Treating cancer with measles

[anam_moon]

Taken from Yahoo news-page:

U.S. researchers are launching a phase I clinical trial to test an engineered measles virus against the bone marrow cancer multiple myeloma.

Multiple myeloma is a type of cancer where plasma cell tumors are spread throughout bone marrow.

In this trial, conducted at the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center in Rochester, Minn, the measles vaccine will be administered intravenously to adults with relapsed or refractory (meaning patients have failed more than one type of treatment) myeloma. The participants must not have had allogenic (from another person) stem cell transplants and must have previously had the measles or been vaccinated against it.

This is the third in a series of Mayo studies testing the potential of measles to kill cancer. The other two studies are looking at the effect of measles on recurrent ovarian cancer and a type of brain tumor called glioblastoma multiforme.

The measles viruses used in the research were engineered by inserting additional genes into the measles vaccine strain. The measles viruses seek out a protein called CD46 -- which is overexpressed by many cancers -- and use it as a receptor to enter the cancer cells.

Once inside the cancer cell, the measles virus spreads and infects nearby tumor cells, causing them to fuse together and increasing cancer cell death.

Comments

[baronlaw.livejournal.com]

Wow, curing Cancer with Measles. Who would have thought!

[ladysashi.livejournal.com]

An interesting discovery... although I wonder whether the reintroduction of measels (even a weak strain) into the general population is a wise idea.

Being vaccinated against measels does not guarantee against an outbreak of the virus. Vaccinations are not cure-alls - they are preventative measures, with a recorded 1-5% margin of error (http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf). Even given all of the medical breakthroughs over the last century, our scientific and medical experts have never discovered a way to destroy parasitic viruses, aside from the destruction of its vector or host through the use of intense heat. What that means is that basically, once you catch a virus, it stays in your immune system until you die - hopefully suppressed permanently by your own natural antibodies(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus and http://bioweb.wku.edu/courses/BIOL115/Wyatt/Immunology/Immune3.htm). However, supressed viruses can still be passed onto others, depending upon its vector type (i.e. airborne, fluid passage, direct skin contact).

Measels is a pox-type virus that is passed through direct contact through the epidermis AND through fluid vectors that go airborne. It is also no exception to the secondary passage rule -- many people catch measels because a supposedly healthy person, who has the virus suppressed in their immune system, sneezes in their general direction.

Now, enter in this scenario: immigrants coming to this country are not necessarily vaccinated against measels, mumps and rhubella. The U.S. DOES take the precautionary measure of vaccinating immigrants who register for citizenship, but what about the millions who come here on temporary work visas, or who come here illegally? I don't think its reasonable to trust that their countries have necessarily vaccinated them against measels (especially in poorer countries, where vaccines are extremely difficult to come by). Given that, do you think it wise to begin artifically introducing measels to the general public again, especially given the secondary passage rule of this type of virus (which completely nullifies this cancer study's requirement that the patient be vaccinated against measels themself)?

Personally, I believe a viral outbreak of measels in the U.S. could be catastrophic to many unvaccinated people, especially given pox viruses' increasing drug-resistence over the last 50 years, and its increasing strength. Is a pox plague that could attack the general public (a 1 in 2 chance of catching it) in a short, violent timespan be more deadly and devestating than the current cancer epidemic (that currently affects 1 in 6 people)?

Just food for thought...

[ragnarok-now.livejournal.com]

It's not just measles, it's genetically engineered measles. This can be either a good thing or a really bad thing. It's good if it is weaker and not able to easily survive (i.e. dies in three days). It's potentially bad it the genetic engineering makes it stronger in any way (which the article infers). Regardless I'm not conviced we have that much control of such things at this time.

[ragnarok-now.livejournal.com]

Intriguing, this is similar but less complicated and dangerous than my cancer cure. Hopefully this sort of thing can be used in all cancer cases in the long run.