Scientists offer a glimpse of life without immune-suppressing drugs

slimvictor

slimvictor

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
6,477
Location
"Darkness cannot be dissipated with more darkness.
By the time Lindsay Porter had her kidneys removed two years ago, they were bulging -- covered in cysts -- and together weighed 16 pounds.

Her abdominal area was so distended, "I looked nine months pregnant, and people regularly asked when I was due," Porter said.

As she prepared for a transplant to address her polycystic kidney disease, Porter, 47, had mixed feelings -- relief to have found a donor, tinged with resignation. She was looking forward to both a new kidney, and a lifetime on immune system-suppressing drugs.

"You get this brand new shiny kidney, and then they give you drugs that eventually destroy it," said Porter.

But that scenario may eventually change, if results of a new pilot study are replicated in a larger group of patients. The study, published Wednesday in the journal Science Translational Medicine, describes eight kidney transplant patients, including Porter, who received a stem cell therapy that allowed donor and recipient immune cells to coexist in the same body.
The effect, in a handful of those patients, was to trick the recipient's immune system into recognizing the donated kidney as its own.

When it works, patients become a sort of medical rarity called a chimera.

"Chimerism is a condition wherein two different genetic cell populations are present in the body, and both cell types are tolerated," said Dr. Anthony Atala, director of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, who was not involved in the study, via e-mail.

cont at
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/07/health/transplant-stem-cells-drugs/index.html
 
And to think people actually wanted to ban stem cells..

This is some amazing stuff, I imagine a future where even if you have a heart attack, they just get a new home grown one out the fridge and boom sorted.
 
As the son of someone who received a liver transplant, and someone immensely interested in organ donation and transplantation, I find this very fascinating, and can only hope that things like this come around soon for the next generations of transplant recipients.

Most people dont realize that those immunosuppressants they give you actually are VERY nephrotoxic, and do in fact destroy kidneys after X amount of years (depending on amount of drug taken daily, some people need more others less). However, this was not a problem in the past because the 10-15 year survival rate for kidney/liver transplants, etc used to not be that high, and those people were not expected in many cases to make it to the point where their kidneys could be destroyed.

In fact, I believe for liver its still only around 50% although thats MUCH HIGHER than it once was (however I do not believe this takes into account the people who die a day or two in from hyperacute/acute rejection, in which case the long term % is in reality higher for people who successfully have the surgeries).

However, with great bounds and leaps in those very fields: immunosuppressants, transplant procedures, we have managed to extend and extend the 10/15 year survival rates, however, we have not managed to decrease much of the kidney toxicity these drugs inflict. They do so for a whole slew of reasons, and most of them too:

The calcineurin inhibitors ciclosporin, and tacrolimus both are toxic to kidneys

Other immunosuppressants such as Mycophenolate mofetil (cellcept) also are rough on the kidneys, although they are rougher on other parts of the body.

However one calcineurin inhibitor, a fairly recent (if not newest) one, sirolimus, is actually used in liver transplant patients who already have renal problems. In fact there is a regimen that the docs do here at Columbia Pres in NYC using sirolimus for just such patients, and in fact studies showed that the patients on this regimen experienced little to no long term kidney damage, making it a more viable medication for those projected to make it past the 10/15 year survivals.

Sadly my father is on tacrolimus, which is pretty rough on the kidneys. But hey, those docs know way better than me, right? They must have their reasons.

Chimerism has also been show in a few unique liver transplantations. A youngish lady received a liver transplant and does not need immunosuppressants. This proves that the liver may play a yet undetermined role in the development of the immune system as well as blood and hemoglobin production. There are more stories regarding a few (like around 5 ever) recipients who did not need immunosuppressants for various reasons (chimerism, impacted antibodies by the graft itself, such as in the liver where it somehow plays a role in immuno-functions)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-510128/Miracle-girl-liver-transplant-changed-blood-type.html

Sadly it cant happen to every liver recipient. But it is just more evidence of crazy stuff theyre doing with medicine, and I felt it was on par with the topic.
 
Last edited:
Newbierock said:
And to think people actually wanted to ban stem cells.
Click to expand...

people still want to ban embryonic stem cells. At least, conservative Americans do. These people have a fanatical sentimentality for embryos, fetuses and brain-dead coma patients. Everyone else can go fuck themselves though.

I'm not sure if the stem cells referred to in this article are embryonic.
 
anyone who wants to ban stem cells is a closed minded idiot. the possibilities are totally endless with stem cells. we haven't even broken the surface yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top