Posted on 12/22/2006 4:53:04 PM PST by Coleus
DUARTE, Calif. -- Patients with advanced cancer that has spread to many different sites often do not have many treatment options, since they would be unable to tolerate the doses of treatment they would need to kill the tumors. Researchers at City of Hope and St. Jude Children's Research Hospital may have found a way to treat cancers that have spread throughout the body more effectively. They used modified neural stem cells to activate and concentrate chemotherapeutic drugs predominately at tumor sites, so that normal tissue surrounding the tumor and throughout the body remain relatively unharmed.
"This approach could significantly improve future treatme nt options for patients with metastatic cancer," said Karen Aboody, M.D., assistant professor of Hematology/Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Neurosciences at City of Hope. "It not only has the potential to destroy residual tumor cells, but it should also improve patients' quality of life by minimizing toxic side effects such as nausea, diarrhea or bone marrow suppression." Aboody is the lead investigator of the study done in collaboration with senior investigator Mary Danks, Ph.D., associate member of Molecular Pharmacology at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn. The study will be published Dec. 20 in PLoS ONE. A second paper with extended results from the study has been accepted for publication in Cancer Research in January. Most chemotherapy drugs affect both normal and cancerous tissue, which is why they also are toxic to naturally fast-growing cells in the body such as hair follicles and intestinal cells. Aboody and her colleagues have developed a two-part system to infiltrate metastatic tumor sites, and then activate a chemotherapeutic drug, thereby localizing the drug's effects to the tumor cells.
The technique takes advantage of the tendency for invasive tumors to attract neural stem cells. The researchers injected modified neural stem/progenitor cells into immunosuppressed mice that had been given neuroblastoma cells, which then formed tumors. After waiting a few days to allow the stem cells to migrate to the tumors, researchers administered a precursor-drug. When it reached the stem cells, the drug interacted with an enzyme the stem cells expressed, and was converted into an active drug that kills surrounding tumor cells. The precursor-drugs were administered for two weeks, then after a two-week break, a second round of stem/progenitor cells and drugs were administered.
One hundred percent of the neuroblastoma mice appe ared healthy and tumor-free at six months. Without treatment, all the neuroblastoma mice died within two-and-a-half months. The results hold promise for treating solid tumors that metastasize including neuroblastoma, which represents 6 percent to 10 percent of all childhood cancers worldwide, with higher proportions in children under 2 years of age. "The results are especially important in the case of high-risk neuroblastoma, because treatment-resistant cancer returns in as many as 80 percent of children, and the majority die of their disease," said co-principal investigator Danks. Aboody and her colleagues had previously published the efficacy of this technique in primary and metastatic tumors in the brain. This is the first research to demonstrate that it is also effective in a metastatic cancer model, targeting multiple solid tumor sites spread throughout the body. They speculate that the technique could also be applie d to other malignant solid tumors, including colon, brain, prostate and breast cancer, and are planning future preclinical trials using those tumors as well.
Disclaimer
The following press releases refer to a selection of the upcoming articles in PLoS ONE. They are contributed by the article authors and/or their institutions. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff or the editors of PLoS ONE. The research was funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute, Stop Cancer Foundation, Phi Beta Psi Sorority, the Rosalinde and Arthur Gilbert Foundation, the Neidorf Family Foundation, the Marcus Foundation and ALSAC.
About City of Hope
City of Hope is a leading research and treatment center for cancer, diabetes and other life-threatening diseases. Designated as a Comprehensive Cancer Center, the highest honor bestowed by the National Cancer Institute, and a founding member of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, City of Hope's research and treatment protocols impact care throughout the nation. Founded in 1913, City of Hope is a pioneer in the fields of bone marrow transplantation and genetics and shares its scientific knowledge with medic al centers locally and globally, helping patients battling serious diseases. For more information, visit www.cityofhope.org. Citation: Aboody KS, Bush RA, Garcia E, Metz MZ, Najbauer J, et al (2006) Development of a Tumor-Selective Approach to Treat Metastatic Cancer. PLoS ONE 1(1): e23. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000023 PLEASE ADD THE LINK TO THE PUBLISHED ARTICLE IN ONLINE VERSIONS OF YOUR REPORT: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000023 PRESS ONLY PREVIEW OF THE ARTICLE: http://www.plos.org/press/pone-01-01-aboody.pdf
>>Actually, the stem cells were harvested from an intentionally aborted 15 week old alive (at one time) baby in fetal age.
How do you know that?
>>then you must really be in the dark.
I must. Please enlighten me.
The guidelines do not permit harvesting from voluntary aborted babies.
Then you won't mind posting the reference sentences and the site for us to go to, right?
>>Then you won't mind posting the reference sentences and the site for us to go to, right?
You mean like you didn't do?
>>Then you won't mind posting the reference sentences and the site for us to go to, right?
See the pdf in the article.
>>Actually, the stem cells were harvested from an intentionally aborted 15 week old alive (at one time) baby in fetal age.<<
Then you won't mind posting the reference sentences and the site for us to go to, right?
I've read the pdf files and you won't find the approved protocols there. The actual research write up is required and not the overview for journalists. You have to dig deeper and I'm not going to do your homework for you even though you've tried to skip answering my inquiry of you and turn the query around. Nice try btw.
And yes, I do beleive there is a difference. If the tissue is from a miscarried fetus, I would congratulate the parents of the baby for being generous in their time of grief. It's no different than organ donation, which I feel is a very thoughtful, unselfish act.
Hmmm. Seems like C started off implying that these were embryonic stem cells but got called on that. Then y'all got called when y'all said they were from an aborted fetus but NEVER supplied your source for your information and now you start with the personal attacks. You know what they say, one knows they have won when the other side resorts to personal attacks. Merry Christmas.
>>has very little to offer on the FR
At least I don't make false posts.
See, NOTHING to offer except tripe.
>>Do you actually care one way or the other?
We care for the truth. If you say it was an aborted baby, you should be able to source the info.
>>The key is 'pathology'
No, the key is the guidelines.
>>I've read the pdf files and you won't find the approved protocols there.
No, but you find the respective organizations that issue the guidelines. I won't do your homework for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.