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