Pages

Sunday, 6 October 2013

TIME Feature: CSO Aubrey de Grey on Google's Newly Launched Anti-Aging Initiative

reposted from: http://www.sens.org/outreach/outreach-blog/time-feature-cso-aubrey-de-grey-googles-newly-launched-anti-aging-initiative

crabsallover highlights, key points, comments / links.

Posted by Desiree Dudley on September 18, 2013 | Outreach

In today's TIME Tech Exclusive Google vs. Death, Larry Page announced Calico, a new Google firm focusing on the challenges of healthcare, aging and associated diseases.
"Illness and aging affect all our families. With some longer term, moonshot thinking around healthcare and biotechnology, I believe we can improve millions of lives," said Larry.
Arthur D. Levinson, Chairman and former CEO of Genentech, Chairman of Apple, and director of Hoffmann-La Roche, will be CEO and a founding investor.
"We focus on early-stage, proof-of-concept research as a non-profit here at SENS Research Foundation. That sort of work is appealing to only the most visionary of investors in the for-profit world. But the ultimate goal of Peter Thiel and our other early supporters has always been to kickstart real anti-aging industry, so it's very important news." said Mike Kope, CEO of SENS Research Foundation.
"I applaud the vision of Google in choosing to devote their energies toward solving the problems of age-related disease, and warmly welcome Art Levinson to this new initiative."
After speaking at a Google Tech Talk in Mountain View last month, SENS Research Foundation co-founder and CSO Aubrey de Grey was asked to opine on the news in a response at TIME, also published today.
"The 'beginning of the beginning' of the war on aging began in the 1990s. Since then, the battle for hearts and minds as to that quest’s feasibility has been proceeding at full tilt. With Google’s decision to direct its resources toward aging, that battle may have been transcended. The curmudgeons no longer matter," said Aubrey. "It's no exaggeration to state that the end of the beginning may have arrived. I won’t go so far as to say that my crusading job is done, but for sure it just got a whole lot easier."

New cholesterol drug shows promise

reposted from: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2013/10October/Pages/New-cholesterol-drug-show-promise.aspx
crabsallover highlights, key points, comments / links.

“Heart attack risk could be cut by new cholesterol lowering drug,” The Guardian reports.
This headline – and others like it – stretch the findings from an early safety trial of ALN-PCS, a new drug that targets LDL (or ‘bad’) cholesterol.
Such trials are not designed to see whether a drug is effective, and in this case, the trial had too few people involved to be able to tell.
ALN-PCS belongs to a class of molecules known as small interfering RNAs or siRNAs. The drug is designed to block the effects of a protein, called PCSK9, that is associated with cholesterol levels.
The trial included 32 healthy people and found that a single dose of the new drug was safe and well tolerated. Further trials are planned to assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of the drug in people with high cholesterol who need lipid-lowering medications such as statins.
As this was just a phase I trial the drug was not compared to other cholesterol-lowering drugs, and information on long-term outcomes, such as reduced risk of heart attacks, was not assessed. Also, the drug was tested in healthy volunteers and not among individuals with very high cholesterol levels who would normally need such treatment.
Further research, in the form of a phase II clinical trial is now required.

The 1, 2, 3 of clinical trials

There are three levels to clinical trials:
  • phase I trials are small trials that enrol healthy people and are primarily designed to see if a drug is safe, and to determine the best dosage for future studies
  • phase II trials are larger, longer-term trials designed to see if a drug is both safe and effective
  • phase III trials are very large trials, usually lasting several years, to see how well the drug works in real patients

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, the University of Texas South Western in the US, Guy’s Hospital in London, and Covance Clinical Research Unit, Leeds. The trial was funded by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals.
A number of the researchers involved in the study are employees of, and/or stock owners in Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, which represents a potential conflict of interest (which was declared in the study).
The study was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal, The Lancet.
Media coverage of the study was mixed, with most headlines focusing on the cholesterol lowering effects of the drug. This was despite the fact that this was not the main aim of the study, and that it was not large enough to detect such changes. The Daily Telegraph did go on to report that, “larger studies would now be needed to check long-term safety and tolerability of the drug on patients who take statins as well as those who cannot take the drugs”.

What kind of research was this?

This was a phase I clinical trial (a randomised controlled trial) that assessed the safety and tolerability of a newly developed cholesterol lowering drug called ALN-PCS.
ALN-PCS is a small interfering RNA (siRNA) molecule, which prevents the production of a protein called PCSK9. PCSK9 has been shown to bind to other proteins called LDL receptors, which are responsible for clearing ‘bad’ LDL cholesterol from the blood. When these receptors are blocked by PCSK9, LDL cholesterol builds up in the blood. There is substantial evidence that high LDL cholesterol levels increase the risk of coronary heart disease.
ALN-PCS works by interrupting the production of PCKS9. The process by which such siRNA molecules interrupt gene expression is called RNA interference (RNAi).
Based on previous research in animals, researchers expected that when participants received ALN-PCS, the levels of PCSK9 in their blood would drop, and a corresponding reduction in LDL cholesterol would be seen.

What did the research involve?

The researchers recruited 32 healthy volunteers with mild to moderately elevated LDL cholesterol. They were randomly assigned to receive either a placebo infusion of a salt solution or a single infusion of the drug, called ALN-PCS, into a vein.
The night and morning before the infusion, volunteers were given a pre-treatment including paracetamol, a corticosteroid and an antihistamine. This was in order to reduce the chances of an adverse reaction to the infusion of the drug.
As a phase I trial, the main aim of the study was to determine whether the drug was safe, and which doses were tolerable by people. As such, six different doses of ALN-PCS were tested, and the primary outcome of the study was the frequency and severity of adverse events (side effects).
As a secondary outcome, the researchers checked for changes in PCSK9 and LDL cholesterol levels in the blood, measured at the beginning of the study and seven days after the drug infusion.

What were the basic results?

Of the 32 healthy participants, 24 were randomly assigned to receive the drug (ALN-PCS) and eight to receive placebo.
Treatment with ALN-PCS was found to be both safe and well tolerated at all doses.
No one receiving the drug experienced any drug-related serious side effects. One patient receiving a low dose was diagnosed with a serious condition on the third day of the study. However, this was determined to be unrelated to the drug being trialled.
Overall, similar proportions of patients receiving ALN-PCS and placebo experienced mild to moderate side effects (79% in the treatment group and 88% in the placebo group).
The researchers also found that the single dose of ALN-PCS was found to significantly reduce concentrations of PCSK9 in the blood, with greater reductions seen at higher drug doses. This was associated with a reduction in LDL cholesterol levels, with higher drug doses causing greater and longer reductions in cholesterol concentrations. The highest drug dose resulted in an average reduction of 40%, compared to placebo.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers concluded that treatment with the RNAi drug ALN-PCS was safe and well tolerated, and that “future trials are needed to fully assess the benefit and long-term safety of ALN-PCS in various patient populations” including patients who are receiving statins as well as patients who cannot tolerate statins.

Conclusion

Media headlines reporting on this phase I trial concentrated on the secondary outcome (that ALN-PCS reduced LDL cholesterol levels). However, these results will need to be confirmed during phase II and phase III clinical trials, which will involve more participants who would normally receive cholesterol-lowering treatment.
While it is tempting to focus on the results of the cholesterol levels, phase I clinical trials are designed to test the safety of a new drug to make sure it is safe enough to test further. They also aim to determine what the highest tolerable dose is, so the appropriate one can be used in later studies. For those reasons, they involve testing the drug in a small group of healthy individuals.
The researchers note (although no media outlets seemed to report on this aspect of the study) that the study was too small to detect statistically significant changes in PCSK9 or LDL cholesterol levels compared with placebo group.
The results of this study will be used to design further phase II and phase III trials, which will further characterise the safety profile of the drug and determine its effectiveness at reducing LDL cholesterol among people who need cholesterol-lowering medications. Only then can we determine whether the drug offers an effective option for managing high LDL cholesterol.
While perhaps less immediately interesting from the general public’s perspective, one of the more exciting aspects of this research is that it is the first time an RNA interference drug has been shown – in humans – to lower a protein that is made in the liver. It is also the first time such a drug has shown a measurable health benefit, even though this was not the primary outcome of the study.
The process of RNA interference is a relatively new discovery (first described in 1998), and substantial research efforts have been directed towards the development of siRNA treatments for human disease. This field of research has hit several hurdles, so this study showing potential clinical benefit from siRNA treatment is exciting news for scientists.
Analysis by Bazian. Edited by NHS Choices. Follow Behind the Headlines on twitter.

Thursday, 19 September 2013

Healthy living may 'reverse' cellular ageing

reposted from: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2013/09September/Pages/Healthy-living-may-reverse-cellular-ageing.aspx
Review: Fergus Walsh : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24114277
crabsallover highlights, key points, comments / links.

Telomere length is thought to be a genetic-level sign of ageing.
In this study, researchers investigated whether adopting a healthy lifestyle could cause telomerase activity and telomere length to increase. Telomeres are protective DNA and protein "caps" which protect the ends of chromosomes. Telomerase is an enzyme that can add DNA to telomeres, counteracting this shortening.
The researchers found that men who adopted a healthy lifestyle had increased telomere length after five years, whereas telomere length decreased in men who did not change their ways.
While the results of the study are intriguing, this research has significant limitations, including its small sample size – only 10 men were in the intervention group, for example.
Another significant drawback is the assumption that increased telomere length will automatically lead to improved health. This remains unproven. 

Healthy living

The lifestyle intervention used in the study consisted of four components:
All four of these components are associated with improvements in both physical and mental health.

The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Lancet Oncology.

What did the research involve?

The researchers recruited men with low-risk prostate cancer who had decided not to have radiotherapy or surgery and had instead decided to "watch and wait".
Low-risk prostate cancers are small and progress more slowly than high-risk cancers. "Watchful waiting", where no active treatment is immediately planned, is a common approach because radiotherapy and surgery can have severe side effects, such as urinary incontinence. This approach is often recommended for older men when it is unlikely the cancer will affect their natural life span.

Treatment for prostate cancer

Many men will require no treatment for prostate cancer, depending on the stage and grade of the tumour. Find out more abouttreatment of prostate cancer.
The men participated in two studies: the GEMINAL study and the MENS study. Both studies monitored the men's tumours.
Men participating in the GEMINAL study had a complete lifestyle change. They:
  • ate a diet high in whole foods, plant-based protein, fruits, vegetables, unrefined grains and legumes, and low in fat and refined carbohydrates (meals were provided for the first three months)
  • performed moderate aerobic exercise by walking for 30 minutes per day six days per week
  • managed stress with gentle yoga-based stretching, breathing, meditation, imagery and progressive relaxation for 60 minutes daily
  • had increased social support, with 60-minute support sessions once per week
For the first three months, at each weekly session men in the GEMINAL study:
  • had another hour of moderate exercise supervised by an exercise physiologist
  • had one hour of stress management techniques supervised by a certified stress management specialist
  • attended one hour of support group led by a clinical psychologist
  • attended a one-hour lecture by a dietitian, nurse or doctor during dinner
After the first three months meetings were not compulsory, but patients could continue to meet on their own for two four-hour meetings per month.
Men participating in the MENS study did not have any help to make lifestyle changes.
The researchers monitored whether the men in both studies made lifestyle changes and calculated a lifestyle index score based on diet, stress management, exercise and social support.
Blood samples were taken from the men at the start of the studies and again five years later. The researchers measured telomere length in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (any blood cell with a round nucleus). They also looked at how active the enzyme telomerase was.
The researchers looked at whether there were differences in changes between baseline and five years after the study started between both groups of men. They looked at changes in:
  • telomere length, measured in "single-copy ratio units", a type of measurement used by geneticists to compare the size of telomeres
  • telomerase activity
  • lifestyle index score
  • prostate specific antigen (PSA) concentration
Prostate cancer can increase the production of PSA – a hormone produced by the prostate – although raised PSA levels are also found in many older men without prostate problems.

What were the basic results?

The researchers used information from 10 men participating in the GEMINAL study who underwent comprehensive lifestyle changes and compared them with 25 men who participated in the MENS study (controls).
After five years, men in the lifestyle change group made more lifestyle changes than men in the control group. Therefore, changes in the lifestyle index score were significantly higher in the lifestyle change group.
After five years, telomere length had increased by a median (average) of 0.06 telomere to single-copy gene ratio units in the lifestyle change group. It had decreased by 0.03 telomere to single-copy gene ratio units in the control group. The difference in changes was statistically significant.
When men from both groups were combined, it was found that improvements in lifestyle were significantly associated with changes in telomere length. For each per cent increase in lifestyle index score, the relative telomere length increased by 0.07 telomere to single-copy gene ratio units after adjustment for age and length of follow-up.
After five years, there was no significant difference in change in telomerase activity (the ability of the  enzyme telomerase extracted from cells to add DNA to telomeres) between the two groups, and telomerase activity was not found to be associated with changes in lifestyle.
There was also no significant difference in change in prostate specific antigen (PSA) concentrations between the two groups.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers concluded that a "comprehensive lifestyle intervention was associated with increases in relative telomere length after five years of follow-up, compared with controls, in this small pilot study. Larger randomised controlled trials are warranted to confirm this finding."

Conclusion

This interesting study has found that a comprehensive lifestyle intervention was associated with increases in relative telomere length after five years of follow-up in men with prostate cancer.
However, this is a small non-randomised study and it is possible that there are unknown sources of bias. The men came from different trials and they may have differed in other unknown ways. A randomised controlled trial is the only way to counteract this bias and this type of study needs to be performed to confirm these findings.
This research does not show whether lifestyle changes increase telomere length in groups of people other than men with prostate cancer.
Finally, although increases in relative telomere length are thought to be beneficial, it is not clear what, if any, impact this had on the men's health. For example, do longer telomeres mean a better prognosis for men with prostate cancer? 

Hopefully these questions will be answered if further research is carried out.

Analysis by Bazian. Edited by NHS Choices. Follow Behind the Headlines on Twitter.