Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). This disease is the human version of Mad Cow Disease. It’s a very rare, yet fatal brain disorder. There is a possible risk of getting vCJD from a blood transfusion, although the risk is very low. Because of this, people who may have been exposed to vCJD aren’t eligible blood donors.

  • Fever
  • Iron Overload
  • Lung Injury
  • Graft-Versus-Host Disease

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a condition in which white blood cells in the new blood attack your tissues.

2.5.5 Erythropoietin

Erythropoietin, (/ɨˌrɪθrɵˈpɔɪ.ɨtɨn/UK /ɛˌrɪθr.pˈtɪn/) also known as EPO, is a glycoprotein hormone that controls erythropoiesis, or red blood cell production. It is a cytokine (protein signaling molecule) for erythrocyte (red blood cell) precursors in the bone marrow. Human EPO has a molecular weight of 34 kDa.

Also called hematopoietin or hemopoietin, it is produced by interstitial fibroblasts in the kidney in close association with peritubular capillary and proximal convoluted tubule. It is also produced in perisinusoidal cells in the liver. While liver production predominates in the fetal and perinatal period, renal production is predominant during adulthood. In addition to erythropoiesis, erythropoietin also has other known biological functions. For example, it plays an important role in the brain’s response to neuronal injury.[1] EPO is also involved in the wound healing process.[2]

Exogenous erythropoietin is produced by recombinant DNA technology in cell culture. Several different pharmaceutical agents are available with a variety ofglycosylation patterns, and are collectively called erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA). The specific details for labelled use vary between the package inserts, but ESAs have been used in the treatment of anemia in chronic kidney disease, anemia in myelodysplasia, and in anemia from cancer chemotherapy. Boxed warnings include a risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and tumor recurrence.[3]

2.5.6  G-CSF (granulocyte-colony stimulating factor)

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF or GCSF), also known as colony-stimulating factor 3 (CSF 3), is a glycoprotein that stimulates the bone marrow to produce granulocytes and stem cells and release them into the bloodstream.

There are different types, including

  • Lenograstim (Granocyte)
  • Filgrastim (Neupogen, Zarzio, Nivestim, Ratiograstim)
  • Long acting (pegylated) filgrastim (pegfilgrastim, Neulasta) and lipegfilgrastim (Longquex)

Pegylated G-CSF stays in the body for longer so you have treatment less often than with the other types of G-CSF.

2.5.7  Plasma Exchange (plasmapheresis)

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1895577-overview

Plasmapheresis is a term used to refer to a broad range of procedures in which extracorporeal separation of blood components results in a filtered plasma product.[1, 2] The filtering of plasma from whole blood can be accomplished via centrifugation or semipermeable membranes.[3] Centrifugation takes advantage of the different specific gravities inherent to various blood products such as red cells, white cells, platelets, and plasma.[4] Membrane plasma separation uses differences in particle size to filter plasma from the cellular components of blood.[3]

Traditionally, in the United States, most plasmapheresis takes place using automated centrifuge-based technology.[5] In certain instances, in particular in patients already undergoing hemodialysis, plasmapheresis can be carried out using semipermeable membranes to filter plasma.[4]

In therapeutic plasma exchange, using an automated centrifuge, filtered plasma is discarded and red blood cells along with replacement colloid such as donor plasma or albumin is returned to the patient. In membrane plasma filtration, secondary membrane plasma fractionation can selectively remove undesired macromolecules, which then allows for return of the processed plasma to the patient instead of donor plasma or albumin. Examples of secondary membrane plasma fractionation include cascade filtration,[6] thermofiltration, cryofiltration,[7] and low-density lipoprotein pheresis.

The Apheresis Applications Committee of the American Society for Apheresis periodically evaluates potential indications for apheresis and categorizes them from I to IV based on the available medical literature. The following are some of the indications, and their categorization, from the society’s 2010 guidelines.[2]

  • The only Category I indication for hemopoietic malignancy is Hyperviscosity in monoclonal gammopathies

2.5.8  Platelet Transfusions

Indications for platelet transfusion in children with acute leukemia

Scott Murphy, Samuel Litwin, Leonard M. Herring, Penelope Koch, et al.
Am J Hematol Jun 1982; 12(4): 347–356
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajh.2830120406/abstract;jsessionid=A6001D9D865EA1EBC667EF98382EF20C.f03t01
http://dx.doi.org:/10.1002/ajh.2830120406

In an attempt to determine the indications for platelet transfusion in thrombocytopenic patients, we randomized 56 children with acute leukemia to one of two regimens of platelet transfusion. The prophylactic group received platelets when the platelet count fell below 20,000 per mm3 irrespective of clinical events. The therapeutic group was transfused only when significant bleeding occurred and not for thrombocytopenia alone. The time to first bleeding episode was significantly longer and the number of bleeding episodes were significantly reduced in the prophylactic group. The survival curves of the two groups could not be distinguished from each other. Prior to the last month of life, the total number of days on which bleeding was present was significantly reduced by prophylactic therapy. However, in the terminal phase (last month of life), the duration of bleeding episodes was significantly longer in the prophylactic group. This may have been due to a higher incidence of immunologic refractoriness to platelet transfusion. Because of this terminal bleeding, comparison of the two groups for total number of days on which bleeding was present did not show a significant difference over the entire study period.

Clinical and Laboratory Aspects of Platelet Transfusion Therapy
Yuan S, Goldfinger D
http://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-and-laboratory-aspects-of-platelet-transfusion-therapy

INTRODUCTION — Hemostasis depends on an adequate number of functional platelets, together with an intact coagulation (clotting factor) system. This topic covers the logistics of platelet use and the indications for platelet transfusion in adults. The approach to the bleeding patient, refractoriness to platelet transfusion, and platelet transfusion in neonates are discussed elsewhere.

Pooled Platelets – A single unit of platelets can be isolated from every unit of donated blood, by centrifuging the blood within the closed collection system to separate the platelets from the red blood cells (RBC). The number of platelets per unit varies according to the platelet count of the donor; a yield of 7 x 1010 platelets is typical [1]. Since this number is inadequate to raise the platelet count in an adult recipient, four to six units are pooled to allow transfusion of 3 to 4 x 1011 platelets per transfusion [2]. These are called whole blood-derived or random donor pooled platelets.

Advantages of pooled platelets include lower cost and ease of collection and processing (a separate donation procedure and pheresis equipment are not required). The major disadvantage is recipient exposure to multiple donors in a single transfusion and logistic issues related to bacterial testing.

Apheresis (single donor) Platelets – Platelets can also be collected from volunteer donors in the blood bank, in a one- to two-hour pheresis procedure. Platelets and some white blood cells are removed, and red blood cells and plasma are returned to the donor. A typical apheresis platelet unit provides the equivalent of six or more units of platelets from whole blood (ie, 3 to 6 x 1011 platelets) [2]. In larger donors with high platelet counts, up to three units can be collected in one session. These are called apheresis or single donor platelets.

Advantages of single donor platelets are exposure of the recipient to a single donor rather than multiple donors, and the ability to match donor and recipient characteristics such as HLA type, cytomegalovirus (CMV) status, and blood type for certain recipients.

Both pooled and apheresis platelets contain some white blood cells (WBC) that were collected along with the platelets. These WBC can cause febrile non-hemolytic transfusion reactions (FNHTR), alloimmunization, and transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease (ta-GVHD) in some patients.

Platelet products also contain plasma, which can be implicated in adverse reactions including transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) and anaphylaxis. (See ‘Complications of platelet transfusion’ .)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »