Jump to content
World's Largest Herpes Support Group
MikeHerp

New Article in Mens' Health on Keith Jerome's Herpes Cure Research

Recommended Posts

Cas9
29 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Does anyone know what kind of endonuclease he achieved 90% elimination? I've always said, ZFNs are the go with HSV. Small, light, and hard-coded. Cas-9 is fantastic for prototyping and research but clunky for end-user therapy.

90% elimination???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost-hope
43 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Does anyone know what kind of endonuclease he achieved 90% elimination? I've always said, ZFNs are the go with HSV. Small, light, and hard-coded. Cas-9 is fantastic for prototyping and research but clunky for end-user therapy.

Beyond the “Men’s Health” article I don’t think those actually numbers or findings have been published in any medical sources yet. 

But im sure they would not have ran the article without it being accurate .

I think everyone is awaiting an official announcement from Keith Jerome 

Edited by Lost-hope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
27 minutes ago, Lost-hope said:

Beyond the “Men’s Health” article I don’t think those actually numbers or findings have been published in any medical sources yet. 

But im sure they would not have ran the article without it being accurate .

I think everyone is awaiting an official announcement from Keith Jerome 

Just looked at the article so I now see the 90% figure. The article also states:

"As Awasthi points out, all research in the field to date has been done in animal cells in a lab, which are not always a great proxy for the living human body at large. Jerome hopes to move on to human trials and optimization in the not-too-distant-future...."

Nevertheless, the 90% achievement is still a positive thing. Let's hope it translates to the human body. And of course he also states there's more room for optimization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
information seeker

But they said they were ready to move into to animal trails 2014. Also I am starting to worry the good doctor has shifted his research to HIV. 

Edited by information seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
38 minutes ago, information seeker said:

But they said they were ready to move into to animal trails 2014.

Where  does it say that?

 

39 minutes ago, information seeker said:

Also I am starting to worry the good doctor has shifted his research to HIV. 

What evidence is there that the doctor has shifted to HIV research?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
information seeker

     

A Fred Hutch and University of Washington team of virologists and bioengineers led by Dr. Keith Jeromehas received a $200,000 grant — the first phase of up to $1.5 million in milestone-driven funding over four years — to develop nanocarrier technology to deliver therapies to reservoirs of dormant, HIV-infected cells.

The grant is from the New York-based amfAR, or Foundation for AIDS Research, as part of its “Countdown to a Cure for AIDS” initiative, which aims to achieve the scientific underpinnings of a cure by 2020. The hard-to-reach reservoirs are a key barrier to curing HIV.

Sound like it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tired of waiting

As I predicted in another thread, HIV funding will lead researchers to that effort. Those of us with HSV,., well get F'cked again. Enjoy standing by for another 10 years until they return to HSV.

yes, I know I sound pessimistic, but I have been on the sidelines (27 years) waiting for HSV research to get any notice and or parity with HIV!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voyager2

I wouldn't get alarmed just yet. Fred Hutch is a big lab with experienced scientists that can handle more than one virus at a time, just as Excision Bio and Editas are doing. Also, there is some overlap, as off target safety issues in gene editing is a common obstacle. The FDA just loosened the guidelines to accelerate testing, and what works for HIV might point the way for HSV. Dr. Jerome knows how many people are infected with each. Let's see what develops in 2019..   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
8 hours ago, information seeker said:

     

A Fred Hutch and University of Washington team of virologists and bioengineers led by Dr. Keith Jeromehas received a $200,000 grant — the first phase of up to $1.5 million in milestone-driven funding over four years — to develop nanocarrier technology to deliver therapies to reservoirs of dormant, HIV-infected cells.

The grant is from the New York-based amfAR, or Foundation for AIDS Research, as part of its “Countdown to a Cure for AIDS” initiative, which aims to achieve the scientific underpinnings of a cure by 2020. The hard-to-reach reservoirs are a key barrier to curing HIV.

Sound like it

He's working on HIV and HSV. Pretty much everyone knows that.

And he wasn't doing animal studies on hsv in 2014.

Neither of your concerns is valid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont quit!17
14 hours ago, Lost-hope said:

Beyond the “Men’s Health” article I don’t think those actually numbers or findings have been published in any medical sources yet. 

But im sure they would not have ran the article without it being accurate .

I think everyone is awaiting an official announcement from Keith Jerome 

Someone should ask them if the 90% figure is accurate? Journalist tend to fudge up numbers to make their articles more intriguing. It seems to me that Dr. Jerome, Dr. Wald and their establishment are pretty careful with putting up false information out so it probably is real. 

With that being said, I think I have read this article about 5 times. The first time I read the article, it gave me for the first time a real sense of hope about not having to live with this into my old age. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost-hope

@dont quit!17 I think I read about 10x and I agree with you, I don’t think they would have put that out if it wasn’t true.

we just have to wait and see what exactly are they referring to when they say 90% but either way that number is very promising 

and I personally think that when the FHC does announce it, it will be a major milestone 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp
On 2/20/2019 at 9:57 AM, Malcolm said:

Does anyone know what kind of endonuclease he achieved 90% elimination? I've always said, ZFNs are the go with HSV. Small, light, and hard-coded. Cas-9 is fantastic for prototyping and research but clunky for end-user therapy.

He's been using meganucleases.  

They've also tried CRISPR Cas9 recently, but found it less effective against latent virus--as you suggested.  

Pls don't forget about the fund raiser.  Every $ is welcome and important.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tired of waiting

Has there been any further comments made by Keith Jerome regarding this topic? I ask because, while the Mens Health story just came out, its unclear when they interviewed Keith?  I Believe the lead time from interview to publishing a story could be many months maybe up to six, and therefor dated.  so there may be some new information available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp
19 hours ago, dont quit!17 said:

Someone should ask them if the 90% figure is accurate? Journalist tend to fudge up numbers to make their articles more intriguing. It seems to me that Dr. Jerome, Dr. Wald and their establishment are pretty careful with putting up false information out so it probably is real. 

With that being said, I think I have read this article about 5 times. The first time I read the article, it gave me for the first time a real sense of hope about not having to live with this into my old age. 

I honestly think you are correct to harbor hope.  

I do think there was some sloppy journalism in this piece, but I do think it suggests that they are making progress in this important research.  

The reason why it is sloppy is that, it refers to a 2-4% editing rate using CRISPR in mice achieved by CRISPR, linking to an article written in the Smithsonian magazine.  However, that article is absolutely clear that this 2-4% was achieved not using CRISPR but meganucleases (and we also know this from Jerome's scientific paper).  So that mistake raises a yellow flag about the rest of the numbers, including the 90% number, in the magazine.

That said,  the gist of this article, that Jerome is making important progress, and that human trials may be a possibility in the not too distant future, are the essence of it, and I think those stipulations are correct:

Here's what we do know:

  • In 2016, they announced editing of 2-4% latent HSV in mice (https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2016/09/can-gene-editing-cure-herpes.html)  and the link cited therein.  This was enough to measurably delay replication, but the effect was not statistically significant.
  • It appears that, in 2018, they were able to increase the editing efficiency to nearly 20-30% in mice (page 7 of this: http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/medicalschool/departments/neurology/CALS/Documents/2018 CALS abstracts.pdf).  This was stated in a summary of a alphavirus latency symposium, not in a research paper, so the details are a bit fuzzy.  But it does appear to mean 20-30%, i.e., a partial cure in mice.  If that's correct--it it does sound like it--then it means that's a huge increase in editing efficiency from 2016.
  • We also know from the grants that their team has been awarded, that they are now fine tuning their approach, with the aim of proceeding towards a large scale animal trial, which would be a necessary precursor to human trials.  It really does sound from this that they are aiming for human trials.  "This project is expected to demonstrate the feasibility of our therapeutic approach directed towards the elimination of HSV pathogenesis in vivo, and to provide critical information for the development of a larger scale animal study necessary to bring this new therapeutic approach to the clinic." (http://grantome.com/grant/NIH/R01-AI132599-01A1)

So coming back to the Mens' Health article, it is possible that they've achieved 90% editing efficiency?  I think it's possible, but it's not clear.  The article seems to suggest that they were only doing this in mice cells in the lab, which sounds like in-vitro.  However, we know from his research paper, that the experiments they conducted in 2016 which edited 2-4% of latent HSV in mice, were conducted in mice in vivo (it seems the Mens Health article doesn't make this very clear either)

It also appears they they have been recently conducting some theoretical research into the number of gene editing doses/therapies, that it would take, in order to effect a cure (https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/spotlight/2018/09/vidd_jerome_bmc.html).  This study was done with HIV in mind, but there's a sentence at the end of it noting that they intend to do a similar study for HSV.  What that tells me is that, they envision this as a series of shots of that, combined would deactivate latent virus (i.e., giving 2 or more doses, would increase the editing and deactivation rate).  I'm just speculating here, but in the 2016 study, as far as I'm aware, they only gave the mice one injection.  If editing efficiency of a dose can be increased, and an animal can tolerate multiple doses, it seems possible that the % of deactivated virus could increase over several doses, such that, in the end of the series, a large portion--maybe even 90% of the latent virus--is deactivated.  In that sense, I think it's plausible that they may have achieved a 90% editing rate (but it's not clear from the Mens' Health article)

Anyway, I don't think we should necessarily focus on the 90%.  It's not entirely clear what it means in the article.  But it is clear that Jerome has been making significant progress.  He does sound excited.  And look, in the article, he expressly says people should be excited about this. I honestly think he means that.  He doesn't seem like the kind of guy who tries to hype stuff up that he doesn't think has much chance to succeed.  When he says he thinks there will be a cure in his lifetime, I don't think that he means a cure might be announced on his death bed, when he's 89 years old.  Further, I'm also cognizant that he mentions in the 2016 piece that, while a 100% cure is the goal, he notes that it's possible there could be "intermittent" or partial success along the way.  

Putting all this together, I think being hopeful about this that this will start to go somewhere in the not too distant future, is fairly realistic and the right understanding.  

 

Edited by MikeHerp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp
19 hours ago, Lost-hope said:

@dont quit!17 I think I read about 10x and I agree with you, I don’t think they would have put that out if it wasn’t true.

we just have to wait and see what exactly are they referring to when they say 90% but either way that number is very promising 

and I personally think that when the FHC does announce it, it will be a major milestone 

Basically agree. I think we have to be patient and just give it time.  I think if we try to ask them or pin them down, we'll just get generalities.  The key point is that, they are making progress and the progress is exciting.  That much is pretty clear.

Let's also keep in mind that, these scientists don't have an obligation to announce the result of every experiment.  Like if the they get 4% efficiency in one experiment, and then they get 8% in the next, they aren't obligated to publish a research paper detailing every time they increase editing efficiency by 4%.  I suspect, the next time a paper is published would be when they can prove some other qualitative breakthrough, rather than just an increase in editing efficiency in mice.  We'll see.

In my communications with Fred Hutch's philanthropy team as part of setting up the fund raiser, I specifically asked them to try to provide some updates every once in a while and they have tentatively agreed.  So we'll know sooner or later what it going on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voyager2

Here's the reference to 90%:

"Even though CRISPR has stoked interest in the field, Jerome notes that in the past few years other gene editing tools have seen massive spikes in efficiency when it comes to herpes cures.

His therapy, he adds, has gone from five percent to over 90 percent effective at eliminating herpes in mice cells in the lab over the last two and a half years."

 

Does "mice cells in the lab" mean (a) in a petri dish or (b) in a live mouse?  Either way, it's wonderful news. I personally think they have moved past the tipping point on the way to developing a therapeutic treatment.

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp
1 hour ago, Voyager2 said:

Here's the reference to 90%:

"Even though CRISPR has stoked interest in the field, Jerome notes that in the past few years other gene editing tools have seen massive spikes in efficiency when it comes to herpes cures.

His therapy, he adds, has gone from five percent to over 90 percent effective at eliminating herpes in mice cells in the lab over the last two and a half years."

 

Does "mice cells in the lab" mean (a) in a petri dish or (b) in a live mouse?  Either way, it's wonderful news. I personally think they have moved past the tipping point on the way to developing a therapeutic treatment.

    

It's not clear.  The experiments in which they inactivated 2-4% latent HSV in mice, was definitely in living mice. The research paper is very clear about that.  It appears that in May 2018, they also reported nearly 20-30% inactivation of latent HSV in living mice.

It's not clear what the 90% is referring to, whether in living mice or some artificial latency model using mice sells in vitro.  I really hope that it was in living mice.  That would make sense, since the earlier experiments were in living mice.  But in any case, as you mentioned, this research is progressing very well.

Let's continue to try to raise money for it.  

Edited by MikeHerp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
realscience77
On 2/14/2019 at 3:34 PM, Miss Horne said:

The way I feel today, Dr Jerome could test it on me now without doing any  further research :D

Samsie :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oneday

Just wish we had SOMETHING now. How long do we have to wait?

I looked after a woman last night who was 71 and taking valtrex daily. Sorry, but that would be awful being that age and still no permanent resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tired of waiting

What's on the dark web for experimental treatments from non FDA regulated countries.

I have been waiting over 27 years for any kind of credible solution.  A lot of people on this forum have only recently been diagnosed with HSV,  and they  think that a cure is a year or two away. In reality based the standard protocol of endless animal testing we are really looking at lest another 10 to 15 years for a solution. for me that is at least 71 or end of life. 

There really needs to be a paradigm change in some of this testing. whether it's vaccine or CRISPR, if a solution works in-vitro, then with enough informed consent, further testing should go to human testing ASAP.  At this point in time there are so many desperate people (me included) who will take a risk on an experimental cure over a life sentence of this shit disease.  

Had Halford from Rational  vaccine lived another year or two we might have better information as to the results of his work. As it now we have a half finished study and the FDA thumping it chest trying to assert power over the experiment conducted out of its jurisdiction, which is further driving more delays and ethics reviews for other candidate vaccines. 

I'm really glad to see that their are people that can sit back and be proud of their ethics while people continue to suffer and new people get infected every day. Bravo well done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voyager2

@oneday  Couldn't agree more. I would only guess that Pritlivir might be the next medication out of the pipeline. After that there are 3 vaccines and a number of gene editing programs (of which Jerome's lab is one). We don't have too much information about any of them at the moment. Like someone else said, they have no obligation to keep us posted.

Edited by Voyager2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oneday

It's ridiculous how decades can pass, candidates come and leave the research scene and we are no better off.

The only thing I see as a benefit to us now than before is being more vocal publicly by coming out from suffering in silence.

Historically, science scholars would consider it a non-issue or nuisance at worst. It's much more than that and impacts multifacets of a person. A cure is needed now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
information seeker

Yup

1 hour ago, oneday said:

It's ridiculous how decades can pass, candidates come and leave the research scene and we are no better off.

The only thing I see as a benefit to us now than before is being more vocal publicly by coming out from suffering in silence.

Historically, science scholars would consider it a non-issue or nuisance at worst. It's much more than that and impacts multifacets of a person. A cure is needed now

Yup, finally, you understand. That why I use fear and scare tactics

 

Also herpes is spreading quicker now. It cause many issues like blindness, death, Alzheimers, can cause cancer, and much more. But they don't talk about that. It all about HIV. Which is not that big of an issue, the impact of herpes will cause devastation across the first world. Disease cause by herpes are on the rise.

Edited by information seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus
31 minutes ago, information seeker said:

Yup

Yup, finally, you understand. That why I use fear and scare tactics

 

Also herpes is spreading quicker now. It cause many issues like blindness, death, Alzheimers, can cause cancer, and much more. But they don't talk about that. It all about HIV. Which is not that big of an issue, the impact of herpes will cause devastation across the first world. Disease cause by herpes are on the rise.

This has the substance of a tissue!

How does HSV cause cancer? I think you are referring to HPV.

It does not cause Alzheimer’s that thinking has long gone.

Herpes is on the decline, we have never seen a lower proportion of the worlds population infected.

Death? More people will die from falling coconuts this year than herpes. Why aren’t you addressing this issue??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
information seeker
8 minutes ago, WilsoInAus said:

This has the substance of a tissue!

How does HSV cause cancer? I think you are referring to HPV.

It does not cause that thinking has long gone.

Herpes is on the decline, we have never seen a lower proportion of the worlds population infected.

Death? More people will die from falling coconuts this year than herpes. Why aren’t you addressing this issue??

You are sadly mistaken herpes is not on the decline. Most doctors don't test for herpes. Also most people don't know they have herpes because of mild or no symptoms at all. So how can you say it on the decline. If I was you I would read up on current events when it comes to herpes.

 

There is quite a bit of evidence herpes cause adverse effects but are seen in the long run. When herpes head to the brain. The brain protect it self by generating a protein to protect it self, but in turn that cause Alzheimer. Next herpes disable certain functions in the cell that can cause cancer. For deaths why not look at 1 in 1000 babies who catch herpes and can die or have brain damage.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Jimmyjimmyhuapua
      By Jimmyjimmyhuapua
      Found a good article what do you think ?
      https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/can-we-gene-edit-herpes-away-180968551/
    • cracked
      By cracked
      Just goes to show you there's always someone working on something, even if they're not in the limelight of research. This also shows that experimental therapies, vaccines, etc can also be life saving like in this case... and they used a virus to edit the gene!
       
    • cracked
      By cracked
      https://www.wired.com/story/whats-next-for-crispr/amp
    • Stbb
      By Stbb
      I tried reaching out more than once to find out if they could assist with experimentation for hsv treatment or cure, but I haven't received a response. He has kids on his website but I don't know if any would be useful for hsv experiments.  The company's owner is Josiah Zayner. 
      Has anyone else tried and if so, we're you successful?
    • cracked
      By cracked
      More CRISPR use for HIV...which can only lead to helping the people with HSV soon...
      “It’s like hiding a book in a stack at the library, and the book has instructions to build a nasty bomb. To get rid of that information, you need to get it back out of the library. We’ve never had the technology to do that inside the living cell until CRISPR came along. It’s the first efficient way to do that inside living cells.”
      http://m.sfgate.com/business/article/How-CRISPR-gene-editing-tech-can-fight-HIV-12294985.php
      How CRISPR gene-editing tech can fight HIV
      Oct 21, 2017
      Researchers at UCSF have received a three-year, $1.6 million grant to advance their work using novel gene-editing technology to make human blood cells less susceptible to HIV infection. 
      The grant, from biopharmaceutical giant Gilead Sciences, a global leader in sales of HIV treatments, will fund a team of scientists working to modify the DNA of a type of white blood cell to make them immune to HIV infection.
      The cells, called T cells, have long been a focus of researchers seeking to improve HIV treatments. T cells help the immune system fight many diseases, including some cancers and flu viruses. They play a unique role in HIV because the virus targets and destroys T cells, and HIV-positive patients whose T cells become too depleted by the virus will progress to AIDS...
      ...It is the first research initiative that Foster City’s Gilead, through its philanthropic program, has funded that involves using CRISPR as a tool in HIV cure-related research. While $1.6 million is not a huge amount, it comes with fewer restrictions than many government grants. The grant will fund a team of five researchers for three years.
  • Trending Now

  • The Hive is Thriving!

    • Total Topics
      69,540
    • Total Posts
      468,324
  • Posts

    • viralfrog
      I think you're right about 'having a good flow', i.e. splitting the dosage throughout the day to make most use of it. You're also right about potential strain on your body for overdoses, however there is conflicting information about this based on studies I've read. There are several of studies indicating benefits of high doses of vitamin C for fighting viral diseases. I've done quite a bit of research on this as in the past I used to suffer from common colds, often over one week in duration and up to 6 times a year. With Zinc and Vitamin C I've managed to reduce these to once a year, and their duration to under 6 days. Some of the studies used IV administration of Vitamin C, which is of course different to taking it orally, but some of them had success with high oral doses as well:  Dr. Harri Hemilä from the University of Helsinki, Finland, analyzed the findings of two randomized trials each of which investigated the effects of two vitamin C doses on the duration of the common cold. The first trial administered 3 g/day vitamin C to two study groups, 6 g/day to a third group, and the fourth group was administered a placebo. Compared with the placebo group the 6 g/day dose shortened colds by 17%, twice as much as the 3 g/day doses did. The second trial administered 4 g/day and 8 g/day vitamin C, and placebo to different groups, but only on the first day of the cold. Compared with the placebo group, the 8 g/day dose shortened colds by 19%, twice as much as the 4 g/day dose did. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/9/4/339/htm High dose IV Vitamin C has been shown to be effective against viral infections such as the common cold rhinovirus (Hemila and Herman,1995); avian virus H1N1 (Ely,2007;) Chikungunya (Gonzalez et al. 2014; Marcial-Vega et al,2015); Zika (Gonzalez et al 2016) and influenza (Zarubaeva et al.2017). Also oral supplementation with vitamin C (doses over 3g) appears to be able to both prevent and treat respiratory and systemic infections (Carr and Maggini, 2017). https://isom.ca/article/high-dose-vitamin-c-influenza-case-report/ We had a case in which a patient with herpes zoster did not respond to conventional therapy so we attempted to administer intravenous infusion of vitamin C which resulted in an immediate reduction in the pain. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111558/
    • WilsoInAus
      Hey @Antoinette63 you do absolutely nothing. If infected with HSV-2, then the initial outbreak would have occurred within days of the infections. Symptoms after 4 months are not really likely to have been from that episode.  If she does have a recent infection of herpes, then it will be from her new boyfriend!
    • WilsoInAus
      Hang on @viralfrog let’s be rational here. The male body can only usefully metabolise 100mg of vitamin C a day. Any excess does not have any known impact on the body as it doesn’t actually get to where you might be thinking it goes. It goes out via your kidneys, potentially causing toxic effects. The real trick with vitamin C is making sure there is a good flow moving through your intestines such that your body can metabolise the full 100mg easily. To achieve this, you are much better off taking a tablet of about 250mg with each meal. Anything more than 2g a day of vitamin C is not only useless but commences a strain process on your body that may include outcomes including kidney stones. 
    • WilsoInAus
      Hang on, no one is talking about testing again for herpes. We are suggesting an analysis of the serum in the blisters that will give clues as to the cause.
    • viralfrog
      Currently I'm taking my Ascorbic acid at two doses throughout the day, 6g at lunch and 6g at dinner. It's already a hassle as I have to dilute it in water, rinse my mouth with coconut oil and then I take a shot of it from a shot glass and rinse my mouth quickly with water after. Even with the coconut oil, I'm worried for my teeth.  I was going to order a capsule filler machine and some gelatin capsules, but realised it will cost me almost the same than just ordering 1g vitamin tablets from iHerb. Also, this means I still have to be eating 12 capsules per day which is not ideal. I wonder if I could figure out some DIY method to be able to squeeze 3-5g of the Ascorbic acid into some coating to be able to swallow it without risking my teeth.  I had a look at liposomal C too, but what put me off was the quick expiration date if making it yourself. Unless I'm wrong, you have to do a new batch like twice a week. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.