Scientists create enzyme able to remove HIV from infected human cells

[motivez]

In a breakthrough that could potentially lead to a cure for HIV infection, scientists have discovered a way to remove the virus from infected cells, a study released Thursday said.

The scientists engineered an enzyme which attacks the DNA of the HIV virus and cuts it out of the infected cell, according to the study published in Science magazine.

The enzyme is still far from being ready to use as a treatment, the authors warned, but it offers a glimmer of hope for the more than 40 million people infected worldwide.

"A customized enzyme that effectively excises integrated HIV-1 from infected cells in vitro might one day help to eradicate (the) virus from AIDS patients," Alan Engelman, of Harvard University's Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, wrote in an article accompanying the study.

Current treatments focus on suppressing the HIV virus in order to delay the onset of AIDS and dramatically extend the life of infected patients.

What makes HIV so deadly, however, is its ability to insert itself into the body's cells and force those cells to produce new infection.

"Consequently the virus becomes inextricably linked to the host, making it virtually impossible to 'cure' AIDS patients of their HIV-1 infection," Engelman explained.

That could change if the enzyme developed by a group of German scientists can be made safe to use on people.

That enzyme was able to eliminate the HIV virus from infected human cells in about three months in the laboratory.

The researchers engineered an enzyme called Tre which removes the virus from the genome of infected cells by recognizing and then recombining the structure of the virus's DNA.

This ability to recognize HIV's DNA might one day help overcome one of the biggest obstacles to finding a cure: the ability of the HIV virus to avoid detection by reverting to a resting state within infected cells which then cease to produce the virus for months or even years.

"Numerous attempts have been made to activate these cells, with the hope that such strategies would sensitize the accompanying viruses to antiviral drugs, leading to virus eradication," Engelman wrote. "Advances with such approaches in patients have been slow to materialize."

New experiments must be designed to see if the Tre enzyme can be used to recognize these dormant infected cells, he wrote.

"Although favorable results would represent perhaps only a baby step toward eventual use in patients, the discovery of the Tre recombinase proves that enzymatic removal of integrated HIV-1 from human chromosomes is a current-day reality," he said.

The researchers who developed the enzyme were optimistic about their ability to design additional enzymes which would target other parts of the virus's DNA.

However they warned that there were significant barriers to overcome before the enzyme could be used to help cure patients.

"The most important, and likely most difficult, among these is that the enzyme would need efficient and safe means of delivery and would have to be able to function without adverse side effects," wrote lead author Indrani Sarkar of the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics in Dresden.

"Nevertheless the results we present offer an early proof of principal for this type of approach, which we speculate might form a useful basis for the development of future HIV therapies," Sarkar concluded.

Potential cure for HIV discovered - Yahoo! News

Wow, this sounds really amazing.. and definitely a right step in the right direction for a cure, even though it sounds like it'll probably still be at least a decade before any kind of treatment would be developed from it..

I always kind of wonder why there's not more of an official global effort (insofar as money, resources, etc) to try to speed up a cure for things like AIDS and Cancer.. I assume they're coordinated loosely through scientific publications and whatnot, taking advantage of any new research that comes out and putting it to use in their own methods.. but wouldn't the cure come faster if the various organizations fighting to cure these things were coordinated and sponsored by a more global effort?

[AVengeance]

sweet. This could be valid not only for AIDS but for many virii. Program an enzyme to gobble up and destroy the virus dna. Cool.

To answer your question about why no global effort: the larger something is, the more corrupt it gets. If there were a huge coordenated effort by all the world governments, there would be no cures and A LOT of very rich politicians.

[Linzyhop]

Originally Posted by motivez

I always kind of wonder why there's not more of an official global effort (insofar as money, resources, etc) to try to speed up a cure for things like AIDS and Cancer..

maybe because there's more money to be had by the drug companies in treatments than cures?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

maybe because there's more money to be had by the drug companies in treatments than cures?

I've had that argument with some people who say that it's just not true

[Simius]

Wow. If they could pull that off it would be amazing. Maybe in the next 20 years AIDs will be a distant memory like smallpox.

[imind]

this will only embolden the already promiscuous into more acts of promiscuity. their agenda is to encourage our children to become whores.

/fundagelical

and lets not forget, its unconstitutional to fund such a program.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by imind

this will only embolden the already promiscuous into more acts of promiscuity. their agenda is to encourage our children to become whores.

/fundagelical

and lets not forget, its unconstitutional to fund such a program.

AIDS was god's punishment for drug addicts and homosexuals. I fear what god will do next if we find a way around his punishment for those sinners.

If the free market wanted a cure for aids, it would have one by now.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

maybe because there's more money to be had by the drug companies in treatments than cures?

There is far more money to be had in a cure. Imagine, how rich will a company become if they have a viable cure to HIV? Look at how huge Pfizer became just because of Viagra

There are always other diseases to work on. Pumping a disease for money just isn't an issue.

[AVengeance]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

There is far more money to be had in a cure. Imagine, how rich will a company become if they have a viable cure to HIV? Look at how huge Pfizer became just because of Viagra

There are always other diseases to work on.

Bingo! And viagra is not a cure for stress or other root causes of erectile dynsfunction, it's a treatment for a symptom.
Thanks for proving the point.

Most people don't even understand the difference anymore between a symptomatic treatment and a cure. My wife (a RN) runs into this all the time.

and this part is LOLz funny, in light of your example:

Pumping a disease for money just isn't an issue.

[ballz2wallz]

Haha, you have a point, but I don't think there can be a cure for the cause of ED...what is the cause?

When there is a cure for HIV, there WILL be tons of money made off of it, guaranteed. The race is out there to get to it first. And what about hte other diseases that have been cured? Why don't you look at those as examples? Why didn't the pharma companies pump those diseases for money? I'll tell you...because that's not the goal of these companies.

[imind]

There is far more money to be had in a cure. Imagine, how rich will a company become if they have a viable cure to HIV? Look at how huge Pfizer became just because of Viagra

what if this cure, for whatever reason, is unpatentable?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by imind

what if this cure, for whatever reason, is unpatentable?

Then that poses a problem but that's not always the end. Often times marketing, such as name recognition, plays an important role. Take tylenol and bayer aspirin for example. Both of those have patents that are expired, but the names themselves are commonplace, and essentially continue to make millions in those drugs.

[imind]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Then that poses a problem but that's not always the end. Often times marketing, such as name recognition, plays an important role. Take tylenol and bayer aspirin for example. Both of those have patents that are expired, but the names themselves are commonplace, and essentially continue to make millions in those drugs.

but these were, at one point, patented and, as such, made money even without their recognition. who is going to throw research money into something they know isn't patentable, and therefore won't make money from?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by imind

but these were, at one point, patented and, as such, made money even without their recognition. who is going to throw research money into something they know isn't patentable, and therefore won't make money from?

Are you saying a cure for HIV isn't patentable? Why wouldn't it be?

Your question addresses the exact issue of the need for capitalism in our system. These pharma companies would not cure the diseases of the world if there weren't money to be made.

[imind]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Are you saying a cure for HIV isn't patentable? Why wouldn't it be?

though the links for 'unpatentable drugs' are numerous on googe, i have yet to find a list of reasons. here, though is a story of a cancer drug that i believe has suffered under unpatentable conditions.

i think that in order for a drug to be patentable, it must, among other things, be significantly different in chemical composition than any existing drug. DCA fails in this regard.

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Your question addresses the exact issue of the need for capitalism in our system. These pharma companies would not cure the diseases of the world if there weren't money to be made.

which is why we need govt funding?

[AVengeance]

Originally Posted by imind

though the links for 'unpatentable drugs' are numerous on googe, i have yet to find a list of reasons. here, though is a story of a cancer drug that i believe has suffered under unpatentable conditions.

i ...

wow!

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by imind

which is why we need govt funding?

I don't think the pharma companies will be driven to succeed with merely government funding. The government funding comes into play in academic research, where many companies begin, but government funding cannot sustain the money needed into big research campaigns.

[imind]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I don't think the pharma companies will be driven to succeed with merely government funding. The government funding comes into play in academic research, where many companies begin, but government funding cannot sustain the money needed into big research campaigns.

i agree with you but there are some instances where govt funding will benefit us.

[jimeigh]

If I were an enzyme i would be DNA helicase so i could unzip your genes