amazing results : pls comment

Despite Earlier Doubts, Feinstein Study Shows Fetal Transplants May Benefit Parkinson’s Patients Over Age 60
Manhasset, NY (Vocus/PRWEB ) December 31, 2009 -- Fetal transplant surgery for Parkinson’s disease went on experimentally for more than a decade before it was put to the ultimate test in a double-blind, randomized study. It turned out that only patients under 60-years-old showed any benefit, but some also developed uncontrolled jerking movements that washed away hope for the technique. The findings were the death knell for the promising procedure.
But scientists involved with brain imaging studies of the fetal transplant recipients did not put away their study tools. In fact, they kept bringing the Parkinson’s patients back into the laboratory to take snapshots of their brains over time. And what they have now found, and reported in the latest issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (JNM), is that people over age 60 began to show improvements more than a year after fetal dopamine cells were infused into the brain region damaged by Parkinson’s.

“This was totally surprising,” said David Eidelberg, MD, director of the Center for Neurosciences at The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research in Manhasset, NY. “The use of fetal transplantation for Parkinson’s encountered a good deal of skepticism after five patients in the study (all under age 60) developed dyskinesias.”

Dr. Eidelberg said that the Parkinson’s community basically forgot about the research and turned their attention to other promising techniques.

There were 33 patients, 13 of whom were over age 60 when the cells were infused into their brains. It was a double-blinded study so that 19 patients received the fetal cells and 14 others had a sham surgery and were offered the fetal cell transplant a year later. But by that time, the word had come out about the devastating side effect (the dyskinesias) and some older people opted out of the second surgery.

The Feinstein researchers have now looked at the brains of the transplanted patients two years and four years after the initial infusion of fetal cells. And they learned a few things: Beyond the first five people who developed dyskinesia, none of the other 15 younger people in the study showed signs of the troubling side effect. In about 25 percent of the cases, clinical improvement was noted and the transplanted cells were still working to make the dopamine up to four years later.

They also discovered that the older people gradually got better after the first year and that their improvements continued over the long term. “The older the brain, the harder it is to integrate the graft,” said Dr. Eidelberg. “But the PET scans told us that the graft was viable. And it took awhile before the cells worked to improve symptoms.”

You beat me to it, Mark. I was pleased to see these statements:

But scientists involved with brain imaging studies of the fetal transplant recipients did not put away their study tools. In fact, they kept bringing the Parkinson’s patients back into the laboratory to take snapshots of their brains over time. And what they have now found, and reported in the latest issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (JNM), is that people over age 60 began to show improvements more than a year after fetal dopamine cells were infused into the brain region damaged by Parkinson’s.

This has inspired me to start a new thread about research. I am glad to see some aren't filing their studies on the shelf to collect dust.

peggy

Amazing results-- yes. But also outrageous that this research has been sitting on the shelves for over 10 years, when maybe all it needed was a little more time. Frrom thenews release:
"Dr. Eidelberg said that the Parkinson’s community basically forgot about the research and turned their attention to other promising techniques. "

Forgot about a potential cure for PD????
How many other promising treatments are on the shelf -- prematurly declared "failures"?
GDNF is one of them.
Or did the controversy over using fetal tissue cells the real reason the research was "forgotten?
Kudos to these ressearchers who continued to follow up on the trial participats.
i will look for the journal article for more info

See - my Southern Belle ettiques (speaking to oanother recent posto) didn't allow me to be "outraged." But I suppose we should be. These things do take time, but as paula is forever saying, "Time isn't neutral to advancing PD patients. (paraphrased)"

So what should we do? We shouldn't condemn the people that brought the facts to light, nof course, but who (or is it whom)?

Give us your thoughts. I've been trying to catch up on paula's discussion about anti-cholenergics, but there's a lot absorb. Do you believe there IS help out there waiting on the shelf?
Peg

imad,
I know a few people, greg wasson is one of them , who always felt Freed was given a bad wrap about that study. We have a ten year relationship with Lynda McKenzie, of Toronto[left out key words...lol - Lynda was a subject in the original fetal tissue trial] ...and she still calls when, with husband al she comes to FLorida and we get together, She is a very naturally pretty lady and she looks great.

Lynda did have severe dyskinesia; has subsequently had a DBS, and looks young and healthy.
paula

it's coming get your dancing shoes ready.

thank you paula. to me, as merely a simple minded person wpd , it seems that the tryal was successful even if the procedure requires to be tuned. It caused dyskiesia in some perhapse because too many fetal cells were injected but that much was right for over 60s who allready lost too many dopamine producing cells !!!!!! ?????
Imad

This is good news , but I still can’t understand why it took close to 5 years for this follow-up data to be made public. The original study on embryonic cell transplants for PD (Freed et al) was published in the New England Journal of medicine in 2001. If the researchers at Feinstein followed up with these trial participants for 2-4 years after the conclusion of the study, the final year of follow-up would have been 2005. What happened to this data from 2005 until Jan 2010 when it was published in Journal of Nuclear Medicine? Were there any previously published articles? Haven't found any yet.

This was a pivotal, and highly cited study, yet for 5 years, it appears researchers and parkinson’s patients were not made aware that the results were better than first reported, especially for the over -60 participants. The follow up results also showed more time may be needed to adequately test treatments like cell transplants, than the typical 6-12 months, Such information could have been used to better design later clinical trials.
Is it possible the” Parkinson’s community basically forgot about the research “ as stated in the press release?
As Paula says "Time is not neutral "

Hi all,
Just a suggestion, yu might have done it already...... (its 3am and I M tired, havent read every post)
How about writing to the researchers directly to get the info?

girija[




LinQUOTE=LindaH;606495]This is good news , but I still can’t understand why it took close to 5 years for this follow-up data to be made public. The original study on embryonic cell transplants for PD (Freed et al) was published in the New England Journal of medicine in 2001. If the researchers at Feinstein followed up with these trial participants for 2-4 years after the conclusion of the study, the final year of follow-up would have been 2005. What happened to this data from 2005 until Jan 2010 when it was published in Journal of Nuclear Medicine? Were there any previously published articles? Haven't found any yet.

This was a pivotal, and highly cited study, yet for 5 years, it appears researchers and parkinson’s patients were not made aware that the results were better than first reported, especially for the over -60 participants. The follow up results also showed more time may be needed to adequately test treatments like cell transplants, than the typical 6-12 months, Such information could have been used to better design later clinical trials.
Is it possible the” Parkinson’s community basically forgot about the research “ as stated in the press release?
As Paula says "Time is not neutral "[/QUOTE]

Thanks girija,
Good suggestion and I will try contacting the researchers. Just wanted to make sure i wasn't missing something or misunderstanding the reports