a a a

Treatment to Limit Spinal Injury Damage Shows Promise

By Jim Schnabel
June 17, 2010

In the first hours after a traumatic spinal cord injury, a process of cellular self-destruction known as “progressive hemorrhagic necrosis” (PHN) usually occurs that greatly worsens the initial injury. Doctors have no drug to prevent this process, but a team of neurosurgeons and neurologists recently reported that by briefly blocking the appearance of a protein that helps to cause PHN, in rats with spinal cord injuries, they dramatically reduced the overall spinal cord damage.

A related anti-PHN drug is in early-stage clinical trials, and the team expects that these anti-PHN methods will also be useful in limiting secondary hemorrhage and related swelling (known as cerebral edema) after strokes and other brain injuries.

“What we’re preventing is the secondary injury related to capillaries bursting, which typically doubles the amount of hemorrhage,” says University of Maryland School of Medicine neurosurgeon Marc Simard, principal investigator for the study, which appeared in the April 21 issue of Science Translational Medicine. This secondary bleeding is toxic to nerve cells, cuts off their oxygen supply, and triggers harmful inflammatory processes; it accounts for most of the secondary damage after a spinal cord injury.

“This is a glimmer of light in a relatively bleak field,” says Kristopher Kahle, a neurosurgeon at Massachussetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School who has done research in this area.

Simard and his colleagues first reported in 2007 that PHN seems to require the presence of a protein known as SUR1 (sulfonylurea receptor 1). In experiments with rodents, they found that damage to the axons (output stalks) of spinal neurons triggers a surge in local levels of SUR1. The protein forms part of a special type of calcium ion channel in the outer membranes of blood-vessel-lining cells known as endothelial cells. After a moderate injury, the sudden abundance of SUR1-associated calcium ion channels may help to protect cells from chemical changes in the surrounding fluid. But after a severe injury, so many of these channels appear that the endothelial cells—and the capillaries they make up—tend to swell until they burst.

In the current study, Simard and his colleagues examined recently-injured spinal cords of humans, mice, and rats and found evidence that in all three, a surge in SUR1 and in the expression of its gene, Abcc8, was associated with the appearance of PHN.

After a spinal cord injury, mice that had been genetically engineered so that their Abcc8 genes were silenced had much less evidence of PHN and associated cell death than control mice who could express Abcc8 normally. They also regained much more muscle control, indicating that the damage to their spinal cords had been greatly reduced.

To prove the role of Abcc8 and its protein SUR1, Simard and his colleagues experimentally injured the spinal cords of rats, which are more similar to humans (compared with mice) in their response to such injuries. Fifteen minutes after the injury, the researchers began to block the translation of Abcc8 into SUR1, using a 24-hour intravenous infusion of a synthetic Abcc8-matching molecule known as an antisense oligodeoxynucleotide. In these animals, the eventual area of spinal damage was reduced to less than one-third of that seen in control animals that had not received the treatment. And again the treated animals fared much better on behavioral tests.

“This really demonstrates that the secondary hemorrhage in these animals was an effect specifically of SUR1,” says Kahle.

Simard and his colleagues obtained similar results by using glibenclamide, a diabetes drug developed in the 1960s. Glibenclamide closes SUR1-associated channels in certain cells of the pancreas, promoting the release of insulin. But it also appears to close the endothelial-cell SUR1-associated channels that activate after spinal cord and brain injuries. In a paper in Nature Medicine in 2006, Simard and his colleagues reported that even low-dose glibenclamide could reduce brain swelling after experimentally induced strokes in rodents.

Because it has been used only as a diabetes drug, glibenclamide is available only in pill form, which could not be taken by unconscious victims of spinal cord or brain injuries. Initial clinical trials are thus testing an intravenously delivered form of the drug. “In terms of the FDA approval process, we’re much further along with glibenclamide,” says Simard. “There’s a Phase 1 trial that is either at the tail end now or is finished, another Phase 1 trial of a different sort that should start in July, and a Phase 2 trial [in spinal cord injury patients] that should start later this year.”

The clinical trials are sponsored by a biotechnology company, Remedy Pharmaceuticals, to which the University of Maryland has licensed the rights to these anti-SUR1 methods. (Simard is an adviser to Remedy, although the company did not sponsor his group’s animal studies.) Simard and his colleagues also have applied to the National Institutes of Health for a grant to perform a clinical trial of intravenous glibenclamide in stroke patients.

Allan Levi, chief of neurosurgery at the University of Miami Hospital, calls the Science Translational Medicine report an excellent paper. Based on the profound effect of the antisense drug or glibenclamide in preventing secondary hemorrhage and limiting nerve function loss, he says, it does appear that such strategies “may have a positive impact in this devastating disease as well as other areas of central nervous system injury.”

The Abcc8-blocking antisense oligodeoxynucleotide strategy hasn’t yet been tested in humans, but Simard thinks it might also be useful someday, perhaps in conjunction with glibenclamide. Antisense drugs have been developed for possible use against several diseases. And although clinical trials have shown that the long-term delivery of these DNA-like compounds tends to evoke unwanted inflammatory reactions, Simard believes that a 24-hour infusion, as in the animal trial, would be unlikely to provoke such a reaction. “I think that the antisense strategy in this case is very promising,” he says.

 

Comments

Stem Cell Implantation to Jugular Veins at the time of Liberation Therapy Supports Long-term Patency, Neuronal Regeneration

James Bostrom

10/1/2012 12:53:41 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysFiW26MHfQ&feature=player_embedded#t=0s While some MS patients who have had the liberation therapy are reporting long-term benefits from having the procedure, there are just as many for whom the ‘liberation therapy’ has failed as an effective therapeutic intervention. This doesn’t mean that these patients didn’t have some immediate benefits once the neck veins were opened; most did, but over time the veins restenosed again and their MS symptoms returned. In fact, having seen their MS symptoms almost totally disappear however briefly once their veins were cleared, patients who have restenosed want it done over again, as many times as necessary in some cases. However, there is now a new and growing subset of MS patients who have had vein widening venoplasty multiple times, usually to less beneficial effect each time, leading to the later discovery of so much intraluminal scar tissue by the second, third, or fourth attempt at re-opening the veins that the procedure cannot be performed again.For more information on the combination therapy protocol and study email to apply@ccsviclinic.ca or call 888-468-1554. http://www.ccsviclinic.ca/?p=1071 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysFiW26MHfQ&feature=player_embedded#t=0s

Evidence Points to MS as a General Disease Condition, Not Effectively Treated with One Type of Intervention

Leo Voisey

7/12/2012 5:03:58 AM

The discovery of a cure for MS will not be attributable to a single medical breakthrough but a series of medical discoveries and innovations leading to the cure. This process will involve biochemists and vascular researchers; physicists and radiologists; engineers and neurosurgeons, immunologists and geneticists among many other scientific disciplines. This is not to discard the new theory of a vascular disease connection. But that is only the snowball that got the avalanche moving down the slope. The theory that a simple dilation of the jugular veins can achieve a cure for MS oversimplifies the explanation of the disease pathways and ultimately obscures therapeutic objectives. Since it was proposed three years ago, it has also politicized a specific disease like never before. Anyone looking at the empirical evidence demonstrated by the growing number of MS patients who are commonly affected once the retrograde blood flow pressure on the brain is relieved by expanding the occluded jugular veins will quickly agree that Zamboni’s hypothesis is more or less correct; that an equalization of the outflow of blood from the CNS to the heart muscle is essential to reducing the presenting symptoms of MS. But the surgical act of neck vein dilation by itself will not come close to providing the cure. Once the vascular pressures are balanced, only a correlation between a vascular event and the disease itself has been demonstrated. The occluded neck veins do not explain the autoimmune trigger that causes the disease. Connecting those dots via the clinical findings from the effect of autologous cells transplanted to the MS brain goes a long way toward the explanation, but again does not identify the trigger. In individuals predisposed to MS, whatever prompts the autoimmune response, inevitable and irreparable damage to the myelin and the interlaced axonal matrix occurs through the pattern of the disease. In multiple clinical trials, suppression of the disease event cascade has been demonstrated with the introduction of Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to the diseased CNS. Once these cells are introduced, the resultant biochemical event sequence has been observed, biochemically identified, measured and described in several important trials. Where the retrograde pressures caused by the stenotic vessels reflux and deposit deoxygenated and iron-rich hemoglobin on the myelin covering of the CNS, MSCs respond by inducing suppression of various immune cell populations and inhibit white blood cells from evaluating the sites of insult and erythrocyte extravasations. But it’s still not known why only some people get MS since the same diseased pathology and internal biochemical conditions exist in human populations that never exhibit the autoimmune response. The good news is that it may not have to be known for the time being. The therapeutic benefits of MSC transplantation have been clinically observed in human subjects. The stem cells, once introduced to the CNS, create the same internal environment where the MS patient’s over-aggressive immune system is suppressed. These stem cells, if present in sufficient numbers, then locate themselves to the areas of disease to replace the damaged nerve and tissue cells. In therapeutic trials on human subjects, the recovery of neurologic deficits in many patients has been remarkably rapid and complete. For MS patients transplanted with stem cells that suppress the disease syndrome and go on to regenerate all tissue and neurons that have been damaged by the disease, the obvious question is then whether the diseased neck veins need to be treated at all? The answer may lie in the MS patient’s abnormal vein pathology. By establishing a diagnosis of Chronic Cerebrospinal Venal Insufficiency, a disease condition has been noted. Furthermore a clear correlation has been established between the pathology and the disease through statistical and observational evaluation. In some southern countries where MS does not exist in numbers in the general population, CCSVI in the jugulars has been noted and corrected as treatment for some types of optic neuritis, a symptomatic indicator for MS (and another autoimmune disorder). Once the neck veins are widened, the symptoms of optic neuritis are alleviated. Minimally invasive procedures to treat optic neuritis (and other specific conditions) by way of jugular venoplasty have been going on in some countries for the decade before Zamboni publicized his liberation theory to the world in 2009. To several groups of neurosurgeons in India, Central America, and South America, Zamboni’s theory was no surprise; in fact it made perfect sense. This therapeutic treatment modality for an autoimmune disorder that is not considered to be MS, yet has some of the same presenting symptoms of MS, is further confirmation of a vascular connection to the disease. Therefore the pathology of the neck veins in MS patients cannot be ignored. And if this statement is accepted as true, then there are many more questions that fall into line. The greater problem is what to make of the vein dilation therapy as it’s currently being practiced on MS patients by IRs in clinics around the world? While MS patients in the thousands fly hither and yon to receive the ‘liberation therapy’ on an outpatient basis claiming it is their right to do so, are they really receiving the most effective therapy for their disease? Or is only one part of the ‘bandwidth’ being treated in a general disease condition that requires a ‘spectrum’ approach to treatment? To start with, the high rate of thrombosis and restenosis that occurs immediately post-procedure indicates that it should never be considered as an outpatient procedure. Yet up until now the clear need to monitor patients post-procedure to avoid risk of complications has not been a focus of either therapeutic practice or of the research, and at least therapeutically, has not been seen as necessary by the practitioners. This avoidance of post-procedure aftercare and lack of follow-up with MS patients just having undergone venoplasty is remarkably at odds with the evidence and consistent with the financial biases inherent in the current system of management of CCSVI. And what happens when an aftercare protocol that supports post-procedure wound healing in the newly remodelled jugular veins is ignored by the IRs writing the current Trial Protocols? If the NL Study findings are repeated in the larger New York Trial currently funded by Saskatchewan and other levels of Canadian governments, the patient outcomes will quite predictably, be precisely the same (within the same statistical margins for error). The conclusion of ANY trial that ignores the clear need to keep the patient in the hospital, in a quiet and supine position, and monitor the jugular veins for complications after the liberation procedure for a period of days, and be prepared to re-treat if necessary, is doomed to repeat the NL Study findings. Unfortunately the ‘liberation therapy’ will not be approved; the MS community will dig their heels in on one side and the medical establishment on the other and the politics of MS treatment will continue.For more information please visit http://www.ccsviclinic.ca/?p=952

Second Canadian Patient Dies After Outpatient Discharge; Aftercare Protocol for Liberation Therapy Proves Necessary

robert taylor

7/21/2011 10:32:26 AM

“Unnecessary risks are being taken by patients seeking the liberation treatment.” says Dr. Avneesh Gupte of the CCSVI Clinic. “It has been our contention since we started doing minimally invasive venous angioplasties nearly 6 years ago that discharging patients who have had neck vein surgery on an outpatient basis is contra-indicated. We have been keeping patients hospitalized for a week to 10 days as a matter of safety and monitoring them for symptoms. Nobody who has the liberation therapy gets discharged earlier than that. During that time we do daily Doppler Ultrasounds, blood work and blood pressure monitoring among other testing. This has been the safe practice standard that we have adopted and this post-procedure monitoring over 10 days is the subject of our recent study as it relates to CCSVI for MS patients.”

 Although the venous angioplasty therapy on neck veins has been done for MS patients at CCSVI Clinic only for the last 18 months it has been performed on narrow or occluded neck veins for other reasons for many years. “Where we encounter blocked neck veins resulting in a reflux of blood to the brain, we treat it as a disease,” says Gupte. “It’s not normal pathology and we have seen improved health outcomes for patients where we have relieved the condition with minimal occurrences of re-stenosis long-term. We believe that our record of safety and success is due to our post-procedure protocol because we have had to take patients back to the OR to re-treat them in that 10-day period. Otherwise some people could have run into trouble, no question.”

Calgary MS patient Maralyn Clarke died recently after being treated for CCSVI at Synergy Health Concepts of Newport Beach, California on an outpatient basis. Synergy Health Concepts discharges patients as a rule without in-clinic provisions for follow up and aftercare. Post-procedure, Mrs. Clarke was discharged, checked into a hotel, and suffered a massive bleed in the brain only hours after the procedure. Dr. Joseph Hewett of Synergy Health recently made a cross-Canada tour promoting his clinic for safe, effective treatment of CCSVI for MS patients at public forums in major Canadian cities including Calgary.

“That just couldn’t happen here, but the sooner we develop written standards and best practices for the liberation procedure and observe them in practice, the safer the MS community will be”, says Dr. Gupte. “The way it is now is just madness. Everyone seems to be taking shortcuts. We know that it is expensive to keep patients in a clinical setting over a single night much less 10 days, but it’s quite absurd to release them the same day they have the procedure. We have always believed it to be unsafe and now it has proven to be unsafe. The thing is, are Synergy Health Concepts and other clinics doing the Liberation Treatment going to be changing their aftercare methods even though they know it is unsafe to release a patient on the same day? The answer is no, even after Mrs. Clarke’s unfortunate and unnecessary death. Therefore, they are not focused on patient safety…it’s become about money only and lives are being put at risk as a result.”

Joanne Warkentin of Morden Manitoba, an MS patient who recently had both the liberation therapy and stem cell therapy at CCSVI Clinic agrees with Dr. Gupte. “Discharging patients on the same day as the procedure is ridiculous. I was in the hospital being monitored for 12 days before we flew back. People looking for a place to have the therapy must do their homework to find better options. We found CCSVI Clinic and there’s no place on earth that’s better to go for Liberation Therapy at the moment. I have given my complete medical file from CCSVI Clinic over to my Canadian physician for review.” For more information Log on to http://ccsviclinic.ca/?p=866 OR Call on: +1 (404) 461-9560.

Patients Report the Success of CCSVI Clinic’s Stem Cell Therapy as a Rare Opportunity

Jessica

6/28/2011 7:36:10 PM

After 6 months of offering stem cell therapy in combination with the venous angioplasty liberation procedure, patients of CCSVI Clinic have reported excellent health outcomes. Ms. Kasma Gianopoulos of Athens Greece, who was diagnosed with the Relapsing/Remitting form of MS in 1997 called the combination of treatments a “cure”.

“I feel I am completely cured” says Ms. Gianopoulos, “my symptoms have disappeared and I have a recovery of many functions, notably my balance and my muscle strength is all coming (back). Even after six months, I feel like there are good changes happening almost every day. Before, my biggest fear was that the changes wouldn’t (hold). I don’t even worry about having a relapse anymore. I’m looking forward to a normal life with my family. I think I would call that a miracle.”

Other recent MS patients who have had Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT), or stem cell therapy have posted videos and comments on YouTube. www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFQr2eqm3Cg. Dr. Avneesh Gupte, the Neurosurgeon at Noble Hospital performing the procedure has been encouraged by results in Cerebral Palsy patients as well. “We are fortunate to be able to offer the treatment because not every hospital is able to perform these types of transplants. You must have the specialized medical equipment and specially trained doctors and nurses”. With regard to MS patients, “We are cautious, but nevertheless excited by what patients are telling us. Suffice to say that the few patients who have had the therapy through us are noticing recovery of neuro deficits beyond what the venous angioplasty only should account for”.

Dr. Unmesh of Noble continues: “These are early days and certainly all evidence that the combination of liberation and stem cell therapies working together at this point is anecdotal. However I am not aware of other medical facilities in the world that offer the synthesis of both to MS patients on an approved basis and it is indeed a rare opportunity for MS patients to take advantage of a treatment that is quite possibly unique in the world”.

Autologous stem cell transplantation is a procedure by which blood-forming stem cells are removed, and later injected back into the patient. All stem cells are taken from the patient themselves and cultured for later injection. In the case of a bone marrow transplant, the HSC are typically removed from the Pelvis through a large needle that can reach into the bone. The technique is referred to as a bone marrow harvest and is performed under a general anesthesia. The incidence of patients experiencing rejection is rare due to the donor and recipient being the same individual.This remains the only approved method of the SCT therapy.