Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

New Drug Bypasses Gene Mutations

Continued from page 1

By Emily Singer

Friday, November 14, 2008

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Patients with cystic fibrosis lack a protein called CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator), which is involved in the transport of chloride ions in and out of cells. Without this protein, thick mucus clogs the lungs, eventually leading to respiratory failure. Scientists found that patients given the drug showed protein production in the nasal epithelium, which is similar to the lung epithelium. Patients also wore vests studded with sensors, which indicated a 30 percent reduction in coughing: people with cystic fibrosis cough an average of 600 to 1,500 times a day, compared with two or three times for healthy people. However, neither study was blinded, meaning that both scientists and patients knew who was getting the drug.

A larger, placebo-controlled study of the drug's effectiveness against muscular dystrophy is now under way, with 175 patients at 38 sites in the United States, Europe, Australia, and Israel. A similar study for cystic fibrosis will begin next year. The tests will last a year or more, allowing scientists to determine whether, over time, the drug can boost protein production enough to halt the progression of the diseases. (Even though scientists measured changes in some symptoms in the earlier studies, they were not designed to determine how effective the drug was at treating patients, but rather whether the target proteins were made.) Lee Sweeney, a biologist at the University of Pennsylvania who collaborates with PTC, estimates from animal research that protein production will need to rise to about 20 to 30 percent of normal levels. "We will get insight over the next six months into how much we can halt their disease," he says.

The trials will also be an important test of safety. While no safety problems have yet arisen in human studies, the long-term effects of the drug are not yet clear. "I do worry a bit about off-target effects," says Melissa Spencer, a researcher at the DMD research center at the University of California, Los Angeles, who is not involved with PTC. Because the drug allows protein-production machinery to skip over premature stop signs, there have been concerns that it might skip normal protein termination signals as well, producing extralong proteins. PTC says that so far it has seen no signs of this.

The drug has also shown promise in animal models of other diseases, including Rett syndrome, some tumors with mutations in tumor suppressor genes, and hemophilia, says Stuart Peltz, PTC's chief executive officer. The company is now planning human tests of the drug for hemophilia A and B, he says.

Because the compound is a small molecule that can be taken orally, it has some advantages over other new biological therapies being developed to treat these diseases, including gene therapy and RNA interference. Such therapies are often difficult to deliver and can trigger immune reactions. "It's essentially a gene therapy that is using cellular machinery rather than introducing DNA," says Spencer. "The chance of immune response is much less than if you took a virus and put it in that way."

Comments

  • How to distinguish between normal and aberrant "stops"?
    How to differentiate between normal and aberrant "stops"?
    Rate this comment: 12345

    nekote
    11/14/2008
    Posts:139
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    • Re: How to distinguish between normal and aberrant "stops"?
      from the Nature article (Vol 447| 3 May 2007| doi:10.1038/nature05756) about the drug- "Nonsense-suppressing drugs could theoretically promote nonspecific readthrough of normal termination codons, but available evidence suggests that normal and premature termination differ mechanistically [Amrani, N. et al. Nature 432, 112–118 (2004).], thereby implying a basis for selectivity."
      Rate this comment: 12345

      ahrensp
      11/14/2008
      Posts:1
      Avg Rating:
      5/5
  • physician heal thy self
    I am always encouraged by the advances that the biotechnology/medical sectors seem to be making in trying to identify and treat the root causes of a wide variety of human ailments. Although we seem to be making a fair amount of progress in this field, we owe much to the early and well documented work of such medical pioneers as Galen, and Hippocrates, who together with the first vivisectionists, put forth the idea that we could understand the human body and its ailments and that they were treatable if one could just come up with the right diagnosis of the condition. My question is this; that given all the recent discoveries of promising new drugs, the complete mapping of the human genome, the study of various genetic mutations, and the discovery of apparently new diseases, have we made any really significant progress in being able to cure ourselves of these contagions since then? 
    Rate this comment: 12345

    phoenix
    11/16/2008
    Posts:172
    Avg Rating:
    3/5

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

The Marcellus Shale Gas Rush
Technology Review November/December 2009

Current Issue

Natural Gas Changes the Energy Map
The United States has vast supplies of this cleaner fossil fuel. But how should we use it?
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.