Why isn't "T-cell adoptive transfer" immunotherapy panacea?

  • Thread starter cave_cat
  • Start date
In summary: Second, there is a limited number of people who are able to undergo a T-cell transplant. Third, the procedure is very expensive. Finally, there are ethical considerations. Some people might believe that it is wrong to use someone else's cells to cure oneself, even if those cells are modified.
  • #1
cave_cat
41
0
in wikipedia Immunotherapy article it talks about how they treat some cancers with "T-cell adoptive transfer" involving cloning patient's white blood cells, sometimes modifying / improving them and then injecting them back into the patient. It says that research started in the 80s and seems to still go on, mostly with cancers.

So I am wondering, why isn't this general approach a generic panacea for all bacterial and viral diseases? E.g. if flu vaccine in vivo makes immune system eventually suppress the current flu strain (and in fact young people do it themselves without vaccine) why can't vaccine be replaced with massive infusion of these cloned T-cells with "vaccine" / response to the strain inserted in the lab?

Likewise, why can't HIV be eliminated by using cloned T-cells whose membranes are modified to eliminate whatever feature involved in allowing the virus enter and attack them?

I guess the main gist of this question is, I understand that if the above isn't happening, there are major limitations to the procedure that are not elaborated in the brief description in wikipedia. So, anybody knows what they are? What makes this procedure so limited that it remains experimental cancer treatment instead of a panacea for everything under the sun?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
This idea has, as you suggested, been applied to the treatment of HIV. One of the first studies occurred in 2008 when an HIV-positive individual who also had leukemia was in need of a bone marrow transplant. Scientists have known that about 1% of Europeans carry a mutation in both copies of the CCR5 gene that greatly decreases their susceptibility to HIV (CCR5 is a protein on the surface of T-cells required for HIV entry). So, the doctors found a bone marrow donor carrying the CCR5 mutations, and replaced the patient's bone marrow with that of the HIV-resistant donor's. Although the initial reports seemed to suggest the transplant cured him of HIV, the infection recently re-emerged. Still, scientists are experimenting with modifying a patient's own T-cells to alter the CCR5 receptor in the hopes of generating resistant T-cells that can help fight HIV infection.

Now as to why the procedure is not so widespread, there are a few reasons. First, it is a very new treatment and we are not fully aware of the risks. Genetic modification of any cell type always carries the risk that you will inadvertently convert the modified cell into a cancerous or pre-cancerous cell. While such risks might be acceptable when treating severe diseases like cancer, such risks are not acceptable for more routine cases where less risky (and much cheaper) alternatives are available. Newer, better targeted genome editing technologies may reduce these risks, but further testing of these technologies is still needed.
 
  • Like
Likes Borek and Ryan_m_b

1. Why isn't "T-cell adoptive transfer" immunotherapy a panacea?

T-cell adoptive transfer is a form of immunotherapy that involves transferring T-cells from a healthy individual to a patient with a disease. While this treatment has shown promising results in certain cases, it is not a panacea, or a cure-all, for all diseases. This is because each disease is unique and may require different types of treatment.

2. Can "T-cell adoptive transfer" immunotherapy be used for all diseases?

No, T-cell adoptive transfer is not suitable for all diseases. This treatment is most effective for diseases that involve the immune system, such as certain types of cancer and autoimmune disorders. It may not be effective for diseases caused by other factors, such as genetic disorders or environmental toxins.

3. Are there any risks associated with "T-cell adoptive transfer" immunotherapy?

Like any medical treatment, there are potential risks associated with T-cell adoptive transfer immunotherapy. These may include allergic reactions, infections, and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) where the transferred T-cells attack the recipient's body. However, these risks can be minimized through careful screening and monitoring of patients.

4. How effective is "T-cell adoptive transfer" immunotherapy compared to other treatments?

The effectiveness of T-cell adoptive transfer immunotherapy varies depending on the disease being treated and the individual patient. In some cases, it has shown to be more effective than traditional treatments such as chemotherapy or radiation therapy. However, it may not be as effective for all types of cancer or other diseases.

5. Is "T-cell adoptive transfer" immunotherapy a new treatment?

No, T-cell adoptive transfer has been around for several decades, but it has gained more attention and research in recent years. The first successful T-cell adoptive transfer was performed in the 1980s, and since then, it has been used to treat various diseases. Ongoing research and advancements continue to improve the effectiveness and safety of this treatment.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
3
Replies
100
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
15K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
32
Views
6K
Back
Top