Monthly Archives: April 2019

A safe and potent anti-CD19 CAR T cell therapy | Nature …

Imai, C. et al. Chimeric receptors with 4-1BB signaling capacity provoke potent cytotoxicity against acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 18, 676684 (2004).

Campana, D., Schwarz, H. & Imai, C. 4-1BB chimeric antigen receptors. Cancer J. 20, 134140 (2014).

Milone, M. C. et al. Chimeric receptors containing CD137 signal transduction domains mediate enhanced survival of T cells and increased antileukemic efficacy in vivo. Mol. Ther. 17, 14531464 (2009).

Porter, D. L., Levine, B. L., Kalos, M., Bagg, A. & June, C. H. Chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells in chronic lymphoid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 725733 (2011).

Maude, S. L. et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells for sustained remissions in leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 15071517 (2014).

Maude, S. L. P. et al. Efficacy and safety of CTL019 in the first US phase II multicenter trial in pediatric relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of an interim analysis. Blood 128, 2801 (2016).

Schuster, S. J. et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells in refractory B-cell lymphomas. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 25452554 (2017).

Schuster, S. J. et al. Tisagenlecleucel in adult relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 380, 4556 (2019).

Eshhar, Z., Waks, T., Gross, G. & Schindler, D. G. Specific activation and targeting of cytotoxic lymphocytes through chimeric single chains consisting of antibody-binding domains and the gamma or zeta subunits of the immunoglobulin and T-cell receptors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 90, 720724 (1993).

Brentjens, R. J. et al. Genetically targeted T cells eradicate systemic acute lymphoblastic leukemia xenografts. Clin. Cancer Res. 13, 54265435 (2007).

Kochenderfer, J. N. et al. Eradication of B-lineage cells and regression of lymphoma in a patient treated with autologous T cells genetically engineered to recognize CD19. Blood 116, 40994102 (2010).

Kalos, M. et al. T cells with chimeric antigen receptors have potent antitumor effects and can establish memory in patients with advanced leukemia. Sci. Transl. Med. 3, 95ra73 (2011).

Kochenderfer, J. N. et al. B-cell depletion and remissions of malignancy along with cytokine-associated toxicity in a clinical trial of anti-CD19 chimeric-antigen-receptor-transduced T cells. Blood 119, 27092720 (2012).

Brentjens, R. J. et al. CD19-targeted T cells rapidly induce molecular remissions in adults with chemotherapy-refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Sci. Transl. Med. 5, 177ra138 (2013).

Lee, D. W. et al. Current concepts in the diagnosis and management of cytokine release syndrome. Blood 124, 188195 (2014).

Turtle, C. J. et al. Immunotherapy of non-Hodgkins lymphoma with a defined ratio of CD8+ and CD4+CD19-specific chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells. Sci. Transl. Med. 8, 355ra116 (2016).

Turtle, C. J. et al. CD19 CAR-T cells of defined CD4+:CD8+ composition in adult B cell ALL patients. J. Clin. Invest. 126, 21232138 (2016).

Neelapu, S. S. et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapyassessment and management of toxicities. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15, 4762 (2018).

Brudno, J. N. & Kochenderfer, J. N. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies for lymphoma. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15, 3146 (2018).

Kelley, L. A. & Sternberg, M. J. Protein structure prediction on the Web: a case study using the Phyre server. Nat. Protoc. 4, 363371 (2009).

Wang, X. et al. A transgene-encoded cell surface polypeptide for selection, in vivo tracking, and ablation of engineered cells. Blood 118, 12551263 (2011).

Giavridis, T. et al. CAR T cell-induced cytokine release syndrome is mediated by macrophages and abated by IL-1 blockade. Nat. Med. 24, 731738 (2018).

Norelli, M. et al. Monocyte-derived IL-1 and IL-6 are differentially required for cytokine-release syndrome and neurotoxicity due to CAR T cells. Nat. Med. 24, 739748 (2018).

Kochenderfer, J. N. et al. Chemotherapy-refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and indolent B-cell malignancies can be effectively treated with autologous T cells expressing an anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 540549 (2015).

Porter, D. L. et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells persist and induce sustained remissions in relapsed refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Sci. Transl. Med. 7, 303ra139 (2015).

Teachey, D. T. et al. Identification of predictive biomarkers for cytokine release syndrome after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Cancer Discov. 6, 664679 (2016).

Brudno, J. N. & Kochenderfer, J. N. Toxicities of chimeric antigen receptor T cells: recognition and management. Blood 127, 33213330 (2016).

Gattinoni, L. et al. A human memory T cell subset with stem cell-like properties. Nat. Med. 17, 12901297 (2011).

Farber, D. L., Yudanin, N. A. & Restifo, N. P. Human memory T cells: generation, compartmentalization and homeostasis. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 14, 2435 (2014).

Wang, A. et al. The stoichiometric production of IL-2 and IFN- mRNA defines memory T cells that can self-renew after adoptive transfer in humans. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 149ra120 (2012).

Hudecek, M. et al. The nonsignaling extracellular spacer domain of chimeric antigen receptors is decisive for in vivo antitumor activity. Cancer Immunol. Res. 3, 125135 (2015).

Alabanza, L. et al. Function of novel anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptors with human variable regions is affected by hinge and transmembrane domains. Mol. Ther. 25, 24522465 (2017).

Waage, A., Brandtzaeg, P., Halstensen, A., Kierulf, P. & Espevik, T. The complex pattern of cytokines in serum from patients with meningococcal septic shock. Association between interleukin 6, interleukin 1, and fatal outcome. J. Exp. Med. 169, 333338 (1989).

Oliver, J. C. et al. Cytokine kinetics in an in vitro whole blood model following an endotoxin challenge. Lymphokine Cytokine Res. 12, 115120 (1993).

Salter, A. I. et al. Phosphoproteomic analysis of chimeric antigen receptor signaling reveals kinetic and quantitative differences that affect cell function. Sci. Signal. 11, eaat6753 (2018).

Marasco, W. A., Haseltine, W. A. & Chen, S. Y. Design, intracellular expression, and activity of a human anti-human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gp120 single-chain antibody. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 90, 78897893 (1993).

Shen, L., Evel-Kabler, K., Strube, R. & Chen, S. Y. Silencing of SOCS1 enhances antigen presentation by dendritic cells and antigen-specific anti-tumor immunity. Nat. Biotechnol. 22, 15461553 (2004).

Song, X. T. et al. A20 is an antigen presentation attenuator, and its inhibition overcomes regulatory T cell-mediated suppression. Nat. Med. 14, 258265 (2008).

Wang, D. et al. Efficacy of intracellular immune checkpoint-silenced DC vaccine. JCI Insight 3, e98368 (2018).

Jiang, X. X. et al. Control of B cell development by the histone H2A deubiquitinase MYSM1. Immunity 35, 883896 (2011).

Read the original:
A safe and potent anti-CD19 CAR T cell therapy | Nature ...

Creating Embryonic Stem Cells Without Embryo Destruction

By: Ian Murnaghan BSc (hons), MSc - Updated: 12 Sep 2015 | *Discuss

One of the biggest hurdles in stem cell research involves the use of embryonic stem cells. While these stem cells have the greatest potential in terms of their ability to differentiate into many different kinds of cells in the human body, they also bring with them enormous ethical controversies. The extraction of embryonic stem cells involves the destruction of an embryo, which upsets and outrages some policy makers and researchers as well as a number of public members. Not only that, but actually obtaining them is a challenge in itself and one that has become more difficult in places such as the United States, where policies have limited the availability of embryonic stem cells for use.

Although researchers have focused on harnessing the power of adult stem cells, there have still been many difficulties in the practical aspects of these potential therapies. In an ideal world, we would be able to use embryonic stem cells without destroying an embyro. Now, however, this ideal hope may actually have some realistic basis. In recent medical news, there has been important progress in the use of embryonic stem cells.

There are still many more tests and research that must be conducted to verify the safety and reliability of the procedure but it is indeed hopeful that funding can now increase for stem cell research. If you are an avid reader of health articles, you will probably be able to stay up-to-date on the latest developments related to this medical news. This newest research into embryonic stem cells holds promise and hope for appeasing the controversy around embryonic stem cell use and allowing for research to finally move forward with fewer challenges and controversies. For those who suffer from one of the many debilitating diseases and conditions that stem cell treatments may help or perhaps cure one day, this is welcome news.

You might also like...

Share Your Story, Join the Discussion or Seek Advice..

Time for Change - 12-Sep-15 @ 12:54 PM

Ellie - 25-Apr-14 @ 6:02 PM

Title:

(never shown)

The rest is here:
Creating Embryonic Stem Cells Without Embryo Destruction

Knees – Stem Cell Therapy For Pain | Stem Cell Seminars …

Surgical options for those suffering from painful knee injuries can range from knee surgery to complete knee replacement. Recent studies have shown that most surgeries dont have a 100% success rate and there is chance of the pain and discomfort resurfacing. Knee replacement surgery can be extremely traumatic and it has the risk of toxic artificial particles entering the bloodstream. Apart from this, months of a painful recovery phase is required to regain the strength and mobility following the surgeries. Most surgeries also boost the degeneration process, which can lead to osteoarthritis.

Knee replacement surgery carries many serious risks and complications, but is often considered as the most-accepted treatment method for those dealing with significant arthritis or injury in knee joints.

Surgery should always be the last option, however, it is often perceived to be the only treatment alternative by most patients. At Stem Cell Therapy for Pain, we have assisted several patients with severe arthritis problems in avoiding knee replacement surgery through stem cell treatment for knees, which enabled them to carry out the things they love without being burdened by pain. We have seen exciting results on tricky knee injury cases, including complete ligament and muscle tears. Our expert physicians ensure that patients experience little to no downtime after the treatment, and can bounce back to their daily routine immediately.

The most common form of arthritis is Osteoarthritis. It is also known as wear-and-tear arthritis, since the cartilage thins and eventually breaks down. The cartilage cushions the joints where two bones meet, so any degeneration can seriously impact our body.

Stem cell treatments for knees offered by Stem Cell Therapy for Pain are designed to target the knee joints to assist with the formation of new cartilage cells. The aim of each stem cell injection for knee pain is to re-inject the amniotic or adult stem cells into the knee joint to boost cartilage or chondrocytes cell creation. Stem cells have a natural anti-inflammatory chemical that helps to alleviate osteoarthritis pain and inflammation in the knee joint.

If you have chronic knee pain due to a past injury or arthritis, an injury to the knee cartilage, meniscus, ligaments, you might be an ideal candidate for stem cell therapy for knees.

To learn more about services like stem cell therapy for osteoarthritis, get in touch with us today. Lets work on restoring your life, one treatment at a time!

View original post here:
Knees - Stem Cell Therapy For Pain | Stem Cell Seminars ...

What Are Stem Cells? – livescience.com

The term "stem cells" has become part of the mainstream lexicon, likely to be overheard in conversations anywhere from a baseball game to cocktail get-togethers. But what exactly are these cells?

Along with phrases such as "that's just immoral" or "stem cells could be the end-all cure," one could easily weave in some technical tidbits about these microscopic, yet significant, cells.

Stem cellsare considered the "engine" cells of regeneration in that they are self-renewing and able to duplicate, or clone, themselves. These special cells are used in the rapidly growing field of regenerative medicine to halt or even reverse chronic diseases. Regenerative medicine seeks torepair or replace tissues or organsthat have been damaged by trauma, disease or congenital defects, according to theMcGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicineat the University of Pittsburgh.

There are three types of stem cells: embryonic, umbilical cord (also known as mesenchymal, or MSC), and adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are considered pluripotent, meaning they can give rise to all of the cell types that make up the human body. Cord and adult stem cells are multipotent, which means that they are able to develop into more than one cell type, but they are more limited than pluripotent cells, according toNYSTEM (New York Stem Cell Science).

In the United States, cord and adult stem cells are the only ones used in regenerative medical procedures. Due to ethical controversy, embryonic stem cells are not used in clinical practice but can be used for research purposes. [How Stem Cell Cloning Works (Infographic)]

Adult stem cells which can be taken from bone marrow, blood or fat are mostly free of ethical controversy, but they have limited potential. As we get older, not only do our stem cells lose functionality, but we have far fewer of them. Researchers estimate that newborns have 40 times more stem cells in their bone marrow compared to a 50 year old, according to a 2009 study in theJournal of Pathology. In addition, adult stem cells may be subject to DNA abnormalities caused by sunlight, toxins and errors associated with making more DNA copies over the course of a lifetime, according to theNational Institutes of Health (NIH).

Cord stem cells can be harvested from the umbilical cord after birth with the mother's permission. This tissue, which is typically discarded, can be donated to science for use in research or medicine, or placed in a cord bank in case the mother or child may need it one day.

Cord stem cellsare much more efficient at replicatingonce removed from the body compared to adult stem cells. For example, when placed in a petri dish with the proper nutrients, one cord stem cell will multiply into 1 billion cells in 30 days, whereas one adult stem cell will multiply into only around 200 cells in 30 days, according to a 2011 study published in the journalOrthopedics.

Doctors use cord stem cells to treat autoimmune conditions, such aslupus,rheumatoid arthritisandmultiple sclerosis, as well as chronic infections such asHIV, herpes and Lyme disease, according toAMA.

Embryonic stem cells hold the most promise for treating diseases, but heated debate abounds over the ethics of using them.Human embryonic stem cellsare derived from eggs fertilized in vitro (outside of the body) and are somewhat pristine. These pluripotent stem cells are prized for their flexibility in being able to morph into any human cell.

When embryonic stem cells are grown in a laboratory under certain conditions for several months, they can remain unspecialized and produce millions of stem cells indefinitely. The resulting batch of cells is referred to as a stem-cell line.

The NIH said 64 embryonic stem-cell lines existed as of August 2001 when President Bush announced the federal policy describing the constraints on funds for stem-cell research. In March 2009, however, President Obama officially removed the restrictions placed by President Bush on federal funding for research on embryos. Although it's been contested, the policy remains in effect withstrict guidelines in place by the NIH.

Scientists can now reprogram adult stem cells to become more like embryonic stem cells. These are known as induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). But since iPSCs are still adult stem cells, they carry the risk of having abnormalities. Much more research is needed on iPSCs, but scientists hope to use them in transplantation medicine, according to theNIH.

Additional resources:

This article was updated on April 15, 2019 by Live Science Contributor Traci Pedersen.

See the article here:
What Are Stem Cells? - livescience.com

Second patient free of HIV after stem-cell therapy

A person with HIV seems to be free of the virus after receiving a stem-cell transplant that replaced their white blood cells with HIV-resistant versions. The patient is only the second person ever reported to have been cleared of the virus using this method. But researchers warn that it is too early to say that they have been cured.

The patient whose identity hasnt been disclosed was able to stop taking antiretroviral drugs, with no sign of the virus returning 18 months later. The stem-cell technique was first used a decade ago for Timothy Ray Brown, known as the Berlin patient, who is still free of the virus.

So far, the latest patient to receive the treatment is showing a response similar to Browns, says Andrew Freedman, a clinical infectious-disease physician at Cardiff University in the UK who was not involved in the study. Theres good reason to hope that it will have the same result, he says.

Like Brown, the latest patient also had a form of blood cancer that wasnt responding to chemotherapy. They required a bone-marrow transplant, in which their blood cells would be destroyed and replenished with stem cells transplanted from a healthy donor.

But rather than choosing just any suitable donor, the team led by Ravindra Gupta, an infectious-disease physician at the University of Cambridge, UK picked a donor who had two copies of a mutation in the CCR5 gene that gives people resistance to HIV infection. This gene codes for a receptor which sits on the surface of white blood cells involved in the bodys immune response. Normally, the HIV binds to these receptors and attacks the cells, but a deletion in the CCR5 gene stops the receptors from functioning properly. About 1% of people of European descent have two copies of this mutation and are resistant to HIV infection.

Guptas team describes the results in a paper due to be published in Nature on 5 March. The researchers report that the transplant successfully replaced the patients white blood cells with the HIV-resistant variant. Cells circulating in the patients blood stopped expressing the CCR5 receptor, and in the lab, the researchers were unable to re-infect these cells with the patients version of HIV.

The team found that the virus completely disappeared from the patients blood after the transplant. After 16 months, the patient stopped taking antiretroviral drugs, the standard treatment for HIV. In the latest follow-up, 18 months after stopping medication, there was still no sign of the virus.

Gupta says that its not yet possible to say whether the patient has been cured. This can only be demonstrated if the patients blood remains HIV free for longer, he says.

But the study does suggest that Browns successful treatment ten years ago wasnt just a one-off. Gupta says that the latest patient received a less aggressive treatment than Brown to prepare for the transplant. The new patient was given a regimen consisting of chemotherapy alongside a drug that targets cancerous cells, while Brown received radiotherapy across his entire body in addition to a chemotherapy drug.

This suggests that, to be successful, stem-cell transplants in HIV patients would not necessarily need to be accompanied by aggressive treatments that might have particularly severe side effects, says Gupta. The radiation really does knock the bone marrow and make you very sick.

Graham Cooke, a clinical researcher at Imperial College London, points out that this kind of treatment wouldnt be suitable for most people with HIV who dont have cancer and so dont need a bone-marrow transplant, which is a serious procedure that can sometimes have fatal complications. If youre well, the risk of having a bone-marrow transplant is far greater than the risk of staying on tablets every day, he says. Most people with HIV respond well to daily antiretroviral treatment.

But Cooke adds that for those who need a transplant to treat leukaemia or other diseases, it seems reasonable to try and find a donor with the CCR5 mutation, which wouldnt add any risk to the procedure.

Gero Htter, who led Browns treatment and is now medical director of the stem-cell company Cellex in Dresden, Germany, agrees that this kind of treatment could only ever be used for a small group of patients. But he hopes that the paper will stimulate a renewed interest in gene therapies that target CCR5, which could be applied to a much broader group. The real breakthrough, we are still waiting for, he says.

Sign up for the daily Nature Briefing email newsletter

Stay up to date with what matters in science and why, handpicked from Nature and other publications worldwide.

Sign Up

Read more here:
Second patient free of HIV after stem-cell therapy

Stem Cell Therapy For Knees | What You Need To Know …

The main conditions treated by stem cell injections include knee osteoarthritis, cartilage degeneration, and various acute conditions, such as a torn ACL, MCL, or meniscus. Stem cell therapy may speed healing times in the latter, while it can actually rebuild tissue in degenerative conditions such as the former.

Thats a major breakthrough. Since cartilage does not regenerate, humans only have as much as they are born with. Once years of physical activity have worn it away from joints, there is no replacing it. Or at least, there wasnt before stem cell therapy.

Now, this cutting-edge technology enables physicians to introduce stem cells to the body. Thesemaster cells are capable of turning into formerly finite cell types to help the body rebuild and restore itself.

Although it may sound like an intensive procedure, stem cell therapy is relatively straightforward and usually minimally invasive. These days, physicians have many rich sources of adult stem cells, which they can harvest right from the patients own body. This obviates the need for embryonic stem cells, and thereby the need for moral arguments of yore.

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are one of the main types used by physicians in treating knee joint problems. These cells live in bone marrow, butincreasing evidence shows they also exist in a range of other types of tissue.This means they can be found in places like fat and muscle. With a local anesthetic to control discomfort, doctors can draw a sample of tissue from the chosen site of the body. The patient usually doesnt feel pain even after the procedure. In some cases, the physician may choose to put the patient under mild anesthesia.

They then isolate the mesenchymal stem cells. Once they have great enough numbers, physicians use them to prepare stem cell injections. They insert a needle into the tissue of the knee and deliver the stem cells back into the area. This is where they will get to work rebuilding the damaged tissue. Although the mechanisms arent entirely clear, once inserted into a particular environment, mesenchymal stem cells exert positive therapeutics effectsinto the local tissue environment.

Mechanisms of action of mesenchymal stem cells appear to include reducing inflammation, reducing scarring (fibrosis), and positively impacting immune system function.

Thats not quite enough to ensure a successful procedure, however. Thats why stem cell clinics may also introduce growth factors to the area. These are hormones that tell the body to deliver blood, oxygen,and nutrients to the area, helping the stem cells thrive and the body repair itself.

Physicians extract these growth factors from blood in the form of platelet-rich plasma (PRP). They take a blood sample, put it in a centrifuge and isolate the plasma, a clear liquid free of red blood cells, but rich in hormones needed for tissue repair.

So, what can a patient reasonably expect when it comes to stem cell therapy, in terms of time and cost outlay?

The answers to both of these questions differ depending on the clinic doing the procedure and the patients level of knee degradation. Some clinics recommend a course of injections over time. Meanwhile, others prepare the injection and deliver it back to the patient in only a matter of hours. Either way, the treatment is minimally invasive, with fast healing times and a speedy return to normal (and even high-intensity) activity.

Some quotes for stem cell knee treatment are as low as $5,000. Others cost up to $20,000 or more. Again, this depends on how many treatments a patient needs, as well as how many joints theyre treating at the same time. Because its easier to batch prepare stem cells, a patient treating more than one knee (or another joint) can address multiple sites for far less. The procedure would only cost an addition of about $2,000 or so per joint.

No treatment proves effective every time. However, insofar as patients reporting good results for stem cell injections, the overall evidence does lean in a beneficial direction.Studies at the Mayo Clinic, for instance, indicate that while further research is needed, it is a good option for arthritis in the knee. Anecdotal reports are positive as well. Patients report it as an effective alternative to much more invasive solutions, such as arthroscopic or knee replacement surgery.

Other studies point to the need for caution. Stem cell therapy and regenerative medicine, in general, are only now exiting their infancies. There arent enough high-quality sources from which to draw at this point, so hard and fast conclusions remain elusive. Of the studies that do exist, some contain unacceptably high levels of bias.

Of course, any new treatment will face these kinds of challenges in the beginning. For those who need an answer to knee pain, and havent yet found one that works, its likely worth the risk that it wont prove as effective as they hoped. But what about other risks?

The good news about this form of stem cell therapy is that the patient uses their own cells. That means they completely skip over the dangers that accompany donor cells. The main one of which is graft-versus-host disease (in which the donor cells initiate an immune response against the patients body). Because the cells have all the same antibodies, neither the body nor the reintroduced cells will reject one another.

Also, the relatively low-stakes outpatient nature of the procedure (versus, say, a bone marrow transplant) means that the chances of something going wrong are much reduced.

However, there do exist some risks wherever needles come into play. It is possible to get an infection at the site of the blood draw as well as at the injection site, but these risks are quite low. Other risks include discoloration at theinjection site or soreness. While some people fear the possible growth of stem cells at the site of injection into a tumor, it is unlikely for this to happen, because physicians utilize adult stem cells for these procedures that have a low proliferative capacity.

These adult stem cells tend to be much safe than pluripotent stem cell types. Examples of pluripotent stem cells are embryonic stem cells (derived from embryos) and a type of lab-made stem cell known as induced pluripotent stem cell (iPS cell).

For those who think stem cell therapy could prove beneficial, its time to set up a consultation with your doctor. Multiple factors will influence whether or not its a good idea. These include age, health, andseverity of the condition and other available treatments. However, overall, this form of regenerative medicine is reasonably affordable, very low-risk, and typically effective.

Are you seeking a stem cell treatment for your knees or other joints?To support you,we have partnered withOkyanosa state-of-the-art facility providing patients with advanced stem cell treatments.

The group offers treatments for arange of chronic conditions, includingosteoarthritis and degenerative joint disease, which are leading causes of knee pain.

If you are seeking a stem cell treatment for knee pain or other chronic condition,contact Okyanos for a Free Medical Consultation.

What questions do you still have about stem cell therapy for knees? Ask them below and we will get you answers.

See the article here:
Stem Cell Therapy For Knees | What You Need To Know ...

Gene Therapy: The New Frontier for Inherited Retinal Disease

In the past 15 years, research in the field of retinal gene therapy has exploded. While no treatments have yet been approved for any inherited retinal dystrophies, clinical trials involving retinal gene therapy are creating hope for future therapies for afflicted patients. Consequently, retina specialists must now be able to appropriately diagnose counsel patients with retinal dystrophies who may be candidates for clinical trials.

This article will focus on updates in retinal gene therapy with an introduction to viral-based gene therapy, followed by a discussion of current retinal gene therapy clinical trials. The goal is to give the retina specialist a framework for evaluating and counseling these patients as they come through our clinics.

Inherited Retinal Disease: A Brief Review Inherited retinal diseases can be categorized by anatomic location in the eyethe macula, fovea, choroid or vitreous. Some diseases are more diffuse and affect all photoreceptors in the retina with varying degrees of insult to either rods or cones.

stationary or progressive. Stationary diseases are typically early onset, such as congenital stationary night blindness, whereas progressive diseases tend to be of later onset, such as retinitis pigmentosa (RP). Other inherited retinal diseases are part of larger syndromes or associated with systemic disease (Table 1).

Multiple clinical trials are ongoing for many of the diseases listed in Table 1. RP, the most common retinal dystrophy, has a prevalence of roughly 1:4,000.1 RP associated with the MERTK gene (for MER proto-oncogene tyrosine kinase) is an autosomal recessive form of the disease that is the subject of a retinal gene therapy clinical trial.2

Stargardt disease is another common retinal dystrophy (prevalence: roughly 1:8,000)3 that is the focus of multiple clinical trials, including a subretinal lentivirus gene therapy trial,4 a stem cell therapy trial5 and an oral drug trial.6 Less prevalent diseases, including Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA), achromatosopia, X-linked retinoschisis (XLRS), Usher syndrome and choroideremia, are all subjects of current gene therapy clinical trials. Given these clinical trials, the need for accurate diagnosis and counseling has substantially increased.

A typical examination of a retinal dystrophy patient starts with a detailed history, with a particular focus on family history, followed by a comprehensive ophthalmologic exam. Imagingparticularly optical coherence tomography, fundus photography and autofluorescenceelectrophysiologic testing and visual field testing can also play an important role in the evaluation.

A common misconception about inherited retinal disease is that the lack of a family history argues against a genetic origin of disease. The majority of inherited retinal diseases are passed on in an autosomal recessive pattern, and often the proband (or affected individual) is the only reported person in a large family pedigree. Children of carriers of a recessive disease have only a one-fourth chance of having the two mutated alleles.

Similarly, the likelihood for a patient with autosomal recessive disease to pass the disease to offspring is remarkably low if the other parent is unaffected, and the prevalence of the carrier state of most retinal dystrophy mutations is quite low in the general population. Obviously, consanguinity can markedly increase the likelihood of seeing recessive disease manifesta phenomenon known as pseudo-dominance. Eliciting this history in the clinical examination can help us better predict the inheritance pattern.

Once we establish a clinical diagnosis and an inheritance pattern, we may offer genetic testing for confirmation of disease.

Genetic Testing for Retinal Dystrophies The key to developing possible gene-based therapies is efficient and accurate genotyping. Gene therapy is effective only when the genetic defect is identified in a given inherited retinal dystrophy. In the past 35 years, more than 200 retinal dystrophy genes have been identified and another 50 have been mappedthat is, the chromosomal location is known but the gene has not been identified (Figure 1).

Research-based or commercially available testing has its pluses and minuses. Typically, research-based testing can be at least partially funded by grants, resulting in lower patient cost. However, not all patients are candidates for grant-funded genetic testing options and results typically take much longer to receive.

Commercial l

Gene Therapy 101 Gene therapy involves use of a vector to carry the gene of interest into the host cell. Bare DNA, nanoparticles or viruses are examples of vectors, with viruses the most commonly used in clinical gene therapy (Figure 2). Existing techniques for viral vector delivery involve intravitreal and subretinal administration (Figure 3). Future techniques may include suprachoroidal and sub-internal limiting membrane techniques.

Once a viral vector is inside the nucleus, the host cell machinery can mediate the gene expression and translation into a protein product.

Adeno-associated virus (AAV) is particularly well suited for gene therapy because it is nonpathogenic, nonimmunogenic and episomal. That is, it does not integrate into the host DNA, but rather remains separate inside the nucleus where it is effectively expressed and translated into protein.

One limitation of AAV is its packaging size; this vector can only hold a 4.7-kb transgene. Scientists have taken advantage of the ability of AAV to encapsulate and deliver DNA into human cells by manipulating the virus genome to remove genes that cause disease and insert therapeutic ones. To create an AAV vector carrying a transgene of interest, the transgene is co-transfected with the rep (or replication) and cap (or capsid) viral DNA into a packaging cell, along with helper adenovirus required for replication.

Once the helper adenovirus is eliminated, the end product is the transgene of interest carried inside a viral capsid. AAV capsids can be modified (by introducing point mutations in the viral capsid genome) to make them more efficient at transduction.

The SAR422459 trial4 (previously known as StarGen) and UshStat trials8 are using lentivirus as the vector. UshStat is a gene therapy developed by Sanofi for Usher Syndrome type 1B (USHB1).9

Lentivirus is a subclass of retrovirus in which viral genome in the form of RNA is reverse-transcribed when the virus enters the cell to produce DNA. Lentivirus is believed to integrate into the genome and can infect both dividing and non-dividing cells. Lentivirus has a much larger carrying capacity than AAV (packaging capacity of 8 to 10 kb), making it the ideal vector for treating retinal genetic disorders with larger affected genes (such as the ABCA4 gene implicated in Stargardt disease).

Replacement gene therapy is the most common clinically relevant gene therapy. It involves replacing a protein that a cell no longer expresses due to a genetic mutation in an autosomal recessive condition. This article will focus on replacement gene therapy.

Other Forms of Gene Therapy Multiple other forms of gene therapy exist. For example, a growth factor can be added in conditions where we do not know the genetic mutation or the conditions are genetically multifactorial. The Oxford Biomedica-sponsored RetinoStat trial for age-related macular degeneration involves expressing endostatin and angiostatin to provide sustained release of an anti-VEGF protein.7

Optogenetics (Box) involves genetically altering ganglion cells to become photosensitive. This would be useful in retinal degenerations in which the photoreceptors have already suffered extensive damage. For dominant conditions, we cannot replace a missing gene, so the option of suppression gene therapy arises, which involves small or short interfering RNA (siRNA).

Gene-editing techniques, such as CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats), aim to genetically alter or modify DNA. This has been done in vitro and in mouse models, and has been used as a technique for controlling dominant/negative effect.

Surgical Considerations As we gain experience from human retinal gene therapy clinical trials, we are learning that the mode of gene therapy delivery is an important determinant of both safety and potential efficacy. The majority of retinal gene therapy trials use subretinal delivery of a viral vector to efficiently transduce photoreceptors. Preclinical animal models have reported success with subretinal delivery for transduction efficiency and rescue of the condition, so logic dictates that subretinal induction would follow in human trials.

We do not yet have a viral vector that can efficiently transduce photoreceptors via intravitreal delivery in any of the inherited retinal diseases currently in human gene therapy trials. The XLRS study utilizes an AAV vector and an intravitreal mode of delivery, but given the ubiquitous intraretinal expression of RS1 in this disease, the photoreceptors do not need to be transduced.10

The LCA2 studies offered some insight into the importance of localization of the subretinal bleb. In most of the LCA2 Phase I/II trials, subretinal blebs were placed in variable locations; some involved the fovea, others were extramacular. However, some investigators have raised concerns over the mechanical trauma that foveal detachment may induce to photoreceptors.11 Patients in gene therapy clinical trials are often young, phakic and do not have a posterior vitreous detachment, all of which are certainly considerations in surgical planning.

Instrument selection for creating the subretinal bleb is also important. Options include extendible or nonextendible cannulas, probes of 38 to 41 gauge, and manual vs. automated vector delivery. The surgeon can use the viscous fluid injector system for a foot-pedal automated injection or have a second surgical assistant manually inject the vector via a syringe and tubing system.

Another option is to create a pre-bleb with basic salt solution prior to injection of the vector to minimize the risk of losing the vector into the vitreous. Lifting the retina can take several attempts once the retinotomy is made with the cannula. Intraoperative OCT can help confirm the subretinal location of the vector.

Retinal tissue with degeneration and thinning is more prone to macular hole formation and iatrogenic retinal tears than healthy, thick retinal tissue. Typically surgeons try to not use air or gas to avoid bleb displacement. Postoperative supine positioning can maximize settlement of the bleb over the posterior pole. The timing for blebs to settle after surgery varies depending on the health of the retinal pigment epithelium and other factors.

Clinical Gene Therapy Trials Active clinical gene replacement trials are targeting Stargardt disease, Usher syndrome, RP, XLRS, choroideremia, achromatopsia and Leber congenital amaurosis 2 (LCA2) (Table 2). These trials use either AAV or lentivirus as viral vectors.

Stargardt Degeneration Trials Stargardt disease is one of the most common inherited retinal dystrophies, with a prevalence of approximately 1:8,000.3 Typical autosomal recessive Stargardt disease is associated with mutations in ABCA4 gene expressing the photoreceptor-specific ABCA4 protein, a member of the superfamily of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters. Clinically, patients typically develop central visual loss as a result of progressive accumulation of lipofuscin in the RPE with the development of yellowish pisciform flecks and eventual macular atrophy.

Depending on the severity of the mutations in the ABCA4 gene, there may be a wide spectrum of phenotypes, ranging from relatively mild and late-onset localized macular disease to earlier-onset diffuse cone-rod disease. A 48-week, Phase I/IIA dose-escalation trial is investigating SAR422459, a lentiviral vector gene therapy carrying the ABCA4 gene formerly known as StarGen, for the treatment of Stargardt disease.12 Eligible patients must have two pathogenic ABCA4 gene variants confirmed by segregation analysis of parental samples.

This study is investigating vitrectomy with subretinal injection of SAR422459. The primary objective is to assess the safety and tolerability of SAR422459, with the secondary objective to evaluate biological activity. After 48 weeks, patients are encouraged to continue follow-up in a long-term safety study. At this writing, 23 patients have been enrolled, and no significant changes in best-corrected visual acuity have been reported in either the treated or untreated fellow eyes. The plan is to continue enrollment in the cohort of youngest patients with early-onset Stargardt disease and evidence of rapid progression of disease (ages 6 to 26 years; all other cohorts involve patients 18 years or older).12

Usher Syndrome Usher syndrome refers to a clinically and genetically heterogeneous group of autosomal recessive disorders which account for the most frequent cause of combined deafness and blindness in humans, with an estimated prevalence of 36:100,000.13

Usher syndrome has three clinical subtypes: USH1; USH2; and USH3. The severity and progression of hearing loss and the presence or absence of vestibular dysfunction distinguish these subtypes. USH1 is the most severe form in terms of the onset/extent of hearing loss and RP. The genetic mutation MYO7A (Usher 1B) accounts for approximately 30 to 50 percent of all USH1 cases.9

MYO7A (Myosin 7A) encodes an actin-based protein that performs critical motility functions in both the inner ear and retina. Patients with USH1B are born with profound neurosensory deafness, have vestibular dysfunction (that is, they often have a history of delay in walking), and develop early retinal degeneration in childhood.

A trial is investigating SAR421869 (UshStat), a lentiviral gene therapy administered via subretinal injection for the treatment of RP in patients with Usher syndrome type 1B (MYO7A gene defect). All patients must have two confirmed mutations in MYO7A.14 As of this writing, nine adult patients have been treated.15 A majority of these patients have shown an initial postoperative drop in BCVA and visual fields that improved to baseline within two weeks in early unpublished results. The vision was stable (in either the treated or untreated fellow eyes) after 48 weeks in a majority of patients. A separate cohort will provide the opportunity to extend the study to include pediatric patients ages 6 years and up.

X-linked Retinoschisis XLRS is an X-linked disorder that affects approximately 1:5,000 to 1:20,000 individuals.16 The disease begins early in childhood, and affected boys typically have BCVA of 20/60 to 20/120 at initial diagnosis. Severe complications such as vitreous hemorrhage or retinal detachment occur in up to 40 percent of patients, especially in older individuals.16

The causative gene was identified in 1997 and named retinoschisin 1 (RS1).15 The gene codes for the retinoschisin protein, which normally provides lateral adhesion that holds retinal cells together. RS1 gene mutations alter the protein to disrupt cell structure. Without normal retinoschisin, the layers of the retina split. Affected individuals typically have early central vision loss and can develop peripheral schisis, exudate or retinal detachment. This damage often forms a spoke-wheel pattern in the macula as seen on clinical examination and OCT.

Research has shown that intravitreal AAV delivery can rescue the condition in mice, likely due to the diffuse expression of RS1 throughout the retina as well as the relatively increased retinal permeability that abnormal retinal morphology causes.18 This is the first replacement gene therapy trial investigating the safety and efficacy of intravitreal gene delivery for an inherited retinal dystrophy.

Ongoing are two Phase I/II studies of an intravitreal-administered AAV-RS1 vector. The National Eye Institute is evaluating three different increasing dose levels of an AAV-RS1 vector in up to 24 adult patients with VA of 20/63 or worse in one eye.19 In the second study, the biotechnology company AGTC is evaluating an AAV-RS1 vector in up to 27 patients.10 The latter study involves three initial groups of adult patients receiving increasing dose levels of the vector and will also evaluate the maximum tolerated dose level in patients 6 years and older.

Choroideremia Choroideremia is an X-linked recessive disorder of a genetic defect in RAB escort protein 1 (REP1) that causes degeneration of RPE and photoreceptors. It can lead to severe and diffuse chorioretinal degeneration. Patients experience gradual vision loss starting from the periphery and advancing toward the fovea. Multiple Phase I and II trials of the AAV.REP1 vector are ongoing at several sites.

In a Phase I/II study, two patients with advanced choroideremia who had low baseline BCVA gained 21 and 11 letters in vision, respectively, despite undergoing retinal detachment.2 Four other patients with near normal BCVA at baseline recovered to within 1 to 3 letters. Maximum sensitivity measured with dark-adapted microperimetry increased in the treated eyes.

In all patients, the increase in retinal sensitivity over six months in the treated eyes correlated with the vector dose administered per area of surviving retina.20 The early improvement observed in two of the six patients was sustained at 3.5 years after treatment despite progressive degeneration in the control eyes.21

Other trials of subretinal placement of the AAV.REP1 vector are ongoing, including a Phase I/II trial Spark Therapeutics is sponsoring.22

Achromatopsia Achromatopsia is an autosomal recessive disease that affects approximately 1:30,000 individuals and is associated with the complete loss of cone function.23 Achromatopsia is of congenital-onset and relatively stationary, with clinical findings of poor central visual acuity (usually 20/200), nystagmus, severe photophobia and complete loss of color discrimination. On electrophysiology testing, patients have nonrecordable cone-mediated responses.

The two genes most commonly associated with achromatopsia are CNGB3 and CNGA3. A Phase I/II dose-escalation study sponsored by AGTC evaluating an AAV-CNGB3 subretinal vector in patients with CNGB3 achromatopsia is ongoing at four sites in the United States.24

MERTK-RP The MERTK-associated form of autosomal recessive RP is very rare, with isolated patient populations identified in the Middle East and most recently the Faroe islands.2 A Phase I clinical trial utilizing an AAV2 vector with an RPE-specific promoter driving MERTK was recently completed in Saudi Arabia.2 Six patients were treated with subretinal injection of an AAV vector expressing MERTK, without any serious adverse events. Three of these patients displayed measurably improved visual acuity in the treated eye following surgery, although two of them had lost that improvement by two years.

LCA2 (RPE65-associated LCA) Because of its early onset and the availability of multiple animal models, innovators have focused a tremendous amount of attention on developing a gene-based therapy for RPE65-associated LCA, or LCA2 (prevalence 1:100,000).25 Multiple Phase I/II trials for RPE65-associated LCA have been either completed or are ongoing. These trials have suggested that improvement in retinal function, as

Despite these promising results of early visual gain, reports of visual acuity loss after treatment30 and continued photoreceptor degeneration at three years have emerged.31 Although these findings of progressive degeneration are somewhat discouraging, they do provide context for an educated and realistic interpretation of findings from these exciting Phase I/II trials as we move into treatment trials for other inherited retinal disorders.

The recently completed Phase III trial of SPK-RPE65 for treatment of RPE65-associated LCA reported that treated patients displayed improved sensitivity to dim light compared to controls (P<0.001) with no significant difference in visual acuity between the two groups.27 The 31 subjects were randomized 2:1 to an early treatment arm or a one-year treatment- delayed arm.27 Both eyes received a subretinal injection of 300 L of AAV, with the second eye treated within 18 days of the first.

The primary endpoint for this trial was mobility testing in an obstacle course with one eye patched. Treated patients scored better than controls (P<0.001), meaning that these treated patients could navigate the maze in lower-light conditions. The secondary outcome was full-field light sensitivity, which was done with both eyes open.

The trial reported no serious adverse events. All ocular events were mild. They included transient elevated intraocular pressure in four subjects, cataract formation in three, retinal tears that resolved after laser in two subjects and transient mild eye inflammation in two subjects. Spark Therapeutics has filed a Food and Drug Administration application for approval of this therapy. That could pave the way for future retinal gene therapies and certainly raise awareness of the need for accurate clinical diagnosis of retinal dystrophies and genetic confirmation of disease.27

Optimizing Vectors, Delivery Groups are also continuing to work on optimizing vectors for potency to possibly increase the therapeutic effect of gene transfer.32 Some investigators believe that earlier treatment in these progressive retinal dystrophies may offer the best chance of sustained visual recovery. Phase I/II trials have shown no direct correlation between patient age and treatment response, although they did report less dramatic improvements in retinal sensitivity in younger patients who had the greatest preservation of retinal structure.30

The mechanism for surgically delivering gene therapy to the retina is under much discussion because of the potential trauma subretinal injections may cause, particularly those involving the macula. Some of the phase I/II LCA trials suggested that patients lost visual acuity and retinal thickness after subfoveal injections, potentially due to mechanical trauma to the fovea from inducing a retinal detachment.11

Keep in mind that these trials involving subretinal injections are targeting only cells in the region of the surgically induced subretinal bleb, which make up a small percentage of the entire retina (gene therapy clinical trial bleb sizes range from 150 m to 450 m).

Zones of retina treated, as well as viral vector dosing, play important roles in the long-term restoration of function. We may yet learn that concomitant neuro-protectant treatments are also going to be useful, if not mandatory, in treating inherited retinal degenerative disease.

Future Trials AGTC expects to begin enrollment soon of a Phase I/II dose-escalation study for treatment of CNGA3-achromatopsia with AAV (using the same AAV vector and promoter as used in the CNGB3 study).33 AGTC is also developing an AAV-RPGR vector for X-linked RP for which it plans to submit an investigational new drug application to the FDA in 2017.34

Although most phase I/II trials for LCA2 show initial improvement in retinal sensitivity in patients after gene therapy, these improvements were modest even in participants with relatively mild retinal degeneration and failed to protect against ongoing degeneration,30 suggesting that we still have much room for improvement in the field.

Research into new optimized vectors for therapeutic efficacy and longevity needs to continue. From a clinical standpoint, we still do not fully understand which patients may benefit most from therapy and how therapeutic intervention will alter the natural history of retinal degeneration and progression of vision loss. From a surgical standpoint, more attention is being placed on optimal delivery to minimize mechanical trauma and perioperative inflammation.

Retinal gene therapy has advanced eons in the past 10 years. We will likely see FDA approval in the near future for the first viral-based retinal gene therapy for LCA2. With innovations like optogenetics we can imagine a future where multiple different diseases can be treated with a larger window of opportunity for therapeutic effect. While exciting to the clinical community, these advances will be even more attractive to our patients who, until very recently, have been told at yearly follow-ups, There is nothing that can be done. We are finally at a point where we can offer realistic hope. RS

REFERENCES 1. Fahim AT, Daiger SP, Weleber RG. Nonsyndromic retinitis pigmentosa overview. In: Pagon RA, Adam MD, Ardinger, HH, et al., eds. GeneReviews [Internet]. Seattle, WA:University of Washington, Seattlel 1993-2017: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1417/. Accessed February 7, 2017. 2. Ghazi NG, Abboud EB, Nowilaty SR, et al., Treatment of retinitis pigmentosa due to MERTK mutations by ocular subretinal injection of adeno-associated virus gene vector: results of a phase I trial. Hum Gene. 2016;135:327-343. 3. Walia S, Fishman GA. Natural history of phenotypic changes in Stargardt macular dystrophy. Ophthalmic Genet. 2009;30: 63-68. 4. Sanofi. A study to determine the long-term safety, tolerability and biological activity of SAR422459 ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed January 30, 2017. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01736592?term=NCT01736592&rank=1 NLM Identifier: NCT01736592. 5. Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine. Safety and tolerability of sub-retinal transplantation of human embryonic stem cell derived retinal pigmented epithelial (hESC-RPE) cells in patients with Stargardts macular dystrophy (SMD). In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed January 30, 2017. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01469832?term=NCT01469832&rank=1 Identifier: NCT01469832. 6. Alkeus Pharmaceuticals. Phase 2 tolerability and effects of ALK-001 on Stargardt Disease. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed January 30, 2017. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02402660?term=NCT02402660&rank=1 NLM Identifier: NCT02402660. 7. Oxford BioMedica. Phase I dose escalation safety study of RetinoStat in advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD). In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed January 30, 2017. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=NCT01301443&Search=Search. NLM Identifier: NCT01301443. 8. Sanofi. A study to determine the long-term safety, tolerability and biological activity of UshStat in patients with Usher syndrome type 1B. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed January 30, 2017. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=UshStat&Search=Search. NLM Identifier: NCT02065011. 9. Hashimoto T, Gibbs D, Lillo C, et al. Lentiviral gene replacement therapy of retinas in a mouse model for Usher syndrome type 1B. Gene Ther. 2007;14: 584-594. 10. Applied Genetics Technology Corp. Safety and efficacy of rAAV-hRS1 in patients with X-linked retinoschisis (XLRS). In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed February 7, 2017. Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02416622?term=agtc+rs1&rank=1. 11. Jacobson SG, Cideciyan AV, Ratnakaram R, et al. Gene therapy for leber congenital amaurosis caused by RPE65 mutations: safety and efficacy in 15 children and adults followed up to 3 years. Arch Ophthalmol. 2012;130:9-24. 12. Sanofi. Phase I/IIa study of SAR422459 in patients with Stargardts macular degeneration. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=NCT+01367444&Search=Search. NLM Identifier: NCT 01367444. 13. Rosenberg T, Haim M, Hauch AM, Parving A. The prevalence of Usher syndrome and other retinal dystrophy-hearing impairment associations. Clin Genet. 1997;51: 314-321. 14. Sanofi. Study of UshStat in patients with retinitis pigmentosa associated with Usher syndrome type 1B. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=NCT01505062&Search=Search. NLM Identifier: NCT01505062. 15. Email communication from R. Buggage, MD (February 2017). 16. Sieving PA, MacDonald IM, Chan S. X-linked Retinoschisis In: Pagon RA, Adam MD, Ardinger, HH, et al., eds. GeneReviews [Internet]. Seattle, WA:University of Washington, Seattlel 1993-2017: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1222/. Accessed February 7, 2017. 17. Sauer CG, Gehrig A, Warneke-Wittstock R, et al. Positional cloning of the gene associated with X-linked juvenile retinoschisis. Nat Genet. 1997;17:164-170. 18. Min SH, Molday LL, Seeliger MW, et al. Prolonged recovery of retinal structure/function after gene therapy in an Rs1h-deficient mouse model of X-linked juvenile retinoschisis. Mol Ther. 2005;12:644-651. 19. National Eye Institute.; Turriff AE, Sieving PA. Study of RS1 ocular gene transfer for X-linked retinoschisis. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed February 7, 2017. Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02317887?term=retinoschisis&rank=7. 20. MacLaren RE, Groppe M, Barnard AR, et al. Retinal gene therapy in patients with choroideremia: initial findings from a phase 1/2 clinical trial. Lancet, 2014. 383:1129-1137. 21. Edwards TL, Jolly JK, Groppe M, et al. Visual Acuity after retinal gene therapy for choroideremia. N Engl J Med, 2016. 374:1996-1998. 22. Spark Therapeutics. Safety and dose-escalation study of AAV2-hCHM in subjects with CHM (choroideremia gene mutations. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed February 7, 2017 Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02341807?term=spark+choroideremia&rank=1. 23. Sharpe LT, Stockman A, Jagle H, Nathans J. Opsin genes, cone photopigments, color vision, and color blindness. In: Gegenfurtner K, Sharpe LT, eds. Color Vision: from Genes to Perception. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999:3-52. 24. Applied Genetic Technologies Corp. Safety and efficacy trial of AAV gene therapy in patients with CNGB3 achromatopsia. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed February 7, 2017. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02599922?term=cngb3&rank=3. 25. Allikmets R. Leber congenital amaurosis: a genetic paradigm. Ophthalmic Genet. 2004;25:67-79. 26. Bainbridge JW, Smith AJ, Barker SS, et al. Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Lebers congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2231-2239. 27. Maguire AM, Simonelli F, Pierce EA. Safety and efficacy of gene transfer for Lebers congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2240-2248. 28. Cideciyan AV, Aleman TS, Boye SL, et al. Human gene therapy for RPE65 isomerase deficiency activates the retinoid cycle of vision but with slow rod kinetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:15112-15117. 29. Cideciyan AV, Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, et al. Human RPE65 gene therapy for Leber congenital amaurosis: persistence of early visual improvements and safety at 1 year. Hum Gene Ther. 2009;20:999-1004. 30. Bainbridge JW, Mehat MS, Sundaram V, et al. Long-term effect of gene therapy on Lebers congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1887-1897. 31. Jacobson SG, Cideciyan AV, Roman AJ, et al. Improvement and decline in vision with gene therapy in childhood blindness. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1920-1926. 32. Georgiadis A, Duran Y, Ribeiro J, et al. Development of an optimized AAV2/5 gene therapy vector for Leber congenital amaurosis owing to defects in RPE65. Gene Ther. 2016;23:857-862. 33. Applied Genetic Technologies Corp. Safety and efficacy trial of AAV gene therapy in patients with CNGA3 achromatopsia. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed February 7, 2017. Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02935517?term=cnga3&rank=2. 34. AGTC files investigational new drug application for the treatment of achromatopsia caused by mutations in the CNGA3 gene. [press release] Gainesville, FL, and Cambridge, MA. Applied Genetic Technologies Corp. October 19, 2016. 35. RetroSense Therapeutics. RST-001 Phase I/II trial for retinitis pigmentosa. In: ClinicalTrials.gov. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine. Accessed February 7, 2017. Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02556736?term=retrosense&rank=1.

See the rest here:
Gene Therapy: The New Frontier for Inherited Retinal Disease

Stem Cell Therapy | New York – Park Avenue Stem Cell

Personal Cell Therapy involves extraction of your own cells from your own body tissues such as the blood, bone marrow or adipose tissue done under sterile conditions. These cells include your own growth factors, platelets and/ or mesenchymal stem cells. These cells are already in your body, surround every small blood vessel and freely roam in the bloodstream. The stromal tissue exists in all organs. These cells can be procured by minimal manipulation. Homologous deployment of your own cells can be accomplished by direct injection into the affected area in the same surgical procedure. These cells do not elicit an immune response that is an issue with allogenic cells

THE CURRENT LITERATURE IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY SUGGESTS THAT TREATMENT WITH THESE CELLS REPRESENT A MEDICAL BREAKTHROUGH IN THE TREATMENT OF MANY CHRONIC MEDICAL CONDITIONS. ( see references)

At Park Avenue Stem Cell we are dedicated continuing clinical research to gather data about the safety and the efficacy of personalized cell treatments.

Our treatments include various modalities however in each case we provide frequent follow up in order to achieve the safest and the best results.

Originally posted here:
Stem Cell Therapy | New York - Park Avenue Stem Cell

Ask the doctors: Stem cell therapies need more research …

Thu., April 11, 2019, 9:42 a.m.

By Eve Glazier, M.D., , Elizabeth Ko and M.D. Andrews McMeel Syndication

Dear Doctor: Stem cell therapies are being heavily marketed here in Florida as promising treatments for a variety of illnesses, but I have my doubts. As a retired doctor, I hate to see people go into debt to pay for something fraudulent or unsafe. Am I being too critical?

Dear Reader: Stem cell therapies are making headlines right now in two very different ways. One is the news that a patient infected with HIV has been in remission for 18 months following a stem cell transplant. The other stem cell news arises from the subject of your letter. That is, unproven and unapproved stem cell treatments. These are being widely marketed as miracle cures for everything from Parkinsons disease, autism, arthritis and dementia to depression, multiple sclerosis, macular degeneration and traumatic brain injury.

Although the use of embryonic stem cells is federally monitored, adult stem cells can be extracted from a patients own body. That makes regulation and oversight challenging.

Despite extravagant claims of success by stem cell clinics, outcomes are largely unproven. However, the potential dangers are clear. In the past year, at least 17 people in five states have become gravely ill following stem cell treatments that used injections of umbilical cord blood and required hospitalization. In one such case, a man who received an injection of umbilical cord blood to address joint pain developed sepsis, a life-threatening infection. He spent 58 days in the hospital.

Last December, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a report warning about unapproved stem cell treatments. The Food and Drug Administration has issued numerous warnings on the issue as well.

The allure of stem cells is that they are a kind of blank canvas. These unprogrammed cells divide rapidly and have the ability to change into other types of cells, such as bone, brain or muscle cells. As a result, stem cells are the centerpiece of regenerative medicine, in which disease and injury are treated by growing new cells, or by replacing or repairing those that are dead and damaged.

Thanks to their unique properties, stem cells are seen as important tools in potential new therapies for diabetes, Parkinsons and heart disease, among others. But because stem cells are undifferentiated, they must first go through a special process, somewhat like programming, in which they are prepared to become specific types of cells. It is during this process, as well as during the act of transplantation, that potential risks to patients can arise.

According to the CDC, a number of vials of stem cell products made from umbilical cord blood were found to be contaminated with E. coli. Even before this latest spate of bad news, various unapproved stem cell treatments were found to cause harm to patients that included severe respiratory illness, blindness and even death.

With few consumer protections in place at this time, the FDA recommends that patients avoid stem cell therapies that are not part of an approved clinical trial. To find ongoing and upcoming clinical trials that use stem cells, visit clinicaltrials.gov. The home page contains a form that you can use to focus your search.

Send your questions to askthedoctors@mednet.ucla.edu.

April 11, 2019, 9:42 a.m.

More:
Ask the doctors: Stem cell therapies need more research ...

stem cell Doctors in Dearborn | stem cell knee injections in Dearborn

stem cell Doctors in Dearborn | stem cell knee injections in Dearborn MI

Stem Cell Therapy Treatments in Dearborn MI | Stem Cell for Knee pain Dearborn Mi

http://integrativehealthmi.com/ Stem Cell Website http://integrativehealthmi.com/testim... Video Testimonials

Here's just a taste of what you'll learn at this special live educational seminar: Learn about this remarkable cutting edge healing Stem Cell Doctors in Dearborn MI, technology that can actually repair damaged tissue in the body through a painless and safe stem cell injection. (Hint: Normal drugs just mask the pain.) According to Michigan Integrative Healths chief medical officer, "Patients can experience a significant decrease in pain and improved range of motion within weeks of just one treatment." When the body heals, the pain naturally goes away. Discover how stem cell injections work... (This is really fascinating stuff!) We'll explain how they pinpoint the impaired areas, remove the swelling with powerful anti-inflammatory properties and heal them by regenerating new cells and tissue. Why this innovative therapy is helpful for degenerative arthritis, degenerative cartilage and ligaments, bone spurs, degenerative joint disease, bursitis and tendonitis. Stem Cell Clinic in Dearborn MI, If you suffer from one of these or know someone who is in pain, this could be life-changing. Michigan Integrative Health is one of the first clinics in the area to offer this highly advanced form of therapy.

To reserve your seat at this informative seminar, click on one of the buttons on below or call (844) 644-7836 or (844) MIH-STEM. When you attend, youll receive a special reduced price consultation at the clinic to explore your stem cell therapy options. If you are unable to attend one of these seminar dates,Stem Cell Specialists in Port Huron MI, please call to schedule a consultation or find out about the next seminar

Theresa - Livonia, MI Patient

"I had back pain, sciatica, and both knees hurt. Its been 5 weeks since I received care. My back pain and sciatica are gone. My knee pain has improved by 75%. Before care my back would hurt when I stood to wash dishes. Now I have no pain."

Rick - Shelby Township, MI Patient

"I was having grinding in my shoulders at night, severe hip problem on the left side and a joint issue in the right toe. 5 weeks after care the grinding in my shoulder is just about gone. My hip pain is completely gone. I have also had a reduction in urinary urgency that has been reduced by 80-90%." Cell Therapy for back pain in Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy for back pain in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Therapy for back pain in Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy for spine degeneration Lansing MI, stem cell therapy for spine degeneration in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Therapy & Treatment Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Therapy and Treatments in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Therapy Treatments in Dearborn MI, The Best Stem Cell Therapy Treatments in Dearborn MI, where Can I get Stem Cell Treatment in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Centers in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Center in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Clinics in Dearborn MI, Stem Cell Clinics Dearborn MI, stem cells for back pain Dearborn MI, Stem Cells for Back Pain in Dearborn MI, Stem Cells for back pain Doctor in Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy for back pain reviews Dearborn MI, cost of stem cell therapy in Dearborn MI, stem cell center Dearborn MI, stem cell shoulder Dearborn MI, cervical stem cell therapy Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy Dearborn MI, stem cell pain Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy on knees Dearborn MI, stem cell shoulder Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy Dearborn MI, stem cell knee pain in Dearborn MI, stem cell knee therapy for Dearborn MI, stem cell clinic in Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy in Dearborn MI, stem cell spine Dearborn MI, stem cell injection knees Dearborn MI, stem cell clinic in Dearborn MI, stem cell injections Dearborn MI, stem cell joint Dearborn MI, stem cell shoulder Dearborn MI, stem cell spine Dearborn MI, stem cell therapy in Dearborn MI, Stem cell clinic in Dearborn MI, stem cell injections Dearborn MI, stem cell knee surgery Dearborn MI, stem cell joint Dearborn MI, stem cell clinic in Dearborn MI, stem cell knee pain Dearborn MI, stem cell injections Dearborn MI, stem cell knee pain injections Dearborn MI, stem cell center Dearborn MI, stem cell center in Dearborn MI, stem cell doctors in Dearborn MI, stem cell center in Dearborn MI, stem cell back therapy in Dearborn MI, stem cell doctors in Dearborn MI, stem cell shoulder Dearborn MI, stem cell back Dearborn MI, stem cell doctors in Dearborn MI, Stem cell center Dearborn MI, stem cell joint Dearborn MI, stem cell treatment Dearborn MI, stem cell clinic Dearborn MI, stem cell shoulder Dearborn MI, stem cell knee injections in Dearborn MI, stem cell center Dearborn MI, stem cell treatment Dearborn MI,

Read more:
stem cell Doctors in Dearborn | stem cell knee injections in Dearborn