Tug of war between Parkinson’s protein and growth factors

A “tug of war” situation exists between Parkinson's provocateur protein alpha-synuclein and the growth factor Read more

From stinging to soothing: fire ant venom may lead to skin treatments

Compounds derived from fire ant venom can reduce skin thickening and inflammation in a mouse model of psoriasis, Emory and Case Western scientists have Read more

Troublemaker cells predict immune rejection after kidney transplant

Evidence is accumulating that the presence of certain "troublemaker" memory T cells can predict the likelihood of belatacept-resistant immune Read more

placebo effect

Cell therapy clinical trial in stroke

Emory neurosurgeon Robert Gross was recently quoted in a Tennessee newspaper article about a clinical trial of cell therapy for stroke. He used cautionary language to set expectations.

“We’re still in the very early exploratory phases of this type of work,” Gross told the Chattanooga Times Free Press. “In these cases, a significant area of the brain has been damaged, and simply putting a deposit of undifferentiated cells into the brain and magically thinking they will rewire the brain as good as new is naive. None of us think that.”

A more preliminary study (just 18 patients) using the same approach at Stanford and University of Pittsburgh was published this summer in Stroke, which says it was the “first reported intracerebral stem cell transplant study for stroke in North America.” The San Diego Union Tribune made an effort to be balanced in how the results were described:

Stroke patients who received genetically modified stem cells significantly recovered their mobility… Outcomes varied, but more than a third experienced significant benefit.

The newspaper articles made us curious about what these cells actually are. They’re mesenchymal stromal cells, engineered with an extra modified Notch gene. That extra gene drives them to make more supportive factors for neurons, but it doesn’t turn them into neurons. Read more

Posted on by Quinn Eastman in Neuro Leave a comment

Sidestepping the placebo effect when studying depression

Research on depression must deal with a major obstacle: the placebo effect. This is the observation that patients improve in response to the sugar pills given as controls in clinical studies.

Clinical trial designers can incorporate various clever strategies to minimize the placebo effect, which is actually comprised of several statistical and psychological factors. Investigators can try to enhance, dissect or even “harness” them. [A recent piece in the New York Times from Jo Marchant focuses on the placebo effect in studies of pain relief.]

Emory psychiatrist Andrew Miller and his team have been developing a different approach over the last few years: studying symptoms of depression in people who are being treated for something else. This allows them to sidestep, at least partially, the cultural construct of depression, from William Styron to Peter Kramer to direct-to-consumer television ads.

Interferon alpha, a treatment used against hepatitis C virus infection and some forms of cancer, is a protein produced by the immune system that spurs inflammation. It also can induce symptoms of depression, such as fatigue and malaise. There are some slight differences with psychiatric depression, which Miller’s team describes here (less guilt!), but they conclude that there is a “high degree of overlap.”

Miller and his colleagues, including Jennifer Felger and Ebrahim Haroon, have documented how interferon-alpha-induced inflammation affects the brains of hepatitis C and cancer patients in several papers. That research, in turn, informs their more recent fruitful investigations of inflammation in the context of major depression. More on that soon.

Posted on by Quinn Eastman in Immunology, Neuro Leave a comment