Showing posts with label virus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label virus. Show all posts

Monday, July 29, 2013

Advice for scientists from a Nobel Prize winner

The UAB School of Medicine recently played host to its leading regional forum, the Spring Immunology Symposium. Proof of the event's growing influence can be seen in  this year's keynote, Nobel Prize Laureate Rolf Zinkernagel, M.D., Ph.D., Professor in the Institute of Experimental Immunology at the University of Zurich. Dr. Zinkernagel won in his Nobel prize in 1996 for discoveries that helped to explain how the human immune system recognizes that one of its cells has been infected by a virus.

Included here is a brief video of Dr. Zinkernagel talking about his life's work, what young scientists should be thinking about and frontiers in immunology.



Dr. Rolf Zinkernagel, UAB Immunology Symposium, June 2013 from UAB School of Medicine on Vimeo.

Below is a summary of the video discussion in a Q&A format.

Q1. What should young people keep in mind who want to get into science and immunology?
  • Success requires a scientist to be prepared for a ratio of 1 percent success to 99 percent failure and that a researcher perservere. 
  • Young scientists should be prepared to work long hours because "the harder you work the luckier you get,"  
  • It is important to find a research subject that you feel is extremely important and one where you burn to know the answer.  
Q2. What were the key decisions that led you to success in your field?
  • Among Dr. Zinkernagel's important early decisions as a scientist was to first become a medical doctor. It enabled him to learn study a complex bodily system, the immune system, in its entirety as a foundation. 
  • Dr. Zinkernagel started as a surgeon, but then got interested in immunology because of the immune rejections seen with transplanted organs. His focus remained on infectious disease from there on out, and not entirely by design.
Q3. What are your thoughts about how science differs around the word (e.g. in the U.S. versus Europe)?
  • The United States, and the UK as well, treat research like a sport in some ways, with a spirit of "fierce, competitive openness" that gives new researchers an opportunity to show what they can do, and with relatively few restrictions. Of his native Switzerland, Dr. Zinkernagel said it has a good research environment, but its small size limits opportunities when compared to larger nations. 
  • He also lauded the opportunistic outlook of the average American. That becomes important as researchers face seemingly unsolvable science problems, but just keep trying. 
Q4. What will the future of immunology look like?
  • The next few years will see scientists gain a more and more detailed understanding of the processes and pathways involved in the immune system. He said that the field may go so deep that it identities a set of uniform processes because, at the root of everything, cells are cells despite their different functions.  
  • That said, how cells and organs interact, the province of systems biology, still has a long way to go before researchers understand the sum of complex interactions that result in health or disease.
  • In addition, immunology is a relatively "soft" science compared to physics, said Dr. Zinkernagel. There are yet many unknowns and presumptions that persist despite a lack of evidence to back them up, and many will turn out to be wrong. In that light, those involved in teaching the next generation of immunologists should take care to instill a combination of open-mindedness and critical thinking in their students.   
For a look back, here is another video created by Nobelprize.org after Dr. Zinkernagel won his award.

Friday, July 26, 2013

Image post 7: spectacular skin cells

Another interesting image coming from UAB research captures the skin's ability to turn back the sea of microbes surrounding it.   


Pictured here is an outer cell layer of mouse skin. Humans have something similar. The tough, fibrous protein keratin, which gives structure to skin, has been dyed green, and T cells that watch for viruses, bacteria or parasites seeking to invade the body have been dyed orange.

These particular T cells, called gamma delta T cells, are unique in their spectacular appearance. They have been described as a missing link between the more primitive innate immune system, which is quickly, directly activated by foreign invaders, and the slower but more precise adaptive system, which must first be first primed by precise mechanisms before it can unleash clonal cell armies specific to the invader at hand.

Gamma delta T cells do a bit of both, and researchers seek to better understand how they defend the skin from invading microbes and help heal wounds. The image was generated in the lab of John Kearney, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Microbiology within the UAB School of Medicine.

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Goal: keep your transplanted organ permanently

Unless you have an identical twin, needing an organ transplant comes with a serious problem even beyond the fact that you need a transplant. Assuming the surgery goes well, the minute the new organ is grafted into your body, your immune system will recognize it as foreign, akin to invading bacteria, and seek to destroy it.

Taking the kidney for an example, there was a time 25 years ago when half of kidney transplant recipients lost their transplant due to immune rejection. The field of transplant immunology has in recent years become very good at preventing this during the first year after transplant using drugs that turn down the immune response, but long-term rejection remains commonplace.

The immune systems of many organ recipients eventually destroy transplanted kidneys over ten to 15 years. Worse yet, patients live through those years with a suppressed immune system; making them vulnerable to viral infections, some of which cause cancer.

Research efforts to solve these thorny, remaining problems in transplant immunology continue, but the field is under duress thanks to cuts in federal research funding, says UAB's Rosyln Mannon, M.D., director of research at the UAB Comprehensive Transplant Institute and a kidney transplant specialist. She was among the organizers of a recent transplant immunology symposium held by the institute.

Dr. Mannon sat down with The Mix to talk about research frontiers in transplantation, including efforts to design drugs that precisely turn down the activity of immune cells involved in transplant rejection, while ignoring those that fight infection.


Show notes for the podcast:

1:05  As we develop in the womb, special proteins are built on the surfaces of all our cells that serve as tags that say "self," and thus keep our immune cells from attacking them.  A transplanted organ obviously has different cell-surface, protein labels.

1:31  When surgeons put in a transplanted organ, the proteins labels on the organ surfaces are picked up and carried by immune cells to nearby lymph nodes, where they trigger the building of an army of cells designed specifically to attack the new organ. Several sets of immune cells are swept up into the effort to destroy the transplanted organ (also called a graft), including T cells and antibodies, two workhorse cells of the adaptive immune system.

1:47 Thus, the response to a transplanted organ that immunologists must deal with when preventing transplant rejection includes a mix of proteins, including antibodies that glom onto and remove foreign cells,    and cells that swarm to the transplant site and release destructive chemicals (e.g. cytokines).

3:15 The field of transplant immunology has been "incredibly successful" at preventing acute transplant rejection in the first year after the transplant using a subtle, powerful mix of drugs that damp down the immune system to protect transplanted organs.

3:39  The average person who receives a kidney this year from a diseased patient can expect the graft to last ten years. If the organ came from a living donor, the transplant may continue to function for 15 years, and especially if the organ came from a well matched family member. Despite these advances, all patients see their transplants fail eventually. About half of them "fail" because the patient dies, some from heart disease. Others organs fail because the medicines taken to suppress immune systems leave patients vulnerable to infection.

4:20 Physicians typically take a biopsy of a failing kidney to see why it has failed after working well for so long. In some cases, the slides will reveal that the immune system finally overcame immunosuppressive drugs to recognize the transplant as foreign and attack it. Interestingly, sometimes it will be one part of the immune system that finally tracks down the organ (e.g. antibodies), and sometimes another (T cells).  In still other cases, the biopsy may reveal that a longtime, undetected viral infection has destroyed the organ, or maybe it was fibrosis, the wear-and-tear scarring that comes with age.

5:15 The failure of organ transplants many years after implantation for these varied reasons is the central, remaining problem facing transplant immunologists and their patients.

5:43 The drugs used to suppress the immune system on the way to protecting a transplanted organ have evolved. In the old days, transplant recipients received steroids like prednisone (an anti-allergy drug) and drugs called anti-metabolites. In the mid-1980s, a set of drugs called calceneurin inhibitors arrived, including cyclosporin and then later Prograf. Most patients in those days got large doses of drugs like these, some of which themselves scar the kidneys. Other risks of such therapy included knocking the immune system thoroughly enough to encourage viral infections like the Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus and related cancers viruses.  The latter make random genetic changes in the cells they infect, some of which accidentally cause the abnormal growth seen in cancer. Presentations at the recent symposium talked about ways of fine-tuning immunosuppressive treatments to minimize damage related to their use.

7:47 Newer FDA-approved treatments appear to have fewer side effects, but still have the same problem as older drugs: they knock down the immune system broadly instead just the cells attacking the new organ. All physicians can do is gradually reduce the dose of immune suppressing medications over time under the assumption that the immune system has come to see the transplant as self, but doing so may result in the late-stage rejections currently observed five and ten years down the line.

8:53 Frontiers in the field include research efforts to design therapies that influence only the subsets of immune cells most associated with transplant rejection. Certain kinds of immune cells "remember" they have encountered a foreign protein, for instance.  Therapies may destroy most of those cells, but those that remain eventually become capable of re-launching the attack on the transplant.  On the other hand, one subset of T cells, called Tregs, are known to damp down the immune response in a careful way. What if engineers were able to deploy a person's own Tregs to damp down response to specific proteins on the surfaces of transplanted tissue?

10:11  Research efforts looking suppressing specific immune mechanisms, while the future of the field, are still in the early phases. Dr. Mannon hopes they suppress more surgically than the global suppression seen with older drugs.

10:45  The recent UAB transplant immunology symposium was timely, said Dr. Mannon, because UAB has been working to establish a collaborative consortium of transplant centers in the Southeast. UAB is one of the largest clinical transplant centers in the country, as is its partner in this symposium, the Emory Transplant Institute. Vanderbilt and the Medical College of South Carolina also have a strong interests in this area. The symposium was the first forum to identify and discuss the central, remaining problems in transplant immunology, and to launch joint efforts to solve them.

11:15 Among the research frontiers discussed was how best to arm patients with the ability to fight off infections without jeopardizing their transplants. One way may be to harness the bacteria that live in the human gut. What role do the bacteria that permanently colonize the body have in the immune system and transplant rejection? Can the interaction between our gut bugs and antibiotics for instance be manipulated to improve long-term outcomes of transplant patients by damping down system-wide inflammation?

14:24  Dr. Mannon is the newly elected president of the American Society of Transplantation, the second president in a row to come from UAB after Dr. Robert Gaston, M.D.  UAB has for years been recognized across the Southeast for the large volume of clinical transplant procedures done here, but having the presidency sends a message to the nation about the strength of the basic and translational research underway.

15:45 The society has been very active on Capitol Hill in terms of lobbying for the support of related research, and that stance will continue during Dr. Mannon's term. As for the group's legislative agenda, they have been trying for 12 years to get a bill passed that would provide coverage for immunosuppressive therapy for the life of those with kidney transplants. Currently, Medicare pays for such medications for three years after the transplant, after which medications the become prohibitively expensive for those without private insurance. Another bill would ensure that those who donate a kidney to another person cannot have their coverage dropped by an insurer after they give the gift of life.