The research involves the first use in humans of “gene editing,” a treatment that zeros in on a particular gene and disables it.
In
12 people infected with H.I.V., scientists used the technique to get
rid of a protein on the patients’ immune cells that the virus must latch
onto to invade the cells. Cells were removed from the patients, treated
and then dripped back into their bloodstreams through an intravenous
line.
In
theory, if enough cells could be engineered to repel the virus,
patients might no longer need antiviral drugs, and might in effect be
cured.
The
experiment was a pilot study, meant to test safety, not efficacy. It
found that immune cells could be altered, and that doing so did not harm
patients. The gene editing also seemed to help fight the infection in
some cases, but the findings are preliminary and researchers cautioned
that widespread use of the technique is a long way off.
“It’s
a great strategy,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who was not involved in
the research. “It’s exciting, interesting, elegant science. But a lot of
‘ifs’ need to be addressed before you can say ‘Wow, this could really
work.’ ”
Dr.
Fauci also questioned whether patients would want this relatively
complex treatment when many people can keep the infection under control
with just one to a few pills a day.
An article about the study is being published on Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine,
by researchers from the University of Pennsylvania, the Albert Einstein
College of Medicine in New York and Sangamo BioSciences, a company in
Richmond, Calif., that makes the gene-editing product.
The
study has its roots in something that scientists discovered in the
1990s: A small percentage of people are resistant to H.I.V. thanks to a
lucky mutation that causes their immune cells to lack CCR5, a protein
that gives the virus a foothold. In people with one copy of the mutated
gene, the infection progresses more slowly than in those who have normal
CCR5. People who have inherited two copies of the mutated gene, one
from each parent, are highly resistant to H.I.V. and may never become
infected despite repeated exposure.
One
man, known as “the Berlin patient,” was apparently cured of AIDS after
he developed leukemia and had bone-marrow transplants in 2007 and 2008.
As luck would have it, his bone-marrow donor had two copies of the
mutated gene for CCR5. His immune system rebounded, the virus
disappeared and he was able to stop taking antiviral drugs. But
bone-marrow transplants are too arduous, risky and expensive to be used
as a treatment for H.I.V.
Dr.
Carl June, the senior author of the study and an expert in AIDS and
cancer at the University of Pennsylvania, said gene editing may offer
another way to achieve the same result.
He
said the approach was worth considering because many patients dislike
the antiviral drugs and experience side effects, and because lifelong
treatment can cost $1 million in the United States. Gene editing could
be cheaper, he said.
One
scientific advance had a big role in making researchers consider even
trying to engineer H.I.V. resistance: the development of a powerful
molecular tool, zinc-finger nucleases,
enzymes that can cut DNA at specific sites. When the cell tries to
repair such a cut, it often makes mistakes, disabling that particular
gene.
At
first, he doubted that the technology would ever be useful for humans,
but he began trying it out in mice, and was surprised by how well it
worked.
“It’s incredible,” Dr. June said. “This tool can target any gene you desire.”
He and his team began testing the technique
in people with H.I.V. in 2009. The 12 patients were given infusions of
about 10 billion of their own CD4 T-cells, which had been treated to
disable the CCR5 gene. The technique disabled the gene in 11 percent to
28 percent of the treated cells.
Six
of the patients then stopped taking antiviral drugs. In most, their
H.I.V. levels went up and their immune cells diminished. But the
modified immune cells declined significantly less than the patients’
untreated cells, suggesting that the gene editing was protective. The
altered cells persisted, at least for a while. On average, half were
still present after 48 weeks.
Jay
Johnson, 53, who lives in Philadelphia, took part in the study and was
treated in 2010. He was the only patient who had an adverse reaction: a
brief bout with fever, chills and joint and back pain.
For
three months, he went off antiviral drugs. Initially, his virus levels
were undetectable, but they began to rise, and he went back on the
drugs.
A
few months ago, doctors told him that he still had some of the altered
cells, Mr. Johnson said, adding that he hopes the cells will keep
multiplying, take over and eventually leave him virus free. He would
gladly go through the treatment again, he said.
“If this works, it will be just such an overwhelming joy to say that I’m H.I.V. negative,” he said.
As
the studies move ahead, Dr. June said, researchers will be trying to
find ways to increase the proportion of edited cells and to make them
persist in the body. It remains to be seen whether the treatment can be
made practical for large numbers of patients. Because the test patients
have received a treatment that alters their DNA, the Food and Drug
Administration requires 15 years of follow-up to check for adverse
effects. One concern is that the treatment could disable the wrong
genes, though no evidence of that has been seen so far.
A version of this article appears in print on March 6, 2014, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V.
No comments:
Post a Comment