Breakthrough in spinal injury treatment

[Fyshhed]

Mere weeks after allowing use of embryonic stem cells to be used in research, we have a very useful study showing some promising results.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Damaged spinal cords in mice have been encouraged to grow back by blocking a scar-causing molecule. The result suggests a fresh approach to treatments for sufferers of spinal cord injury.

Spinal cord injuries have long been considered incurable because the affected nerve cells do not grow back. Depending on the site and severity of damage, patients can be left paralysed and unable to control important bodily functions.

But in recent years, scientists seeking to reverse spinal cord damage have been pursuing a number of different approaches. These include transplanting cells to stimulate growth, removing factors that inhibit repair and using biocompatible materials to 'bridge' gaps between damaged nerve ends.

One major barrier to nerve regrowth is scar tissue. Now researchers from the University of Melbourne seem to have found a way to prevent this scarring, which they publish in this week's Journal of Neuroscience1.

Scar maker

The team found that mice bred without a molecule called EphA4 produce very little scar tissue around damaged spinal nerves. The researchers believe this is because EphA4 plays an important role in activating cells known as astrocytes, which are responsible for scar-tissue formation.

To test whether reducing scarring helps the animals to heal, the researchers cut the spinal cords of two groups of mice: one group had normal levels of EphA4, the other group lacked the molecule. The injury paralysed the left hind limb of the animals.

The mice that lacked EphA4 regained all of their stride length within three weeks,

and after one month they had recovered ankle and toe movement. In contrast, the control group recovered only 70% of their stride length, and no ankle or toe movement.

The researchers also found that a large percentage of the spinal cord nerves had regrown across the damaged section in the mice that lacked EphA4, compared with hardly any in the control group.

Surprising the experts

Preliminary observations made by the researchers suggest that the same effect occurs in monkeys as well as mice. If it holds true in humans too, then development of drugs that block EphA4 could remove an important obstacle to spinal cord repair.

"This is a very surprising finding," comments Ole Kiehn, a neuroscientist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden. He says the result is promising from the point of view of developing treatments. "It needs to be seen, however, that this works in humans," he cautions.

The complexity of the body's nervous system means that many factors come into play during spinal cord repair. An effective clinical treatment will almost certainly need to combine a number of different approaches, including surgery.

"I find it very difficult to imagine that one molecule could make the difference between spinal nerves being repaired or not," says Geoff Raisman, director of the new spinal repair unit at University College London and pioneer of a method that involves transplanting 'pathway repairing' cells from the nasal cavity to grow back spinal cord nerves. "I am surprised that they have got these results."

He notes that the leap from mouse to man is also a large step in the world of spinal cord research. Small animals sometimes get better on their own in a way that humans do not, he points out, regardless of experimental treatment.


It's too early to know whether this is a freak study with chance results, or a legitimate potential cure for a number of spinal injuries that result in paralysis. I personally hope it's the latter.

[CC]

This is a topic I stay on top of. I'm even on a short list of Schwann Cell therapy. The BIG problem with practicing on mice, dogs are even monkeys.

First, they surgically cut through the subjects spinal cord. Those of us who are "in the club" know that SCI's are never done with a scalpel. Rather, like myself it is usually is usually do to some horrific accident that does much more (if you are a level 3 as I am) damage, ie; Broken bones, MANGLED spinal cords and then not being found immediately.

The animals used in research's spinal cords are done in clinical settings. The severing of the spinal cord is done quickly with no other side effects, (broken ribs and neurotic losses).
They monitor every increase in good measures but downplay the bad side effects. or rather they downplay any side effects they feel do not effect the progress.

The giant step that must be made is this. Rodents, dogs and even monkeys have a different neuro-muscular skeleton than humans. They have some systems that for a period, operates, though not as well their previous conditions, without their brain needing to continuosly tell it what to do.

Rodents and every other animal (save for humans) have motor functions that can and do operate to some degree without needing any signals coming from their brain to tell them to do it.

Ever seen a chicken that runs around the yard a few laps after it has been beheaded? I have. Ever see a dog that gets hit by a car only to get up, struggle to their yard and then die?

Humans on the other hand have a neuro-skeletol and muscular that operates by the brain (even subconciously) telling your body to do everthing. Your brain signals your feet to walk and they walk. Your brain tells you to pick up something and to set it down.

I have found no human function whatsoever that operates on it's own without first being acknowledeged by the brain of it's happening.


So finding cures for SCI in humans is much more complicated than say, mice. I have a friend who is a neuro-surgeon who tells me that the reason research is so lengthy is because the medical journals make money by publishing one account, then a rebuttle, a rebuttal to the rebuttal etc;.. My friend is reveloutionizing the way works are reviewed instantly. He has started a website, (his specialty is burns) where the material is instantly scrutininzed and so quickly "tweaked" as opposed to the years long wait on investigating because instead of submitting his research to any journal, he simply publishes it on a website. Of course the money makers who own the Journals don't like it,

I don't think a cure will come along in the USA before I become too old for it to do much good. However I am keeping my eyes on France and China as they are leading in the area od SCI repair and rehabilitation. Anyone want to start a fund for me to get to France? I didn't think so. Hopefully the USA we will push religion and politics away from the medical fields. The scientist are the experts so let them decide what is ethical. Surely the church fanatics nor any politician would not be as qualified as the scientist who actually have been doing the research.

SCI research is indirectly affected by research money leaning more towards How to look ytounger or a cure for the common cold. That is where the money is. There are a whole lot more people with enough money to keep their faces free of wrinkles and their libido up even higher than normal. Money talks, SCI walks. (well, rolls away)...........:O)

[Dionysus]

I have found no human function whatsoever that operates on it's own without first being acknowledeged by the brain of it's happening.

Not to change the subject, but I thought sleep due to lack of the same falls in the catagory you describe here.

[Ibelsd]

Mere weeks after allowing use of embryonic stem cells to be used in research, we have a very useful study showing some promising results.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 3 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



It's too early to know whether this is a freak study with chance results, or a legitimate potential cure for a number of spinal injuries that result in paralysis. I personally hope it's the latter.


Two things to point out here.
1. Weeks after allowing embryonic stem cells where? In the U.S., their use has never been banned.
2. I can't find mention of embryonic stem cells anywhere in the article you posted.

[Fyshhed]

Two things to point out here.
1. Weeks after allowing embryonic stem cells where? In the U.S., their use has never been banned.
2. I can't find mention of embryonic stem cells anywhere in the article you posted.

But in recent years, scientists seeking to reverse spinal cord damage have been pursuing a number of different approaches. These include transplanting cells to stimulate growth, removing factors that inhibit repair and using biocompatible materials to 'bridge' gaps between damaged nerve ends
One of the methods of transplanting cells is the use of engineered stem cells which have been transformed into the desired tissue type. This includes all types of stem cells, from umbilical, to adult marrow, to embryonic. In instances where adult stem cells are unavailable, and the umbilical cells were not preserved, embryonic cells would be the remaining alternative. This would be the case if, for example, a baby developed an irreparable spinal problem.

Practical use of stem cells has been maximized by the facilitation of making strains through the embryonic method. Adult cells have to be harvested, and umbilical cells have one finite amount that is often discarded anyway.


What I find of particular interest, is the standard repair method of tissue is actually inefficient at repairing nervous tissue. Scarring of nervous tissue reduces or limits the function of it, which to me says something about "intelligent design" either being ignorant/malicious, or nonexistent ;)

[CC]

"A South Korean woman paralyzed for 20 years is walking again after scientists say they repaired her damaged spine using stem cells derived from umbilical cord blood.

Hwang Mi-Soon, 37, had been bedridden since damaging her back in an accident two decades ago.

Last week her eyes glistened with tears as she walked again with the help of a walking frame at a press conference where South Korea researchers went public for the first time with the results of their stem-cell therapy.

They said it was the world's first published case in which a patient with spinal cord injuries had been successfully treated with stem cells from umbilical cord blood.

Though they cautioned that more research was needed and verification from international experts was required, the South Korean researchers said Hwang's case could signal a leap forward in the treatment of spinal cord injuries.

The use of stem cells from cord blood could also point to a way to side-step the ethical dispute over the controversial use of embryos in embryonic stem-cell research.

"We have glimpsed at a silver lining over the horizon," said Song Chang-Hoon, a member of the research team and a professor at Chosun University's medical school in the southwestern city of Kwangju.

"We were all surprised at the fast improvements in the patient."

Under TV lights and flashing cameras, Hwang stood up from her wheelchair and shuffled forward and back a few paces with the help of the frame at the press conference here on Thursday.

"This is already a miracle for me," she said. "I never dreamed of getting to my feet again."

Medical research has shown stem cells can develop into replacement cells for damaged organs or body parts. Unlocking that potential could see cures for diseases that are at present incurable, or even see the body generate new organs to replace damaged or failing ones.

So-called "multipotent" stem cells -- those found in cord blood -- are capable of forming a limited number of specialised cell types, unlike the more versatile "undifferentiated" cells that are derived from embroyos.

However, these stem cells isolated from umbilical cord blood have emerged as an ethical and safe alternative to embryonic stem cells.

Clinical trials with embryonic stem cells are believed to be years away because of the risks and ethical problems involved in the production of embryos -- regarded as living humans by some people -- for scientific use.

In contrast, there is no ethical dimension when stem cells from umbilical cord blood are obtained, according to researchers.

Additionally, umbilical cord blood stem cells trigger little immune response in the recipient as embryonic stem cells have a tendency to form tumors when injected into animals or human beings.

For the therapy, multipotent stem cells were isolated from umbilical cord blood, which had been frozen immediately after the birth of a baby and cultured for a period of time.

Then these cells were directly injected to the damaged part of the spinal cord.

"Technical difficulties exist in isolating stem cells from frozen umbilical cord blood, finding cells with genes matching those of the recipient and selecting the right place of the body to deliver the cells," said Han Hoon, president of Histostem, a government-backed umbilical cord blood bank in Seoul.

Han teamed up with Song and other experts for the experiment.

They say that more experiments are required to verify the outcome of the landmark therapy.

"It is just one case and we need more experiments, more data," said Oh Il-Hoon, another researcher.

"I believe experts in other countries have been conducting similar experiments and accumulating data before making the results public."

****************************************

It is true that most human clinical experiments aren't revealed until after they have done it and it is reviewed by others in the medical community....as I've said, other countries ARE making headway simply by letting the scientist follow the trail of stem research, rather than people who think they have no stake and nothing to gain.....................:O)

[Ibelsd]

One of the methods of transplanting cells is the use of engineered stem cells which have been transformed into the desired tissue type. This includes all types of stem cells, from umbilical, to adult marrow, to embryonic. In instances where adult stem cells are unavailable, and the umbilical cells were not preserved, embryonic cells would be the remaining alternative. This would be the case if, for example, a baby developed an irreparable spinal problem.

Practical use of stem cells has been maximized by the facilitation of making strains through the embryonic method. Adult cells have to be harvested, and umbilical cells have one finite amount that is often discarded anyway.


What I find of particular interest, is the standard repair method of tissue is actually inefficient at repairing nervous tissue. Scarring of nervous tissue reduces or limits the function of it, which to me says something about "intelligent design" either being ignorant/malicious, or nonexistent ;)


Ok. But you made some controversial comments completely unbacked by your article. In fact, they are, by all accounts, seeminly erroneous. As the clown pointed out, other types of stem cells besides embryonic, seem to have taken the forefront in contemporary research.

I think it is high time people began to realize that embryonic stem cell research may not be the answer. Aside from the ethical reasons, other types of stem cell research appears much more promising. And to think, Californians just offered up a half billion in tax money for this.

[Fyshhed]

As the clown pointed out, other types of stem cells besides embryonic, seem to have taken the forefront in contemporary research.
It might relate to the fact that there's more funding...


I think it is high time people began to realize that embryonic stem cell research may not be the answer. Aside from the ethical reasons, other types of stem cell research appears much more promising. And to think, Californians just offered up a half billion in tax money for this.
Hm. Careful what you choose not to read, the article states that the embryonic cells are vastly more versatile than umbilical or marrow cells. Their direct use occasionally resulted in a "tumourous growth" but keep in mind that the original automobiles did not get 60 miles to the gallon while driving highways at 90mph. Techniques for all forms of the cells should improve over time, and the various advantages and disadvantages of each type will become clearer with experimentation. We know so little.

[Ibelsd]

It might relate to the fact that there's more funding...
Why might funding be directed towards one cause over another? The research has been pointing AWAY from embryonic cells for the last several years. Private funding is free to back embryonic stem cell research. Why hasn't it?



Hm. Careful what you choose not to read, the article states that the embryonic cells are vastly more versatile than umbilical or marrow cells. Their direct use occasionally resulted in a "tumourous growth" but keep in mind that the original automobiles did not get 60 miles to the gallon while driving highways at 90mph. Techniques for all forms of the cells should improve over time, and the various advantages and disadvantages of each type will become clearer with experimentation. We know so little.

The article you gave a link to didn't mention embryonic stem cells. I attempted to go back to see if I missed something, but the link appears dead now.