Draft of American Aging Society Presentation – Towards a Systems Theory of Aging.

I have finished drafting the Power Point presentation for the Society’s 39th annual meeting in Portland Oregon early next month.   I am still polishing up the presentation, fixing mysteriously broken links, adding citations, etc., but I have put it online where it can be previewed by my readers at Towards a Systems Theory of Aging.  The conclusion of the presentation is “The two theories Programmed epigenomic changes and Decline in functioning of the stem cell supply chain are complimentary and equivalent and reflect cutting-edge developments in molecular and cell biology and genomics.  They have the potential for providing a framework for an overall systems view of aging that knits together a large collection of traditional special theories of aging.”  Expect minor changes and improvements between now and the time of the conference. 

With this done, I am happily getting back to my regular blogging activities.  As always, any and all comments are most welcome.

Posted in Uncategorized | 7 Comments

Melanoma research update

Melanoma is the most serious form of skin cancer. It is a cancer “–  of melanocytes which are found predominantly in skin but also in the bowel and the eye (see uveal melanoma).  — Melanocytes are normally present in skin, being responsible for the production of the dark pigment melanin.[2] Despite many years of intensive laboratory and clinical research, the greatest chance of cure is in the early surgical resection of thin tumors(ref).”  In 2009, 68,720 new cases of melanoma were reported in the US and the disease led to 8,650 deaths(ref). “According to a WHO report about 48,000 melanoma related deaths occur worldwide per year(ref).”[6] 

Melanoma is also among the most-studied cancers.  The US government clinical trials database shows 910 clinical trials for melanoma in various stages.  This blog entry reports a selection of recent (2010) published research findings.

An April 2010 e-publication Vaccination with autologous dendritic cells pulsed with multiple tumor antigens for treatment of patients with malignant melanoma: results from a phase I/II trial provides a testimony to the relative inefficacy of a high-technology vaccine in the face of progressive malignant melanoma.  See the earlier blog post Dendritic cell cancer immunotherapy.  According to the new publication “Dendritic cells are regarded as the most effective antigen presenting cells and coordinators of the immune response and therefore suitable as vaccine basis. Here we present results from a clinical study in which patients with malignant melanoma (MM) with verified progressive disease received vaccination with autologous monocyte-derived mature dendritic cells (DC) pulsed with p53, survivin and telomerase-derived peptides (HLA-A2(+) patients) or with autologous/allogeneic tumor lysate (HLA-A2(-) patients) in combination with low-dose interleukin (IL)-2 and interferon (IFN)-alpha2b. Results: Of 46 patients who initiated treatment, 10 stopped treatment within 1-4 weeks because of rapid disease progression and deterioration. After 8 weeks, 36 patients were evaluable: no patient had an objective response, 11 patients had stable disease (SD); six had continued SD after 4 months, and three patients had prolonged SD for more than 6 months. The mean overall survival time was 9 months, with a significantly longer survival (18.4 months) of patients who attained SD compared with patients with progressive disease (PD) (5 months). Induction of antigen-specific T-cell responses was analyzed by multidimensional encoding of T cells using HLA-A2 major histocompatibility complex (MHC) multimers. Immune responses against five high-affinity vaccine peptides were detectable in the peripheral blood of six out of 10 analyzed HLA-A2(+) patients. There was no observed correlation between the induction of immune responses and disease stabilization. A significant lower blood level of regulatory T cells (CD25(high) CD4 T cells) was demonstrable after six vaccinations in patients with SD compared with PD. Conclusions: Vaccination was feasible and safe.  Treatment-associated SD was observed in 24% of the patients. SD correlated with prolonged survival suggesting a clinical benefit. Differences in the level of regulatory T cells among SD and PD patients could indicate a significant role of these immune suppressive cells”  I decode this to mean that about a quarter of the treated patients extended their mean survival time from 9 months to 18.4 months.  While this is only a Phase I/II study, it casts doubt on whether dendritic cell cancer immunotherapy, a major focus of current cancer research, will provide a magic bullet against aggressive cancers.

A study published this week in the journal Cell A Temporarily Distinct Subpopulation of Slow-Cycling Melanoma Cells Is Required for Continuous Tumor Growth may help explain several key aspects of melanoma, such as its aggressiveness.  The study suggests that there are two important temporary subpopulations of melanoma cells, both tumorigenic but different in their differentiation and replication potentials.  There is at any time a relatively small slowly-dividing population of cells characterized by the JARID1B demethylase biomarker.  This population is stem-cell-like and necessary for continuous tumor growth.  The JARID1B- cells, on the other hand, divide very rapidly but are insufficient for continuous tumor maintenance.  Moreover, JARID1B- cells can transform into being JARID1B+ cells and the other way around.  Melanomas are highly heterogeneous tumors, but the biological significance of their different subpopulations is not clear. Using the H3K4 demethylase JARID1B (KDM5B/PLU-1/RBP2-H1) as a biomarker, we have characterized a small subpopulation of slow-cycling melanoma cells that cycle with doubling times of >4 weeks within the rapidly proliferating main population. Isolated JARID1B-positive melanoma cells give rise to a highly proliferative progeny. Knockdown of JARID1B leads to an initial acceleration of tumor growth followed by exhaustion which suggests that the JARID1B-positive subpopulation is essential for continuous tumor growth. Expression of JARID1B is dynamically regulated and does not follow a hierarchical cancer stem cell model because JARID1B-negative cells can become positive and even single melanoma cells irrespective of selection are tumorigenic. These results suggest a new understanding of melanoma heterogeneity with tumor maintenance as a dynamic process mediated by a temporarily distinct subpopulation.  º The H3K4 demethylase JARID1B marks a subpopulation of slow-cycling melanoma cells.  º The JARID1B+ subpopulation is required for continuous tumor maintenance .  º Cells can lose or gain JARID1B expression and do not follow a stem cell hierarchy.  º Tumor initiation is not necessarily linked with tumor maintenance.”  A possible implication if the study is that an effective therapy regimen for melanoma will have to target both the fast (JARID1B-) and slow-growing (JARID1B+) cell populations if it is to be effective.  The study is also important for pointing out how the JARID1B- cells can convert themselves into the stem-cell-like JARID1B+ cells, an effect not observed in other cancers.   For background relating to cancer stem cells you can check out the earlier blog entries On cancer stem cells, Big pharma is targeting cancer stem cells, Update on cancer stem cells and News on disabling cancer stem cells.

The April 2010 publication Melanoma: Stem cells, sun exposure and hallmarks for carcinogenesis, molecular concepts and future clinical implications reports on a review study, the purpose of which was to identify molecular biomarkers for melanoma.  A vivid view is provided of how melanoma originates: “RESULTS: Melanocyte precursors undergo several genome changes -UV-induced or not- which could be either mutations or epigenetic. These changes provide stem cells with abilities to self-invoke growth signals, to suppress antigrowth signals, to avoid apoptosis, to replicate without limit, to invade, proliferate and sustain angiogenesis. Melanocyte stem cells are able to progressively collect these changes in their genome. These new potential functions, drive melanocyte precursors to the epidermis were they proliferate and might cause benign nevi. In the epidermis, they are still capable of acquiring new traits via changes to their genome. With time, such changes could add up to transform a melanocyte precursor to a malignant melanoma stem cell. CONCLUSIONS: Melanoma cannot be considered a “black box” for researchers anymore. Current trends in the diagnosis and prognosis of melanoma are to individualize treatment based on molecular biomarkers. Pharmacogenomics constitute a promising field with regard to melanoma patients’ treatment. Finally, development of novel monoclonal antibodies is expected to complement melanoma patient care while a number of investigational vaccines could find their way into everyday oncology practice.”  I find it interesting here that the genome changes leading up to a cancer could be epigenetic as well as mutations in the genome.  Until recently the conventional wisdom has been that cancers are caused only by gene mutations. 

The January 2010 review publication Molecular cytogenetics of cutaneous melanocytic lesions – diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic aspects is concerned with cytogenetic alterations in melanocytic tumours.  The focus in this paper is on molecular biology and genetic changes rather than on cancer stem cells.  “This review demonstrates that at present cytogenetics has mainly increased our understanding of the pathogenesis of melanocytic tumours, with an important role for activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway in the initiation of melanocytic tumours. Mutations in BRAF (in common naevocellular naevi), NRAS (congenital naevi), HRAS (Spitz naevi) and GNAQ (blue naevi) can all cause MAPK activation. All these mutations seem early events in the development of melanocytic tumours, but by themselves are insufficient to cause progression towards melanoma. Additional molecular alterations are implicated in progression towards melanoma, with different genetic alterations in melanomas at different sites and with varying levels of sun exposure. This genetic heterogeneity in distinct types of naevi and melanomas can be used for the development of molecular tests for diagnostic purposes. However, at the moment only few molecular tests have become of diagnostic value and are performed in daily routine practice. This is caused by lack of large prospective studies on the diagnostic value of molecular tests including follow-up, and by the low prevalence of certain molecular alterations. For the future we foresee an increasing role for cytogenetics in the treatment of melanoma patients with the increasing availability of targeted therapy. Potential targets for metastatic melanoma include genes involved in the MAPK pathway, such as BRAF and RAS. More recently, KIT has emerged as a potential target in melanoma patients. These targeted treatments all need careful evaluation, but might be a promising adjunct for treatment of metastatic melanoma patients, in which other therapies have not brought important survival advantages yet.”  As pointed out in the previously-cited paper, there is a need for identifying biomarkers and developing better molecular tests related to them.

One potentially useful biomarker for melanoma is Nestin, as pointed out in the January 2010 publication Stem cell marker nestin expression in peripheral blood of patients with melanoma.  “There is continued interest in markers indicative of circulating melanoma cells. Nestin is a neuroepithelial intermediate filament protein that was found to be expressed in melanoma and in various cancer stem cells. Objective: We investigated expression of nestin in peripheral blood of melanoma patients. Patients/Methods: We analyzed nestin expression by flow cytometry and by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) both in tissues (n=23) and blood samples (n=102) from patients with AJCC stage III-IV melanoma. Forty-six negative controls were also added. Results: Flow cytometry did not reveal nestin expressing cells in peripheral blood of healthy volunteers. In melanoma patients, however, nestin protein was expressed in a proportion of melanoma cells enriched from peripheral blood by immunomagnetic sorting. In melanoma tissue samples a significant correlation was found between mRNAs encoding for nestin and tyrosinase (p=0.001) and Mart-1 (p=0.002), whereas in blood a significant correlation was only observed for tyrosinase (p=0.015), but not for Mart-1 (p=0.53). Nestin expression was higher in stage IV patients compared to stage III/IV with no evidence of disease (NED), positively correlated to tumour burden, and positively correlated to expression of tyrosinase and Mart-1. Conclusions: Nestin showed to be an additional marker of interest for circulating melanoma cells.”

The February 2010 publication Prognostic significance of the hair follicle stem cell marker nestin in patients with malignant melanoma also looked at the use of Nestin as a predictive biomarker, this time related to prognosis of outcome in melanoma patients. “Nestin is an intermediate filament protein, and serves as a hair follicle stem cell and neural stem cell marker. Recent studies have suggested that nestin expression is also important for tumorigenesis. Previous reports from our laboratory have revealed that nestin is a marker of HMB-45-negative melanoma cells in dermal invasive lesions of nodular malignant melanoma. The present study examines nestin expression in malignant melanoma and investigates the relationship between nestin expression and prognosis in patients.  We immunohistochemically stained 78 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded malignant melanomas for nestin, HMB-45 and S100 reactivity. We found that nestin, HMB-45 and S100 protein were detected in 56.5%, 88.4% and 100% of malignant melanomas, respectively. The 5-year survival rate of stage I and II nestin-positive cases was significantly decreased compared to the nestin-negative cases (p < 0.05). In addition, the 5-year survival rate exceeded 80% in nestin-negative malignant melanomas at all stages of tumor development. We conclude that nestin expression may be a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with malignant melanoma.”

Similar points are made in the January 2010 paper The stem cell marker nestin predicts poor prognosis in human melanoma.  “These results suggest that nestin expression in both tumoral and endothelial cells may be considered an important early prognostic marker in melanoma.”

Collectively, these papers indicate the importance of developing biomarker tests for melanoma, and the emergence of Nestin as such a biomarker.  I note that the emphasis on discovering reliable predictive biomarkers applies to diseases across the spectrum.  See the recent blog entry Harnessing the engines of finance and commerce for life-extension .  The discovery of disease biomarkers is identified there as central to a new paradigm in medicine, Personalized Predictive Preventative Participatory Medicine.

There is much more going on in the world of Melanoma research and I will pick this thread up again in a later blog entry.  I will also discuss research relating various supplements to melanomas. 

As a final note, by far the most effective protection against melanomas and other skin cancers is UV avoidance.  Wear sunhats, clothes, sunglasses and sunscreen protective against both UVa and UVb when outdoors in the summer and at high altitudes, and stay away from tanning beds.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Contrarian current research outcomes

This blog entry is about three recent research results where the outcomes were the opposite of what might have been expected. 

1.     Chocolate consumption and depression are correlated 

The April 2919 publication Chocolate and Depressive Symptoms in a Cross-sectional Analysis indicates a surprising relationship between chocolate consumption and mood, namely that consumption and depression seem to be correlated.  A sample of 1018 adults (694 men and 324 women) from San Diego, California, without diabetes or known coronary artery disease was studied in a cross-sectional analysis. The 931 subjects who were not using antidepressant medications and provided chocolate consumption information were the focus of the analysis. Mood was assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Cut points signaling a positive depression screen result (CES-D score, 16) and probable major depression (CES-D score, 22) were used. Chocolate servings per week were provided by 1009 subjects. — Results  Those screening positive for possible depression (CES-D score 16) had higher chocolate consumption (8.4   servings per month) than those not screening positive (5.4 servings per month) (P = .004); those with still higher CES-D scores ( 22) had still higher chocolate consumption (11.8 servings per month) (P value for trend, <.01). These associations extended to both men and women. These findings did not appear to be explained by a general increase in fat, carbohydrate, or energy intake.” 

The study does not indicate a causal connection or, if one exists, direction of the cause.  Does eating chocolate induce depression or do depressed people eat more chocolate?  If it is the first case, the result is the opposite of what I would have thought.  In the second case, eating chocolate while feeling depressed seems completely understandable to me since I am a chocolate-eater.  I have mentioned health benefits of consuming chocolate in several blog entries.  For example, see Health and longevity benefits of dark chocolate. 

2.     Cognition and HIV HAART therapy

A rather interesting recent result is that cognition improves in AIDS patients when HAART therapy is discontinued.  HAART stands for highly active antiretroviral therapy and is normally administered as a cocktail of multiple antiretroviral drugs combined into a single pill.  For a long time it has been thought that anti-retroviral therapy in AIDS patients improves cognitive functioning.  For example. the 1999 publication Positive and sustained effects of highly active antiretroviral therapy on HIV-1-associated neurocognitive impairment reports for a sample of 26 patients” “Conclusion: HAART produces a positive and sustained effect on neurocognitive impairment in HIV-infected patients. A reduction of plasma viral load was associated with the regression of neuropsychological test abnormalities.” The recent result associated with discontinuation of HAART therapy again is the opposite of what was expected. 

The April 2010 publication Neurocognitive effects of treatment interruption in stable HIV-positive patients in an observational cohort reports “Methods: Neurocognitive function was assessed as part of ACTG 5170, a multicenter, prospective observational study of HIV-infected subjects who elected to discontinue ART. Eligible subjects had CD4 count >350 cells/mm3, had HIV RNA viral load <55,000 cp/mL, and were on ART ( 2 drugs) for 6 months. Subjects stopped ART at study entry and were followed for 96 weeks with a neurocognitive examination. — Results: A total of 167 subjects enrolled with a median nadir CD4 of 436 cells/mm3 and 4.5 median years on ART. Significant improvements in mean neuropsychological scores of 0.22, 0.39, 0.53, and 0.74 were found at weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96 (all p < 0.001). In the 46 subjects who restarted ART prior to week 96, no significant changes in neurocognitive function were observed. — Conclusion: Subjects with preserved immune function found that neurocognition improved significantly following antiretroviral treatment (ART) discontinuation. The balance between the neurocognitive cost of untreated HIV viremia and the possible toxicities of ART require consideration.”   

It is interesting that the scores continued to improve during the 96 week period following discontinuation of the HAART therapy.  An important point is that the typical 2010 HAART therapy is different than the 1999 therapy and more effective in its anti-viral effects. So, it might be that one or more of the drugs in the 2010 HAART therapy that were not in the 1999 therapy are responsible for cognitive impairment.

3.     Vitamin-B therapy does not help diabetic nephropathy

We supplement-oriented types often have a default assumption that vitamin therapies are likely to have positive effects.     Specifically, B vitamins have been thought to be useful for treating neurological pathologies.  Not necessarily so, according to the April 2010 publication Effect of B-Vitamin Therapy on Progression of Diabetic Nephropathy.  Context  Hyperhomocysteinemia is frequently observed in patients with diabetic nephropathy. B-vitamin therapy (folic acid, vitamin B6, and vitamin B12) has been shown to lower the plasma concentration of homocysteine.  Objective  To determine whether B-vitamin therapy can slow progression of diabetic nephropathy and prevent vascular complications.  Design, Setting, and Participants  A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (Diabetic Intervention with Vitamins to Improve Nephropathy [DIVINe]) at 5 university medical centers in Canada conducted between May 2001 and July 2007 of 238 participants who had type 1 or 2 diabetes and a clinical diagnosis of diabetic nephropathy.  Intervention  Single tablet of B vitamins containing folic acid (2.5 mg/d), vitamin B6 (25 mg/d), and vitamin B12 (1 mg/d), or matching placebo.  Main Outcome Measures  Change in radionuclide glomerular filtration rate (GFR) between baseline and 36 months. Secondary outcomes were dialysis and a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and all-cause mortality. Plasma total homocysteine was also measured.  Results  The mean (SD) follow-up during the trial was 31.9 (14.4) months. At 36 months, radionuclide GFR decreased by a mean (SE) of 16.5 (1.7) mL/min/1.73 m2 in the B-vitamin group compared with 10.7 (1.7) mL/min/1.73 m2 in the placebo group (mean difference, –5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], –10.6 to –1.1; P = .02). There was no difference in requirement of dialysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% CI, 0.4-2.6; P = .88). The composite outcome occurred more often in the B-vitamin group (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-4.0; P = .04). Plasma total homocysteine decreased by a mean (SE) of 2.2 (0.4) µmol/L at 36 months in the B-vitamin group compared with a mean (SE) increase of 2.6 (0.4) µmol/L in the placebo group (mean difference, –4.8; 95% CI, –6.1 to –3.7; P < .001, in favor of B vitamins).  Conclusion  Among patients with diabetic nephropathy, high doses of B vitamins compared with placebo resulted in a greater decrease in GFR and an increase in vascular events.” GFR stands for  glomerular filtration rate, the best test to measure level of kidney function and determine the stage of  a kidney disease.  Lower is worse and scores below 15 indicate a pathology.  The B-vitamins did lower homocysteine but they also significantly lowered GFR indicating an overall negative effect in the population studied.

A few observations with respect to the life sciences and longevity:

·        Reasonable conjectures and conclusions might not be valid.

·        What we know we don’t know expands faster than what we know.  Uncertainty expands faster than the certainty. 

·         We have to live with that growing uncertainty.  For example, does eating chocolate cause depression or is that a good thing to do if you have depression?  In the past this was not something to be concerned about.. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Alzheimer’s Disease research update

I have posted several blog entries related to Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), including  New views of Alzheimer’s disease and new approaches to treating it,  The social cost of Alzheimer’s disease and late-life dementia, Diet and cognition, Warding off Alzheimer’s Disease and things in my diet,  and a short post Deconstructing Alzheimer’s Disease – role of mitochondria.  The purpose of this blog entry is to report on some additional mostly-recent research findings, focusing particularly on dietary substances and supplements and their impacts on AD.  Topics covered are research related to 1.  Relationship of SIRT1 and taking resveratrol to AD, 2. Dietary substances and supplements and AD, 3. Clinical trials of dietary substances for AD, and 4. Curcumin and AD. 

1.      SIRT1 and Resveratrol and Alzheimer’s Disease 

I have discussed the SIRT1 gene and protein in numerous contexts in this blog.  In the blog entry SIRT1, mTOR, NF-kappaB and resveratrol I mentioned links between SIRT1 activation, mTOR signaling suppression, and inhibition of NF-kappaB.  And I discussed how some researchers think activation of SIRT1 might confer a strong a therapeutic effect for control of Alzheimer’s disease.  Several review articles published in the last couple of years articulate that hypothesis and suggest a potential role for resveratrol in controlling AD.  These articles include the March 2010 e-publication Resveratrol as a Therapeutic Agent for Neurodegenerative Diseases, the 2009 publication Resveratrol and neurodegenerative diseases: activation of SIRT1 as the potential pathway towards neuroprotection and the 2008 publication Modulation of sirtuins: new targets for antiageing. “ — increasing SIRT1 has been found to protect cells against amyloid-beta-induced ROS production and DNA damage, thereby reducing apoptotic death in vitro. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that Alzheimer’s and Huntington’s disease neurons are rescued by the over-expression of SIRT1, induced by either caloric restriction or administration of resveratrol, a potential activator of this enzyme. The therapeutic use of resveratrol (a polyphenol present in red wines) and other related compounds, which utilize SIRT1 pathway modulators, in treating aging-related brain disorders will be discussed in this review(ref).”   

While these and other review articulate this hypothesis (that resveratrol and SIRT1 activation could be useful in controlling AD), current experimental evidence to this effect seems to be scarce.  There were earlier experiments indicating that resveratrol is neuroprotective against beta-amyloid-induced neurotoxicity in rat neurons(ref), but I am unaware of any tests of the effects of taking resveratrol on warding off or treating human Alzheimer’s disease.  Personally, I think resveratrol is a great supplement but the hypothesis that resveratrol and SIRT1 activation could be useful in controlling AD remains an untested conjecture as far as I know.  Theoretical reasons for taking resveratrol may be strong but clinical data on effectiveness in AD is nonexistent. 

2.     Alzheimer’s Disease, dietary substances and supplements

A large number publications based on in-vitro and mouse studies suggest that polyphenols occurring in common dietary substances and supplements may be useful for treating or preventing the onset of Alzheimer’s or other neurodegenerative diseases.  Examples are:

·          (2010) l-theanine protects the APP (Swedish mutation) transgenic SH-SY5Y cell against glutamate-induced excitotoxicity via inhibition of the NMDA receptor pathway. 

·         (2010) [Review on the neuroprotective effects of green tea polyphenols for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases] 

·         (2010) Fish oil enhances anti-amyloidogenic properties of green tea EGCG in Tg2576 mice.

·         (2010) Nanolipidic particles improve the bioavailability and alpha-secretase inducing ability of epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.

·          (2010)  Naturally occurring phytochemicals for the prevention of Alzheimer’s disease.

·         The 2009 study Cinnamon extract inhibits tau aggregation associated with Alzheimer’s disease in vitro reports An aqueous extract of Ceylon cinnamon (C. zeylanicum) is found to inhibit tau aggregation and filament formation, hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The extract can also promote complete disassembly of recombinant tau filaments and cause substantial alteration of the morphology of paired-helical filaments isolated from AD brain.”

·         (2009) Natural Compound In Extra-Virgin Olive Oil — Oleocanthal — May Help Prevent, Treat Alzheimer’s 

·         (2009)  l-Theanine, an amino acid in green tea, attenuates beta-amyloid-induced cognitive dysfunction and neurotoxicity: reduction in oxidative damage and inactivation of ERK/p38 kinase and NF-kappaB pathways.

·         (2009) Neuroprotective molecular mechanisms of (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate: a reflective outcome of its antioxidant, iron chelating and neuritogenic properties. 

·         (2009) Green tea (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate inhibits beta-amyloid-induced cognitive dysfunction through modification of secretase activity via inhibition of ERK and NF-kappaB pathways in mice.

·         (2009) Green tea polyphenol (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate enhances the inhibitory effect of huperzine A on acetylcholinesterase by increasing the affinity with serum albumin.

·         (2009) Neuroprotective effect of epigallocatechin-3-gallate against beta-amyloid-induced oxidative and nitrosative cell death via augmentation of antioxidant defense capacity.

·         (2009) Botanical phenolics and brain health.

·         (2009) Natural antioxidants protect neurons in Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.

·         (2008) Simultaneous manipulation of multiple brain targets by green tea catechins: a potential neuroprotective strategy for Alzheimer and Parkinson diseases.

·          (2008) Cell signaling pathways and iron chelation in the neurorestorative activity of green tea polyphenols: special reference to epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG).

·          (2008) Lipoic acid as an anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective treatment for Alzheimer’s disease. 

·         (2008) Targeting multiple neurodegenerative diseases etiologies with multimodal-acting green tea catechins.

·         (2008) Green tea epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) reduces beta-amyloid mediated cognitive impairment and modulates tau pathology in Alzheimer transgenic mice.

·         (2008) Green tea catechins prevent cognitive deficits caused by Abeta1-40 in rats. 

·         (2008) Epicatechin gallate increases glutamate uptake and S100B secretion in C6 cell lineage. 

·         (2008) Neuroprotective effects of (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) on paraquat-induced apoptosis in PC12 cells. 

Again, the clinical evidence for the effectiveness of most of these substances against Alzheimer’s disease seems to range from being very limited to nonexistent.  Pharmaceutical companies are understandably only willing to spend millions or hundreds of millions of dollars on clinical trials of substances that they own the rights to – and that excludes foods and plant-based supplements.  However, some public agencies have been stepping in to fill the gaps. 

3.     Clinical Trials of dietary substances for AD

The clinicaltrials.gov database shows some 781 clinical trials for AD of which approximately 100 are ongoing.  I went only through the first 300 trials listed to come up with the following related to dietary substances or supplements.  

The Department of Veterans Affairs is currently sponsoring two such trials now in the recruiting phase, A Single Center, Multi-site, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of Resveratrol With Glucose and Malate (RGM) to Slow the Progression of Alzheimer’s Disease.  And A Randomized, Clinical Trial of Vitamin E and Memantine in Alzheimer’s Disease (TEAM-AD)   Another clinical trial Lipoic Acid and Omega-3 Fatty Acids for Alzheimer’s Disease sponsored by the Oregon Health and Science University is not yet recruiting.  The clinical trial Lutein and Alzheimer’s Disease Study (LAD) sponsored by the Oregon Health and Science University is listed as still in the recruiting phase.

A clinical study Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease by Vitamin E and Selenium (PREADVISE) sponsored by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) is ongoing.

4.     Completed clinical trials of dietary substances for AD

A clinical trial VITAL – VITamins to Slow ALzheimer’s Disease (Homocysteine Study) sponsored by the National Institute on Aging has been completed.  The substances tested were Folate, Vitamin B6 and Vitamin B12.  The 18-month double blind study involved in 409 participants in 38 study locations and was designed to measure differences in decline of cognitive functioning.  The study results, reported in the publication High-dose B vitamin supplementation and cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease: a randomized controlled trial, were negative. “A higher quantity of adverse events involving depression was observed in the group treated with vitamin supplements. CONCLUSION: This regimen of high-dose B vitamin supplements does not slow cognitive decline in individuals with mild to moderate AD.” 

Another completed clinical trial is OmegAD (Omega-3 and Alzheimer’s Disease), sponsored by Karolinska University Hospital.  The randomized double-blind trial involved omega-3 fatty acid treatment of 174 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s Disease .  The results were underwhelming as reported in the 2006 paper Omega-3 fatty acid treatment in 174 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: OmegAD study: a randomized double-blind trial.  “CONCLUSIONS: Administration of omega-3 fatty acid in patients with mild to moderate AD did not delay the rate of cognitive decline according to the MMSE or the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale. However, positive effects were observed in a small group of patients with very mild AD.” 

A clinical trial Long-term Use of Galantamine Versus Nootropics (Memory Enhancing Drugs) in Patients With Alzheimer’s Dementia Under Conditions of Daily Routine sponsored by Janssen-Cilag G.m.b.H has been completed but no results of it have yet been published.  The nootropics were evaluated secondarily, galantamine being the main focus of the study.  The nootropics included ginkgo biloba, nicergoline, and piracetam. 

A clinical trial Effect of Panax Ginseng on the Cognitive Performance in Alzheimer’s Disease sponsored by the Seoul National University Hospital has been completed.  The results are published in the 2008 publication Panax ginseng enhances cognitive performance in Alzheimer disease.  “Consecutive AD patients were randomly assigned to the ginseng (n=58) or the control group (n=39), and the ginseng group was treated with Panax ginseng powder (4.5 g/d) for 12 weeks. Cognitive performances were monitored using the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and Alzheimer disease assessment scale (ADAS) during 12 weeks of the ginseng treatment and at 12 weeks after the ginseng discontinuation. MMSE and ADAS scales showed no baseline difference between the groups. After ginseng treatment, the cognitive subscale of ADAS and the MMSE score began to show improvements and continued up to 12 weeks (P=0.029 and P=0.009 vs. baseline, respectively). After discontinuing ginseng, the improved ADAS and MMSE scores declined to the levels of the control group. These results suggest that Panax ginseng is clinically effective in the cognitive performance of AD patients.” 

A number of clinical trials are shown as completed but no publications report on their results.A competed pilot clinical trial Alzheimer’s Disease: Potential Benefit of Isoflavones shows no publication history up to this point. A clinical trial Fish Oil and Alpha Lipoic Acid in Treating Alzheimer’s Disease Phases I and II sponsored by the Oregon Health and Science University appears to be completed in 2007 but no associated publication is listed.  The study Curcumin in Patients With Mild to Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease sponsored by the John Douglas French Foundation is shown as completed but I could find no publication reporting on it. 

Please note that the above is only a sample of the available clinical trial information.  I reviewed only 300 out of 781 studies listed.  Assuming the above-mentioned trials are representative, I am struck by how thin our clinical trial information is with respect to the effectiveness of supplements against Alzheimer’s disease 

4.     Curcumin and Alzheimer’s Disease

There seems to be a considerable literature with respect to curcumin and AD(ref).  While I have not independently verified the statements and citations therein, the October 2, 2007  item Turmeric and Alzheimer ‘s disease by Jacob Schor, ND appears to me to be particularly informative.  He makes a compelling case for why curcumin may be helpful in prevention of AD. He points out that the incidence of AD in India where curcumin is commonly found in foods is a quarter that in the US. (Note that some of this might be explainable by differing demographic factors like life expectancy.)  As I have been pointing out, we lack the information that could be provided by a large and well-designed clinical trial of curcumin in AD.  According to the Pauling Foundation web site: “In Alzheimer’s disease, a peptide called amyloid beta forms aggregates (oligomers), which accumulate in the brain and form deposits known as amyloid plaques (72). Inflammation and oxidative damage are also associated with the progression of Alzheimer’s disease (73). Curcumin has been found to inhibit amyloid beta oligomer formation in vitro (74). When injected peripherally, curcumin was found to cross the blood brain barrier in an animal model of Alzheimer’s disease (74). In animal models of Alzheimer’s disease, dietary curcumin has decreased biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative damage, amyloid plaque burden in the brain, and amyloid beta-induced memory deficits (74-77). It is not known whether curcumin taken orally can cross the blood brain barrier or inhibit the progression of Alzheimer’s disease in humans. As a result of the promising findings in animal models, clinical trials of oral curcumin supplementation in patients with early Alzheimer’s disease are under way (59, 78). The results of a 6-month trial in 27 patients with Alzheimer’s disease found that oral supplementation with up to 4 g/day of curcumin was safe (4). Larger controlled trials are needed to determine whether or not oral curcumin supplementation is efficacious in Alzheimer’s disease.” 

Consistent with the above, last week on April 28, 2010 – The independent panel convened by the NIH to assess the “state of the science” on preventing Alzheimer’s disease and cognitive decline released its draft consensus statement following a 2-day public conference.  The Independent Panel Found Insufficient Evidence to Support Preventive Measures for Alzheimer’s Disease. 

 Where does this all leave me? 

First of all, there is another whole area of AD research that I left out of this blog writeup but that I want to cover soon.  That area is association studies that relate gene polymorphisms to susceptibility to AD. 

With regard to supplements there is relatively little clinical data to go on with respect to their usefulness for delaying the onset of AD or for treating early-stage AD.  I would not be surprised if clinical trials finally reveal that some combination of supplements or foods might be very useful for these purposes.  I specifically see extra-virgin olive oil, green tea polyphenols, resveratrol and curcumin as excellent candidates. 

With regard to what I see as the basic cause of AD and how it eventually might need to be addressed on a basic level, I stand by my statements in the blog entry New views of Alzheimer’s disease and new approaches to treating it.  My best guess as explained there is that the basic cause of AD is microglial cell senescence.  “Based on what we know now, the two most promising general avenues for preventing microglial cell senescence are approaches to preserving or extending telomere lengths in microglia, and approaches to refreshing and reinvigorating the somatic stem cells which differentiate into microglia.”   If certain foods and supplements can help stave off AD, and I suspect they can, my strong guess is that they will do so by staving off microglial cell senescence.  This is plausible since we know that one of the impacts of certain polyphenol supplements is preserving telomere lengths.  

Please see the medical disclaimer for this blog.

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Extra-virgin olive oil

As a kid in a traditional Italian family, I was raised on olive oil.  And I now consume generous quantities of extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) just about every day.  For one thing, I love its taste.  I am so hooked on EVOO that I shudder when a friend serves me a wonderful meal with a great salad, but sets out bottles of commercial salad dressing instead of dressing it with EVOO.  I am particularly bothered by bottled dressings with big labels saying MADE WITH REAL ITALIAN OLIVE OIL and showing ladies in colorful dresses carrying baskets of olives while the very fine print on the back of the bottle lists the amount of olive oil as only 15%, and it’s not even extra-virgin oil.  I have always known that olive oil is good for me.  But for most of my life I could not respond intelligently if somebody asked me “why?”  I thought here, as a break from heavy stuff in molecular biology, I would addresses that question and review some of the research on olive oil.  I particularly focus on EVOO. 

Olive oil and the Mediterranean Diet

There is a two-part generic argument often heard for olive oil.  The first part is that a Mediterranean Diet contributes significantly to health and longevity.  The second part is that olive oil is an essential component of a Mediterranean diet and therefore must be one of the key “good for you” components.  There seems to be good research evidence for the first-part argument as outlined in my August 2009 blog post Recent research on the Mediterranean diet.  The second part of the argument by itself does not meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” test needed to convict somebody in a court trial.  What if something else in the Mediterranean Diet is providing most of the benefits, like the tomatoes?  The rest of this blog entry will establish the value of EVOO beyond a reasonable doubt.

Olive oil and heart disease risk

A good place to start is with a carefully controlled and fairly-large international 2006 study that  directly relates phenolic content of olive oils to familiar lipid levels like HDL and triglycerides:  The effect of polyphenols in olive oil on heart disease risk factors: a randomized trial “BACKGROUND: Virgin olive oils are richer in phenolic content than refined olive oil. — OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the phenolic content of olive oil further benefits plasma lipid levels and lipid oxidative damage compared with monounsaturated acid content. DESIGN: Randomized, crossover, controlled trial. SETTING: 6 research centers from 5 European countries. PARTICIPANTS: 200 healthy male volunteers. MEASUREMENTS: Glucose levels, plasma lipid levels, oxidative damage to lipid levels, and endogenous and exogenous antioxidants at baseline and before and after each intervention. INTERVENTION: In a crossover study, participants were randomly assigned to 3 sequences of daily administration of 25 mL of 3 olive oils. Olive oils had low (2.7 mg/kg of olive oil), medium (164 mg/kg), or high (366 mg/kg) phenolic content but were otherwise similar. Intervention periods were 3 weeks preceded by 2-week washout periods. RESULTS: A linear increase in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels was observed for low-, medium-, and high-polyphenol olive oil: mean change, 0.025 mmol/L (95% CI, 0.003 to 0.05 mmol/L), 0.032 mmol/L (CI, 0.005 to 0.05 mmol/L), and 0.045 mmol/L (CI, 0.02 to 0.06 mmol/L), respectively. Total cholesterol-HDL cholesterol ratio decreased linearly with the phenolic content of the olive oil. Triglyceride levels decreased by an average of 0.05 mmol/L for all olive oils. Oxidative stress markers decreased linearly with increasing phenolic content. Mean changes for oxidized low-density lipoprotein levels were 1.21 U/L (CI, -0.8 to 3.6 U/L), -1.48 U/L (-3.6 to 0.6 U/L), and -3.21 U/L (-5.1 to -0.8 U/L) for the low-, medium-, and high-polyphenol olive oil, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The olive oil may have interacted with other dietary components, participants’ dietary intake was self-reported, and the intervention periods were short. CONCLUSIONS: Olive oil is more than a monounsaturated fat. Its phenolic content can also provide benefits for plasma lipid levels and oxidative damage. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial number: ISRCTN09220811”.  So, in only three weeks cholesterol and triglyceride scores improved in the olive oil takers and the scores increased most markedly in those taking the olive oil with the most phenolic content, i.e., the extra-virgin olive oil. And the result is not just because the olive oil is a “good fat.”

The 2007 publication Changes in the phenolic content of low density lipoprotein after olive oil consumption in men. A randomized crossover controlled trial reports on a trial cohort of 30 men, and my impression is that this cohort may have been part of the larger cohort of the first study mentioned above.  The writeup has a somewhat different focus, however, focusing on the antioxidant properties of virgin olive oil. “Olive oil decreases the risk of CVD (cardiovascular disease). This effect may be due to the fatty acid profile of the oil, but it may also be due to its antioxidant content which differs depending on the type of olive oil. In this study, the concentrations of oleic acid and antioxidants (phenolic compounds and vitamin E) in plasma and LDL were compared after consumption of three similar olive oils, but with differences in their phenolic content. Thirty healthy volunteers participated in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover, randomized supplementation trial. Virgin, common, and refined olive oils were administered during three periods of 3 weeks separated by a 2-week washout period. Participants were requested to ingest a daily dose of 25 ml raw olive oil, distributed over the three meals of the day, during intervention periods. All three olive oils caused an increase in plasma and LDL oleic acid (P < 0.05) content. Olive oils rich in phenolic compounds led to an increase in phenolic compounds in LDL (P < 0.005). The concentration of phenolic compounds in LDL was directly correlated with the phenolic concentration in the olive oils. The increase in the phenolic content of LDL could account for the increase of the resistance of LDL to oxidation, and the decrease of the in vivo oxidized LDL, observed in the frame of this trial. Our results support the hypothesis that a daily intake of virgin olive oil promotes protective LDL changes ahead of its oxidation.”

Coming back to the Mediterranean Diet, the 2005 review article The phenolic compounds of olive oil: structure, biological activity and beneficial effects on human health relates the phenolic content of olive oil to the diet’s salutary benefits. “The Mediterranean diet is rich in vegetables, cereals, fruit, fish, milk, wine and olive oil and has salutary biological functions. Epidemiological studies have shown a lower incidence of atherosclerosis, cardiovascular diseases and certain kinds of cancer in the Mediterranean area. Olive oil is the main source of fat, and the Mediterranean diet’s healthy effects can in particular be attributed not only to the high relationship between unsaturated and saturated fatty acids in olive oil but also to the antioxidant property of its phenolic compounds. The main phenolic compounds, hydroxytyrosol and oleuropein, which give extra-virgin olive oil its bitter, pungent taste, have powerful antioxidant activity both in vivo and in vitro.”

Again, the messages appear to be that it is the phenolic ingredients in olive oil that are important, that their antioxidant activities are important and that the most healthful olive oil is the one with the most concentration of the polyphenols, namely first-press extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO). 

Further, though olive oil seems to be a simple substance the biochemical activities of olive oil polyphenols is not simple, as discussed in the 2008 paper Nutritional benefit of olive oil: the biological effects of hydroxytyrosol and its arylating quinone adducts.  “A unique characteristic of olive oil is its enrichment in oleuropein, a member of the secoiridoid family, which hydrolyzes to the catechol hydroxytyrosol and functions as a hydrophilic phenolic antioxidant that is oxidized to its catechol quinone during redox cycling. Little effort has been spent on exploring the biological properties of the catechol hydroxytyrosol quinone, a strong arylating electrophile that forms Michael adducts with thiol nucleophiles in glutathione and proteins. This study compares the chemical and biological characteristics of hydroxytyrosol with those of the tocopherol family in which Michael adducts of arylating desmethyltocopherol quinones have been identified and correlated with biologic properties including cytotoxicity and induction of endoplasmic reticulum stress. It is noted that hydroxytyrosol and desmethyltocopherols share many similarities, suggesting that Michael adduct formation by an arylating quinone electrophile may contribute to the biological properties of both families, including the unique nutritional benefit of olive oil.” 

The 2007 document The olive oil antioxidant hydroxytyrosol efficiently protects against the oxidative stress-induced impairment of the NObullet response of isolated rat aorta reports “Moreover, hydroxytyrosol was found to be a potent OH(*) scavenger, which can be attributed to its catechol moiety. Because of its amphiphilic characteristics (octanol-water partitioning coefficient = 1.1), hydroxytyrosol will readily cross membranes and provide protection in the cytosol and membranes, including the water-lipid interface. The present study provides a molecular basis for the contribution of hydroxytyrosol to the benefits of the Mediterranean diet.”

A number of other published studies confirm these messages like the 2004 publication  Effects of differing phenolic content in dietary olive oils on lipids and LDL oxidation–a randomized controlled trial and the 2010 publication Biological activities of phenolic compounds present in virgin olive oil, the 2005 report International conference on the healthy effect of virgin olive oil, the 2009 report Chemistry and health of olive oil phenolics, and a number of others. 

Olive oil and cancers

A number of studies relate the effects of the active polyphenols in olive oil to killing (induction of apoptosis in) cancer cells.  For example the 2009 study Anti-proliferative and apoptotic effects of oleuropein and hydroxytyrosol on human breast cancer MCF-7 cells reports “Olive oil intake has been shown to induce significant levels of apoptosis in various cancer cells. These anti-cancer properties are thought to be mediated by phenolic compounds present in olive. These beneficial health effects of olive have been attributed, at least in part, to the presence of oleuropein and hydroxytyrosol. In this study, oleuropein and hydroxytyrosol, major phenolic compound of olive oil, was studied for its effects on growth in MCF-7 human breast cancer cells using assays for proliferation (MTT assay), cell viability (Guava ViaCount assay), cell apoptosis, cellcycle (flow cytometry). Oleuropein or hydroxytyrosol decreased cell viability, inhibited cell proliferation, and induced cell apoptosis in MCF-7 cells. Result of MTT assay showed that 200 mug/mL of oleuropein or 50 mug/mL of hydroxytyrosol remarkably reduced cell viability of MCF-7 cells. Oleuropein or hydroxytyrosol decrease of the number of MCF-7 cells by inhibiting the rate of cell proliferation and inducing cell apoptosis. Also hydroxytyrosol and oleuropein exhibited statistically significant block of G(1) to S phase transition manifested by the increase of cell number in G(0)/G(1) phase.”

The 2009 study Extra-virgin olive oil polyphenols inhibit HER2 (erbB-2)-induced malignant transformation in human breast epithelial cells: relationship between the chemical structures of extra-virgin olive oil secoiridoids and lignans and their inhibitory activities on the tyrosine kinase activity of HER2 reports “Extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO – the juice of the olive obtained solely by pressing and consumed without any further refining process) is unique among other vegetable oils because of the high level of naturally occurring phenolic compounds. We explored the ability of EVOO polyphenols to modulate HER2 tyrosine kinase receptor-induced in vitro transformed phenotype in human breast epithelial cells. — EVOO polyphenols induced strong tumoricidal effects by selectively triggering high levels of apoptotic cell death in HER2-positive MCF10A/HER2 cells but not in MCF10A/pBABE matched control cells. EVOO lignans and secoiridoids prevented HER2-induced in vitro transformed phenotype as they inhibited colony formation of MCF10A/HER2 cells in soft-agar. Our current findings not only molecularly support recent epidemiological evidence revealing that EVOO-related anti-breast cancer effects primarily affect the occurrence of breast tumors over-expressing the type I receptor tyrosine kinase HER2 but further suggest that the stereochemistry of EVOO-derived lignans and secoiridoids might provide an excellent and safe platform for the design of new HER2 targeted anti-breast cancer drugs.”

The 2008 paper Analyzing effects of extra-virgin olive oil polyphenols on breast cancer-associated fatty acid synthase protein expression using reverse-phase protein microarrays is another of several more relating EVOO to breast cancer. “These findings reveal for the first time that phenolic fractions, directly extracted from EVOO, may induce anti-cancer effects by suppressing the expression of the lipogenic enzyme FASN in HER2-overexpressing breast carcinoma cells, thus offering a previously unrecognized mechanism for EVOO-related cancer preventive effects.”

The 2008 document tabAnti-HER2 (erbB-2) oncogene effects of phenolic compounds directly isolated from commercial Extra-Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO) relates to the same theme.  “Among the fractions mainly containing the single phenols hydroxytyrosol and tyrosol, the polyphenol acid elenolic acid, the lignans (+)-pinoresinol and 1-(+)-acetoxypinoresinol, and the secoiridoids deacetoxy oleuropein aglycone, ligstroside aglycone, and oleuropein aglycone, all the major EVOO polyphenols (i.e. secoiridoids and lignans) were found to induce strong tumoricidal effects within a micromolar range by selectively triggering high levels of apoptotic cell death in HER2-overexpressors. Small interfering RNA-induced depletion of HER2 protein and lapatinib-induced blockade of HER2 tyrosine kinase activity both significantly prevented EVOO polyphenols-induced cytotoxicity. EVOO polyphenols drastically depleted HER2 protein and reduced HER2 tyrosine autophosphorylation in a dose- and time-dependent manner. EVOO polyphenols-induced HER2 downregulation occurred regardless the molecular mechanism contributing to HER2 overexpression (i.e. naturally by gene amplification and ectopically driven by a viral promoter). Pre-treatment with the proteasome inhibitor MG132 prevented EVOO polyphenols-induced HER2 depletion. CONCLUSION: The ability of EVOO-derived polyphenols to inhibit HER2 activity by promoting the proteasomal degradation of the HER2 protein itself, together with the fact that humans have safely been ingesting secoiridoids and lignans as long as they have been consuming olives and OO, support the notion that the stereochemistry of these phytochemicals might provide an excellent and safe platform for the design of new HER2-targeting agents.”   

It is interesting to me that the emphasis in the last-mentioned study and in several other studies seems to be not on promoting the use of EVOO as an anti-cancer health measure but rather on identifying biochemical pathways on which to base new drug developments.  Perhaps this is because the point of departure of most of these studies is acknowledging the health benefits of a Mediterranean diet and consuming lots of olive oil.  And, perhaps cynically, I wonder if it reflects research funding sources for whom finding a new blockbuster drug may be more important than public health. 

A 2010 study publication Extra-virgin olive oil-enriched diet modulates DSS-colitis-associated colon carcinogenesis in mice reports “RESULTS: Disease activity index (DAI) was significantly higher on SFO (sunflower oil) vs. EVOO diet at the end of the experimental period. EVOO-fed mice showed less incidence and multiplicity of tumors than in those SFO-fed mice. beta-catenin immunostaining was limited to cell membranes in control groups, whereas translocation from the cell membrane to the cytoplasm and/or nucleus was showed in DSS-treated groups and its expression was higher in SFO-fed animals. Cytokine production was significantly enhanced in SFO-fed mice, while this increase was not significant in EVOO-fed mice. Conversely, cyclooxigenase-2 (COX-2) and inducible nitric oxidase synthase (iNOS) expression were significantly lower in the animal group fed with EVOO than in the SFO group. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that EVOO diet has protective/preventive effect in the UC-associated CRC. This beneficial effect was correlated with a better DAI, a minor number of dysplastic lesions, a lower beta-catenin immunoreactivity, a proinflammatory cytokine levels reduction, a non modification of p53 expression and, COX-2 and iNOS reduction in the colonic tissue.”   

Olive oil and inflammation

A study in done back 2001 Protective effects upon experimental inflammation models of a polyphenol-supplemented virgin olive oil diet again demonstrated a dose-dependent effect of olive oil polyphenols in protecting rats from induced inflammation damage. “CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that virgin olive oil with a higher content of polyphenolic compounds, similar to that of extra virgin olive oil, shows protective effects in both models of inflammation and improves the disease associated loss of weight. This supplementation also augmented the effects of drug therapy.”   

Synergy of olive oil with other supplements  

A 2006 study Intestinal anti-inflammatory activity of combined quercitrin and dietary olive oil supplemented with fish oil, rich in EPA and DHA (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids, in rats with DSS-induced colitis found synergy between administration of fish oil, quercetin and olive oil in a rat model of colitis.  “In addition, a complete restoration of colonic glutathione content, which was depleted as a consequence of the colonic insult, was obtained in rats treated with QR plus FO diet; this content was even higher than that obtained when colitic rats were treated with FO diet alone. When compared with the control colitic group, the combined treatment was also associated with a lower colonic nitric oxide synthase and cyclooxygenase-2 expression as well as with a significant reduction in different colonic proinflammatory mediators assayed, i.e. leukotriene B(4), tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin 1beta, showing a significantly greater inhibitory effect of the latter in comparison with rats receiving FO diet without the flavonoids (quercetin). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the potential synergism between the administration of the flavonoid and the incorporation of olive oil and n-3 PUFA to the diet for the treatment of these intestinal inflammatory disorders.”

EVOO and gene expression

Finally, I want to mention that new studies are starting to look at the effects of EVOO on gene expression.  For example, the 2010 publication Gene expression changes in mononuclear cells from patients with metabolic syndrome after acute intake of phenol-rich virgin olive oil.  BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that acute intake of high-phenol virgin olive oil reduces pro-inflammatory, pro-oxidant and pro-thrombotic markers compared with low phenols virgin olive oil, but it remains unclear if the effects attributed to its phenolic fraction are exerted at the transcriptional level in vivo. To achieve this goal, we aimed at identifying in humans those genes which undergo expression changes mediated by virgin olive oil phenolic compounds. RESULTS: Postprandial gene expression microarray analysis was performed on peripheral blood mononuclear cells at the postprandial period. Two virgin olive oil-based breakfasts with high (398 ppm) and low (70 ppm) content of phenolic compounds were administered to 20 patients with metabolic syndrome following a double-blinded random crossover design. To eliminate the potential effect that might exist in their usual dietary habits, all subjects followed a similar low-fat, carbohydrate rich diet during the study period. Microarray analysis identified 98 differentially expressed genes (79 underexpressed and 19 overexpressed) when comparing the intake of phenol-rich olive oil with the low-phenol olive oil. Many of those genes are linked to obesity, dyslipemia and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Among these, several genes are involved in inflammatory processes mediated by transcription factor NF-kappa B, activator protein-1 transcription factor complex AP-1, cytokines, mitogen-activated protein kinases MAPKs or arachidonic acid pathways. CONCLUSION: This study shows that intake of a breakfast based in virgin olive oil rich in phenol compounds is able to repress the in vivo expression of several pro-inflammatory genes, thereby switching the activity of peripheral blood mononuclear cells to a less deleterious inflammatory profile. These results provide at least a partial molecular basis for the reduced risk of cardiovascular disease observed in Mediterranean countries, where virgin olive oil represents the main source of dietary fat.”   

I could continue this blog entry citing more and more studies but it should be clear by now that the old Italian folklore about the health value of olive oil is right-on and the pungent extra-virgin variety is by far the best.  What I have to figure out now based on the final study quoted is how can I work extra virgin olive oil into my regular daily breakfast?  I want to do that without adding carbs and confounding tastes like blueberries and EVOO.  I will need to do some experimenting.  Perhaps they will go together fine.

Please see the medical disclaimer for this blog.

Posted in Uncategorized | 20 Comments

The PROOF Centre of Excellence

In the recent blog post Harnessing the engines of finance and commerce for life-extension, I characterized a new approach to health, medicine and  longevity called Personalized Predictive Preventative Participatory Medicine (PPPPM). I also promised to describe specific examples in subsequent blog entries.  This posting is concerned with a Canadian initiative on the way to becoming a full PPPPM.  The initiative is called the PROOF Centre of Excellence, where PROOF stands for prevention of organ failure.  A presentation on this topic was made at the Bio-IT World Conference & Expo last week by Raymond Ng.  His talk was on Developing Combinatorial Biomarker Panels for End-stage Organ Failures.  PROOF represents a medium-scale PPPPM in early-stage development, where focus is presently on identification and development of biomarkers. 

As stated on the PROOF website “The Centre of Excellence for the Prevention of Organ Failure (PROOF Centre) discovers, develops, commercializes and implements bio-molecular markers (biomarkers) to prevent, predict, diagnose and better treat heart, lung and kidney failure. The PROOF Centre is a cross-disciplinary engine of devoted partners including industry, academia, health care, government, patients and the public focused on reducing the enormous socioeconomic burdens of heart, lung and kidney failure and on improving health.”

I will review elements of PROOF paying particular attention to the criteria by which I characterized PPPPM.

1.      PROOF addresses an important category of disease processes. Organ failure is a condition where an organ does not perform its expected function.  There are many possible types of organ failure and multiple possible causes.  “Epidemics of inactivity, dietary imbalance, hypertension, obesity, diabetes, air pollution and tobacco use set the stage for accelerated risk for, and occurrence of, vital organ failure. One in four Canadians are believed to be at risk of organ failure; similar to the incidence worldwide. Current methods of detecting organ failure are frequently ineffectual, often costly, at times invasive and generally unsuitable for early diagnosis(ref).” In Canada alone, the personal, societal and economic consequences of vital organ failure (heart, lung and kidney) has a cost of more than $35 billion a year. 

2.     Availability of reliable predictive biomarkers for various kinds of organ failure could make a big difference. “Precise and accurate recognition of a patient’s risk of organ failure has the potential to dramatically improve preventive care, treatment decisions and clinical outcomes, while lowering both social and economic costs(ref).”  This web page illustrates how PROOF views the importance of biomarkers and articulates the core strategy of a PPPPM initiative. “Current treatment strategies are reactive in that, for the most part, interventions are initiated after significant pathological changes have occurred and are often irreversible, which greatly increases the management costs, disease burden, and results in poorer outcomes. The typical current intervention occurs after the disease is irreversible and costly –. However, a new treatment strategy that makes use of predictive, diagnostic, or prognostic biomarker information may help to guide earlier effective interventions when the disease process is still modifiable. As such, overall treatment costs may be reduced and outcomes can be improved.”  

3.     PROOF is a highly collaborative activity. Proof is a not-for-profit center established in 2008, funded initially by the Canadian Networks for Centres of Excellence for Commercialization and Research, hosted by the University of British Columbia and based at the St. Paul hospital in Vancouver BC.   It defines itself as the hub of a multi-disciplinary group of partners drawn from industry, academia, government, health care and the public.

Among the PROOF Centre partners are Luminex, Pfizer of Canada, Genome BC, Astellas Pharma Canada and UVic Genome BC Proteomics Centre.   “The PROOF Centre has partnered with Genome British Columbia to bring new blood tests into clinical practice for heart and kidney transplant patients.  IO Informatics have partnered with the PROOF Centre to provide a data integration and knowledge explorer infrastructure. This will allow investigators involved in the Centre to access data from all biomarker programs within the PROOF Centre(ref).” 

Among the PROOF Centre partners are:

• “clinical and academic leaders to define decision-points in patient management when/where a biomarker panel could change care and then implement observational biomarker discovery studies,

• technology leaders in the public and private sectors to pilot or augment technology platforms for multiplexed analysis,

• leaders of established patient cohorts at the “right” stage of disease to assess the power of biomarker panels in changing care,

• health economics leaders to evaluate clinical settings and patient groups in which biomarker solutions would change healthcare costs and/or lead to a wealth creation opportunity, and

• “front-line” health care and laboratory professionals who understand the harsh practicalities of bringing new tests based on biomarkers into care systems(ref).”

4.     PROOF envisages the following stages of evolution which are characteristic of a PPPPM:

a.     “Biomarker discovery: cohort – single site,  high performance platforms – genomics, proteomics, metabolomics, and computation & analysis to develop sets of biomarkers,

b.     Biomarker development:  multi-site biomarker trial, high performance platforms/assay validation, computation & analysis to validate sets of biomarker signals,

c.      Clinical drug development:  develop assays and platforms that can move into the clinical laboratory, assay development partnerships,

d.     Regulatory filing:  voluntary exploratory data submission (VXDS). FDA and Health Canada submissions

e.     Clinical implication and experience feedback(ref).”

5.     PROOF is already a going concern.  Representative of PROOF’s initial impacts:

·        “Through its flagship program, “Biomarkers in Transplantation”, the PROOF Centre team has discovered levels of genes and proteins in the blood that allow the diagnosis or prediction of acute rejection in heart and kidney(ref).”  Put differently: “The PROOF Centre has discovered and internally validated blood-based proteomic and genomic biomarker tests to diagnose and predict allograft immune rejection in heart and kidney transplantation(ref).”

·        A Canada-Wide Biomarker Trial is underway and will test this new method to provide better care for heart and kidney transplant patients in preparation for a submission to regulatory agencies(ref)” 

My impression is that PROOF is somewhere in the middle of the scale in size and reach as far as existing PPPPMs go.   I suspect PROOF will grow in scale, in sophistication of techniques and in partnering activities as time progresses.  Dimensions of expansion will probably include more “omics” screening, enhanced collaborative computer networking among its partners and active relationships with care agencies with active feedback from clinical experience. 

PROOF may seem small-scale given US standards and appears tucked up in the Canadian NorthWest.  But its biomarkers, once validated and in widespread use, may be of immense help to everybody.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Towards a systems view of aging

On several occasions both in this blog and in my treatise I have pointed out the need for integrating the various disparate theories of aging into an overall systems framework.  Following is the abstract for a presentation I will be offering at the American Aging Association’s 39th Annual Meeting and 24th Annual Meeting of the American College of Clinical Gerontology in Portland Oregon June 4-7, 2010:

Towards a systems view of aging

A comprehensive systems theory of aging must embrace the validated teachings of multiple existing special theories of aging, theories that range from oxidative damage to loss of mitochondrial function to neurological degeneration to telomere shortening and cell senescence to decline in hormone levels.  The author has characterized 14 such major theories and an additional 7 candidate ones.   While each such theory is correct in its own framework of reference, on the surface most seem to be largely independent of the others.  However, on the levels of molecular biology and genomics a rich network of links exists among these theories.  The author suggests two overarching frameworks for integrating and clarifying existing understandings from the diverse theories of aging.  One framework is lifelong programmed changes in global gene expression due to DNA methylation, histone acetylation and other epigenomic modifications.  For example, aging-related decline of efficacy of DNA repair machinery might possibly result from promoter methylation of the Mms22 gene, resulting in increasing susceptibility to oxidative damage with age.  Promoter methylation of the P21 and P53 apoptosis genes can result in increased susceptibility to cancers.  The second framework sees aging as decline in functioning of the stem cell supply chain, the chain where adult stem and progenitor cells progressively differentiate as-needed into other cells of increased specificity and decreased pluripotency, resulting in lifelong renewal of somatic cell types.  As the supplies of multipotent mesenchymal and haemopoietic stem cells available in their niches for differentiation decline because of their replicative senescence, for example, fewer progenitor and somatic cells are available to replace ones that have died or become senescent.  The paper will embody insights developed over a multi-year period and described in the author’s online treatise ANTI-AGING FIREWALLS – THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF LONGEVITY and in the hundreds of postings in the author’s blog www.anti-agingfirewalls.com.

In the course of the next couple of weeks I expect to produce a more detailed version of that presentation for this blog.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Harnessing the engines of finance and commerce for life-extension

Suppose I reported that billions of dollars will be spent on life-extension research next year and that soon that number will reach tens of billions?  The first reaction of aging-science researchers would be “no way.”  They would point to the pittance allocated to longevity research by the NIH.   Yet, I am about to assert here that investing in life-extension is going big time. This is the first of a series of related blog posts on an emerging paradigm in medicine and its implications for longevity.  The series is inspired by what I learned at the Bio-IT World Conference & Expo last week from listening to many speakers and from wandering through the exhibit floor and talking with many people.    

Aging science vs. life-extension engineering 

I drew an important distinction in the blog entry What are aging, life-extension and anti-aging?  I pointed out that there are a lot of life extension approaches, ones that increase the life expectancy of a defined population, that are of an engineering or social nature.  These approaches may or may not have anything to do with postponing aging from a biochemical viewpoint.  Example approaches that have worked are better sanitation systems, clearing out water and air pollution, eradicating parasite populations, systematic inoculation programs, building safer highways, and implementing speed limits and seatbelt laws.  Indeed, the fact that the average American lives twice as long as our predecessors did 150 years ago has mostly to do with these kinds of life extension measures.  While the results of these engineering and social approaches have been life extension, they are invariably thought of in other terms such as “public health,” “cleaner environment,” and “food safety.”  A powerful new engineering approach in medicine with life extension consequences is gearing up right now.

In contrast, in my treatise ANTI-AGING FIREWALLS THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF LONGEVITY treatise and in this blog I have largely come at aging through the lenses of aging science, identifying 14 of the leading theories of what causes aging and another 7 candidate theories of aging and then writing about developments relating to them.  So I have dealt with topics relating to aging theories  ranging from oxidative damage  and chronic inflammation at the “classical” end of the spectrum to telomere shortening and damage and increasing mTOR signaling at the “new science” end of the spectrum.  I will doubtlessly continue to do the same.

What I am going to discuss in this particular series of blog entries is a different engineering and social approach to life extension that, in my opinion at least, will also end up telling us many of the things we need to know about the science of aging. 

Personalized Predictive Preventative Participatory Medicine (PPPPM)

The new approach is directed to health and medicine in the coming decades, although I believe it will have major implications for life extension and perhaps even for slowing biological aging.  I will call it Personalized Predictive Preventative Participatory Medicine (PPPPM).  The dimensions of PPPPM are only now becoming clear and I will only generally characterize it here, saving detailed characterizations and discussions of examples for subsequent blog entries. 

In a nutshell, the essence of PPPPM is:

1.     The objective of PPPPM is not so much to cure diseases as it is to detect and predict disease susceptibilities before a disease starts or at very early stages of disease progression and initiate personalized interventions to prevent the progression of the disease before it becomes symptomatic or does damage. 

2.     PPPPM is participatory in the sense that the collaborative participation of large numbers of health research institutions and care agencies is involved in doing the research and creating the infrastructure to make it workable.  It involves a tight and continuing linkup loop of researchers, practitioners, patients and healthy people who want to stay healthy.

3.     The predictions of PPPPM are based on the identification of sets of biomarkers that are predictive of disease susceptibilities and stages of disease progression for particular diseases.  The biomarkers can consist of known gene mutations, SNPs, copy number variations and the like, and other “omics” markers (proteomic, transcriptomic, metabolomic, epigenomic etc.) as well as the results of all kinds of existing clinical tests and clinical data.

4.     The biomarkers will be arrived at through massive correlation analyses and pattern matching between public data bases of the kinds of data involved and association studies of many different kinds.  See the blog entry Genome-wide association studies for examples.  The biomarkers will be continuously refined through feedback from personal histories, of course with numerous layers of personal privacy protection.

5.     Identifying PPPM biomarkers will proceed one disease at a time, the challenges including creation of massive public data bases of “omics” information and performing multivariate association studies.  It is a task that requires mobilization of incredible networked computer power and human analytics.  

6.     Identifications of disease-prevention interventions including drug candidates will proceed along the same lines using the same kinds of tools and analytics, where interventions will be determined on the basis of the known biomarker patterns as well as individual patient or well-persons’ patterns of “omic” markers.

7.     Fully implementing PPPM will require genetic, genomic and other “omic” profiling on the part of increasing numbers of people, something that should become commonplace in 10-15 years. 

Here is a simplified example of how the approach could work.  Say a healthy person discovers early in life that he has a susceptibility to Alzheimer’s disease.  For example, a current-generation genetic test shows he possesses the APOE4 gene allele, a predictor of late-onset AD.  Starting at around age 50, he would periodically have his other Alzheimer’s-predictive biomarkers checked.  These should show early signs of the actual disease before any dementia is detected.  This might, for example, require a combination of epigenomic scans and lab tests.  If and when very-early disease signs are detected, strong preventative measures are immediately initiated.  These might consist of drugs, supplements or lifestyle changes. 

The basic concept is that it should be a lot easier to stop a disease in its very early stages from progressing or reverse its progress than waiting for symptoms to show up and damage is done, and then trying to “cure” it.  All too many diseases like Alzheimer’s have shown themselves to be remarkably resistant to being cured because by the time they are symptomatic, it is too late to stop them.

PPPPM may sound like a grand concept for the future, and it is.  However it is already being actively pursued for several disease conditions by large research consortia.  Many large relevant databases already exist and many important biomarkers are already known.  One of several existing examples of PPPPM is the cancer biomedical informatics grid, “a virtual network of interconnected data, individuals and individuals that redefines how research is conducted, care is provided, and patients/participants interact with the biomedical research enterprise.”

The current energy and vitality of PPPPM follows from the fact that it is not just a research approach but also heavily involves finance, entrepreneurship and industry participation.  Large pharmaceutical companies who badly need new drug candidates to replace those going off-patent are using the PPPPM approach to discover them.  A number of large government agencies like the National Cancer Institute are involved.  And dozens of new companies and players are lining up to do the information processing and collaborative networking required.  Players with names like Microsoft and IBM are involved.  There is the smell of billions of dollars involved.   But I will leave details and descriptions of concrete examples to subsequent blog entries.

And what happens when diseases of aging are effectively postponed?  It is a no-brainer that on the average people live longer, that is life extension. And I have no doubt that as effective PPPPM approaches gear up and more and more biomarker-disease correlations and prevention-treatment disease correlation are learned, we will be learning more and more about how to postpone biological aging too.

Life-extension lives!

Just as a post-script, the basic principles of computer science were already well-established in 1950, but computers were doing very little to help people then.  It took years of commercial activities, engineering and technology innovations, inventions and new approaches in manufacturing, software and marketing to get where we are now where computers empower all aspects of our lives.  This was a social-engineering-industrial-marketing feedback process involving institutions, government (for early Internet development), businesses, entrepreneurial activities and intense involvement of business of all kinds and now, everybody.  It was tumultuous with many failures and incredible successes, and continues to be. The same kind of process has already started related to health.  We are already deeply engaged in a similar tumultuous process of life extension and it will be a wonderful crazy ride.  Real practical life extension is no fantasy.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Out at the Bio-IT conference

I am out attending the Bio-IT World Conference & Expo in Boston a good part of this week, paying particular attention to the track on Systems and Predictive Technology.  The conference is focused on a fundamental shift happening in biological and medical research, drug discovery, disease prevention, and the practice of medicine – with far-reaching implications for longevity.  Being at the conference is providing me with important contacts, new materials and exciting ideas for future blog posts.  However, these few days there is no time left over for me to do my usual job of researching and writing blog posts.  I will be back at it again soon, probably starting on the weekend.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Progress in stem cell oncolytic virotherapy

Don’t let the fancy name scare you off.  The underlying concepts are fairly simple.  The basic idea is to go after cancer cells with viruses that kill them.  To help the viruses escape the immune system, they are packaged in stem cells that are expected to snuggle up to the cancer cells.  It is hoped that the approach will go after cancer stem cells as well as mature cancer cells and therefore possibly provide a basic cure for the cancer concerned.  The broader area, oncolytic virotherapy is an approach to curing cancers that has been intensely researched for a number of years.  What is new is using stem cells or other human cells for safely getting the viruses to and into the target cancer cells. 

Some background 

The 10th theory of aging in my treatise is Susceptibility to Cancers.  The probability of incidences of cancer rises rapidly with advanced aging.  Cancer is second major cause of age-associated mortality and cancer in turn often induces other age-related maladies.  Finally, cancer therapies like radiation and some forms of chemotherapy can accelerate the aging process. The War on Cancer going back to 1971 has produced marginal results for the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on research.  In 2008 the NCI spent $4.83 billion on 5,380 research grantsThe relative lack of progress for the amount of effort invested is probably due to the fact that basic scientific knowledge related to the biomolecular, cell-cycle, signaling pathways, genetic and epigenetic processes involved in cancer did not exist until recent years.  And this knowledge could not exist until extremely powerful computers capable of analyzing molecular, genomic and proteomic data became available.  So, the early approaches to curing cancer tended to be trial-and-error approaches based on screening chemical compounds which mostly ended in failure.  Many current approaches are much more sophisticated, however, and stem cell oncolytic virotherapy is one of them. 

On oncolytic virotherapy

The idea of plain-old oncolytic virotherapy is more than 50 years old though most real progress has been made in the last dozen years.  See the 2007 publication Clinical trial results with oncolytic virotherapy: a century of promise, a decade of progress.  “Therapeutic oncolytic viruses (virotherapeutics) constitute a novel class of targeted anticancer agents that have unique mechanisms of action compared with other cancer therapeutics. The development of virotherapeutics has evolved from the use of in vitro-passaged strains (first generation), to genetically engineered selectivity-enhanced viruses (second generation) and finally to genetically engineered transgene-expressing ‘armed’ oncolytic viruses (third generation). Descriptions of cancer remissions following virus infections date back to a century ago. Initial patient treatment publications, written up to 50 years ago, consisted of case reports or case series of treatment with first-generation, non-engineered viruses. Over the past decade, hundreds of patients with cancer have been treated on prospectively designed clinical trials (including phase III), evaluating over 10 different agents, including engineered second-generation and third-generation viruses. This Review summarizes and interprets the data from clinical reports over the last century, including safety, efficacy and biological end points (viral and immunologic).”

By 2008 much progress had been made as indicated in the publication Oncolytic virotherapy: molecular targets in tumor-selective replication and carrier cell-mediated delivery of oncolytic viruses.  “Tremendous advances have been made in developing oncolytic viruses (OVs) in the last few years. By taking advantage of current knowledge in cancer biology and virology, specific OVs have been genetically engineered to target specific molecules or signal transduction pathways in cancer cells in order to achieve efficient and selective replication. The viral infection and amplification eventually induce cancer cells into cell death pathways and elicit host antitumor immune responses to further help eliminate cancer cells. Specifically targeted molecules or signaling pathways (such as RB/E2F/p16, p53, IFN, PKR, EGFR, Ras, Wnt, anti-apoptosis or hypoxia) in cancer cells or tumor microenvironment have been studied and dissected with a variety of OVs such as adenovirus, herpes simplex virus, poxvirus, vesicular stomatitis virus, measles virus, Newcastle disease virus, influenza virus and reovirus, setting the molecular basis for further improvements in the near future. Another exciting new area of research has been the harnessing of naturally tumor-homing cells as carrier cells (or cellular vehicles) to deliver OVs to tumors. The trafficking of these tumor-homing cells (stem cells, immune cells and cancer cells), which support proliferation of the viruses, is mediated by specific chemokines and cell adhesion molecules and we are just beginning to understand the roles of these molecules.”

So, with all that great history and the discovery of many powerful anti-cancer viruses, why are oncolytic virotherapies not now in widespread use?   A large part of the answer appears to be that usually a) there is a problem getting the virus specifically to the cancer cells and b) the human immune system detects and wipes out the virus before it can get to the cancer cells and do its job.  The immune system in such a case is just doing its job.  The 2008 publication Cell carriers to deliver oncolytic viruses to sites of myeloma tumor growth reports “Several studies have illustrated the potential of utilizing oncolytic viruses (measles, vaccinia, Vesicular Stomatitis Virus and coxsackievirus A21) for the treatment of MM (multiple myeloma), but there are significant barriers that prevent the viruses from reaching sites of myeloma tumor growth after intravenous delivery. The most important barriers are failure to extravasate from tumor blood vessels, mislocalization of the viruses in liver and spleen and neutralization by antiviral antibodies.”  These problems have led to approaches using “Trojan horse” cells that hide the viruses from the immune system and that can home-in to the cancer cells.

Cell-based oncolytic virotherapy

The March 2010 publication Crossing the boundaries: stem cells and gene therapy provides an overview of the current situation.  “Oncolytic virotherapy is an emerging therapeutic modality for the treatment of cancer. It entails construction of viruses with the ability to selectively target and lyse tumor cells. This branch of therapy has significantly advanced in the past decade, heralded by the development of several novel viruses. Despite the initial success of oncolytic virotherapy in the preclinical setting, however, this treatment modality remains hindered by several obstacles. First, failure to achieve effective viral delivery to targeted tumor beds is a well known limitation. Second, the virus-neutralizing mechanisms of the host immune system, which are in place to protect from viral pathogens, may also hinder the therapeutic potential of virotherapy. One approach to tackling these shortcomings is the use of cell-based carriers to both help with delivery of the virus and shield it from immunosurveillance. Stem cells have recently surfaced as a potential cell-based candidate for delivery of virotherapy. Their unique migratory and immunosuppressive qualities have made them an exciting area of investigation. The focus of this review is to discuss the benefits of stem-cell-based delivery of oncolytic virotherapy and its role in cancer treatment.”

The idea of using cells to deliver oncolytic viruses in cells goes back a few years.  The 2007 publication Cell-based delivery of oncolytic viruses: a new strategic alliance for a biological strike against cancer outlined the strategy of cell-based delivery but at that time did not emphasize the use of stem cells as delivery vehicles.  The 2009 report Cell carriers for oncolytic viruses: Fed Ex for cancer therapy amplifies on this theme. “Oncolytic viruses delivered directly into the circulation face many hazards that impede their localization to, and infection of, metastatic tumors. Such barriers to systemic delivery could be overcome if couriers, which confer both protection, and tumor localization, to their viral cargoes, could be found. Several preclincal studies have shown that viruses can be loaded into, or onto, different types of cells without losing the biological activity of either virus or cell carrier. Importantly, such loading can significantly protect the viruses from immune-mediated virus-neutralizing activities, including antiviral antibody. Moreover, an impressive portfolio of cellular vehicles, which have some degree of tropism for tumor cells themselves, or for the biological properties associated with the tumor stroma, is already available.” 

Stem cells appear to be excellent candidates for the Trojan horse role. 

The 2010 publication Treatment of metastatic neuroblastoma with systemic oncolytic virotherapy delivered by autologous mesenchymal stem cells: an exploratory study reports on a small-scale human trial: “The tumor stroma engrafting property of intravenously injected mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) may allow the use of MSCs as cellular vehicles for targeted delivery. In this work, we study the safety and the efficacy of infusing autologous MSCs infected with ICOVIR-5, a new oncolytic adenovirus, for treating metastatic neuroblastoma. Four children with metastatic neuroblastoma refractory to front-line therapies received several doses of autologous MSCs carrying ICOVIR-5, under an approved preliminary study. The tolerance to the treatment was excellent. A complete clinical response was documented in one case, and the child is in complete remission 3 years after this therapy. We postulate that MSCs can deliver oncolytic adenoviruses to metastatic tumors with very low systemic toxicity and with beneficial antitumor effects.”

A May 2009 blog entry Trojan-horse stem cells might offer an important new cancer therapy discusses an approach to killing cancer stem cells that is very akin to the one described here.  Instead of the death payload delivered to cancer cells being an oncolytic adenovirus as discussed here, the payload in the case of that blog entry is a molecule called TRAIL (A TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand in case you wanted to know).  “TRAIL induces apoptosis via death receptors (DR4 and DR5) in a wide variety of tumor cells but not in normal cells(ref).”  

Lots of research action

There is much more going on relating to oncolytic virotherapy, way more than I can start to cover here.  Here, for example, is a starting list of relevant publications produced in 2010 alone:

·         A High-throughput Pharmacoviral Approach Identifies Novel Oncolytic Virus Sensitizers.

·         Regression of human prostate tumors and metastases in nude mice following treatment with the recombinant oncolytic vaccinia virus GLV-1h68.

·         Oncolytic measles viruses encoding interferon beta and the thyroidal sodium iodide symporter gene for mesothelioma virotherapy.

·         Oncolytic herpes simplex virus vectors and chemotherapy: are combinatorial strategies more effective for cancer? 

·         Adenovirus retargeting to surface expressed antigens on oral mucosa.

·         Antiangiogenic cancer therapy combined with oncolytic virotherapy leads to regression of established tumors in mice. 

·         Crossing the boundaries: stem cells and gene therapy.

·         Regression of advanced rat and human gliomas by local or systemic treatment with oncolytic parvovirus H-1 in rat models.

·         Cancer Stem Cells: The Final Frontier for Glioma Virotherapy. 

·         Noninvasive monitoring of mRFP1- and mCherry-labeled oncolytic adenoviruses in an orthotopic breast cancer model by spectral imaging.

·         United virus: The oncolytic tag-team against cancer!

·         Combining oncolytic virotherapy and tumour vaccination.

·         Clinical trials with oncolytic reovirus: Moving beyond phase I into combinations with standard therapeutics. 

·         Oncolytic herpes simplex virus armed with xenogeneic homologue of prostatic acid phosphatase enhances antitumor efficacy in prostate cancer.

·         Oncolytic parvoviruses as cancer therapeutics.

·         Evaluation of continuous low dose rate versus acute single high dose rate radiation combined with oncolytic viral therapy for prostate

Treatment of metastatic neuroblastoma with systemic oncolytic virotherapy delivered by autologous mesenchymal stem cells: an exploratory study.

·         Double-regulated oncolytic adenovirus-mediated IL-24 overexpression exhibits potent antitumor activity on gastric adenocarcinoma.

·         Oncolysis using herpes simplex virus type 1 engineered to express cytosine deaminase and a fusogenic glycoprotein for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

·         Type I interferon-sensitive recombinant newcastle disease virus for oncolytic virotherapy.

·         Oncolysis of prostate cancers induced by vesicular stomatitis virus in PTEN knockout mice.

·         Oncolytic (replication-competent) adenoviruses as anticancer agents. 

·         Combination gene therapy of lung cancer with conditionally replicating adenovirus and adenovirus-herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase.

·         Phase I trial of intraperitoneal administration of an oncolytic measles virus strain engineered to express carcinoembryonic antigen for recurrent ovarian cancer.

·         Parvovirus H1 selectively induces cytotoxic effects on human neuroblastoma cells.

·         Potent anti-tumor effects of a dual specific oncolytic adenovirus expressing apoptin in vitro and in vivo. 

·         Vesicular stomatitis virus oncolysis is potentiated by impairing mTORC1-dependent type I IFN production.

·         Myxoma virus virotherapy for glioma in immunocompetent animal models: optimizing administration routes and synergy with rapamycin. 

·         Improved potency and selectivity of an oncolytic E1ACR2 and E1B19K deleted adenoviral mutant in prostate and pancreatic cancers.

·         hTERT-promoter-dependent oncolytic adenovirus enhances the transduction and therapeutic efficacy of replication-defective adenovirus vectors in pancreatic cancer cells.

·         Antitumor effects of telomelysin in combination with paclitaxel or cisplatin on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. 

·         Intelligent design: combination therapy with oncolytic viruses.

·         International Society for Cell and Gene Therapy of Cancer 2009 Annual Meeting held in Cork, Ireland.

·         Single-cycle viral gene expression, rather than progressive replication and oncolysis, is required for VSV therapy of B16 melanoma. 

·         Multimodal approach using oncolytic adenovirus, cetuximab, chemotherapy and radiotherapy in HNSCC low passage tumour cell cultures.

·         Adenovirus-mediated cancer gene therapy and virotherapy (Review). 

Despite all this history, the use of stem cells as delivery vectors for oncolytic viruses is fairly new and this aspect of oncolytic virotherapy is still largely in the preclinical stage. 

The bottom line? 

Do I think cell-delivered oncolytic virotherapy will be an effective approach to wiping out cancers?  My guess is that the answer depends on whether the particular virotherapy concerned infects and wipes out cancer stem cells as well as cancer cells.  If the answer is “no” then the cell-delivered oncolytic virotherapy will be just another in a long list of ways to send the cancer into temporary remission with a high probability of it returning.  Paying lots of attention to the virus delivery vehicle and little attention to whether the delivered virus will wipe out cancer stem cells is not likely to get us very far. 

The 2008 publication Virotherapy as An Approach Against Cancer Stem Cells is optimistic in this respect. “Targeting of cancer stem cells might be key for improving survival and producing cures in patients with metastatic tumors. Viruses enter cells though infection and might therefore not be sensitive to stem cell resistance mechanisms. During the last decades, oncolytic adenoviruses have been shown to effectively kill cancer cells, by seizing control of their DNA replication machinery and utilizing it for the production of new virions, ultimately resulting in the rupture of the cell.”  The 2007 publication Targeting the Untargetable: Oncolytic Virotherapy for the Cancer Stem Cell appears also to be tentatively optimistic.  Oncolytic viruses may represent an effective therapeutic approach to target cancer stem cells.6,7  

If the authors are right and the virotherapy kills cancer stem cells, then at last we might be on the way to real cancer cures.  Finally!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment